VET Teacher Training in Australia: Preserving Australian VET ...

VET Teacher Training in Australia: Preserving Australian
VET teacher professionalism in the face of increasing
casual employment of the VET practitioner
Lewis Hughes, Enviro‐sys, Australia
Background paper supporting VET teacher training conversation, University of Bremen,
Institute of Technology and Education (ITB), September 2012.
In Australia, a large number of vocational education and training (VET) teachers are employed on
short‐term arrangements ranging from twelve month contracts, through part‐time, to casual; and
this appears to be an increasing trend. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to sustain an
argument that VET teaching is a profession and that achievement of substantial teaching
qualification is justified by the teacher. However, VET teaching is not a role to be taken on lightly as
confidence in qualifications awarded – truly attesting to competency – is very important.
Note: In this paper ‘casualisation’ is used to mean departure from past confidence that VET
teaching was secured by long‐term, continuing, employment as a teacher – compared to a
shift to the teaching activity being seen by the teacher (in some cases) as a brief interlude in
their real job or secondary to their job when sessionally employed. Therefore, 12 month
contracts are regarded as just as debilitating to professional commitment as is the case for
being offered short‐term employment for the what may be just a part of delivery of a short
course which may not be repeated by the provider.
It is not difficult to offer examples of very bad outcomes if a person does not have the competency
suggested by holding a VET qualification. For example, a poorly trained firefighter is at risk
personally and so too are others; an inadequately competent medical technician can cause much
harm; a roofing contractor lacking skill can be the cause of property damage; an inadequate
accountant can cause business failure; an agricultural worker inappropriately handling chemicals can
cause much harm to self and the environment; a manufacturing manager with shallow
understanding of sustainability processes and strategies puts their and the jobs of others at risk; etc.
Clearly, a VET teacher being competent is the foundation upon which a strong VET system is
constructed and, if we take the view that students must graduate with the claimed competency
(indicated by qualification), then it follows that VET teachers must be accordingly trained and
valued. However, if the system does not offer security of employment (albeit in new formats) and
respect for the professional qualities of a VET teacher – as a teacher ‐ we are – as a society ‐
journeying to a dark place characterised by economic weakness and poor social cohesion compared
to community aspirations.
In offering the above cautioning, I am reflecting upon what may set VET apart from university
education; and add strength to the proposition that VET is not a lesser tertiary education pathway
than university 1 . Arguably, the difference between VET and university is that a VET graduate is
1
I resist using the term ‘higher education’ for the university component of tertiary education as, in my view, it
is improperly demeaning of VET.
1

expected to be work‐ready; whereas, it is acceptable for a university graduate to be prepared to
begin to become work‐effective. Over time, the VET graduate expands their depth of theoretical
understanding and critical thinking and the university graduate, over time, catches up with the
practical stuff. As purposeful learners (if such is nurtured), they both finish up in much the same
amalgams of theory and practice place as is appropriate to their work.
Cause and effect of casualisation of the VET teacher workforce
In an April 2011 report, the Australian Productivity Commission found that approximately one in
every four trainers or assessors 2 has more than one job and about 33% of non‐TAFE 3 trainers and
assessors were employed on a part‐time basis and this percentage was likely to be higher in the
TAFE sector (PC 2011, p.31).
Although I don’t have access to trend statistics, there is strong anecdotal evidence that the incidence
of casual employment of teachers is increasing in the TAFE sector; and the rapidly expanding non‐
TAFE sector is likely to be increasingly characterised by casual employment of VET teachers when
acting upon opportunities which arise and decline in the VET marketplace. In both the TAFE and the
non‐TAFE sectors, the trend to casualisation of the VET teacher workforce appears to have
connection to government opening up VET to market forces which are heavily impacted by the
vagaries of government funding. And, particularly in Victoria, with this came the notion of a level
playing field for public and private providers which may not have been given full consideration from
a community serving perspective. For example, a TAFE Institute is a substantial enterprise with large
standing costs in maintaining campus facilities and supporting corporate type infrastructures which
are there when needed and/or can be seen as investments in the future; as compared to a small
public provider with a narrow scope of learning offering, very small overheads, operating in the
moment and, possibly, hiring training rooms and teachers as required from time to time to act upon
business opportunities arising from having access to government funding and/or entrepreneurial
initiative. Under these circumstances, and seemingly in accord with government intention, it is not
surprising that large providers (public and private) look to reduce teacher costs by hiring on short‐
term contracts and/or variations of casual appointment – the times of permanency for a VET teacher
are gone and sustaining a professional disposition to the role is problematic.
Consequent upon the casualisation of the VET teacher role, there are implications regarding how
these teachers see themselves in terms of being professionally committed as teachers. It is not
surprising that a part‐time employed teacher, who doesn’t see themselves as a teacher, questions
what is appropriate as learning effort in adding teaching qualification to their technical (broadly
meant) competency. That is, they see themselves as employed because of their technical capacities
(vocational competence) and teaching qualifications are a distant consideration. And from the
2 In Australia, generally ‘trainer or assessor’ refers to a VET teacher although the Productivity Commission was
attempting to address workplace trainers when engaged in VET delivery. In some instances, there are VET
assessors who don’t teach, but this is rare.
3 In Australia, there are two categories of VET provider (Registered Training Organisations – RTOs). Public
providers – i.e. Government owned and funded – are known as Technical and Further Training (TAFE)
Institutes; and there are also Private RTOs – i.e. not government owned, but may be delivering some of their
programs under contract to government.
2

provider employer perspective, reluctant compliance with set minimum quality standards is likely to
be the stance.
With the foregoing in mind, in addition to offering an overview of Australian VET teacher training,
this paper is an invitation for reflection upon the valuing of a vocational education and training (VET)
teacher in terms of their preparation to commence in this role, maintain currency in their area of
vocational competence, and valuing of self as influenced by being valued by others.
Whilst an Australian VET teacher is the focus of this paper, it is offered as an entry point for
comparison with German (and other European) VET systems – particularly with respect to VET’s
contribution to social capital (Hughes & Hughes 2011). For example, a point of difference is that in
Australia VET delivery is by registered training organisations (RTOs) which doen’t appear to have
equivalence in the German Dual System (as I understand it) in which close entwining with the
workplace may differently yield outcomes beyond just knowledge and skill . In Australia, a VET
teacher is sometimes referred to as a VET trainer ‐ there isn’t a VET teaching institution and
workplace training duality as, I understand, applies in the German Dual System, but some
apprenticeship arrangements are similar.
It should be noted that extensive use of footnotes is used in this paper so as to provide explanation
of the Australian VET system for those readers who are not familiar with the Australian approach to
VET. For my part, I am seeking confirmed understanding of the German (and other European)
approaches to the design and delivery of VET; and this paper is a contribution to the conversation.
The who and the what of being an Australian VET teacher
Recent research (Hughes & Hughes 2011; 2012) has strengthened my view that an effective and
committed VET teacher draws upon their life experience to bring passion and depth of knowledge to
their facilitation of vocational learning; and this is a powerful influence upon the student – more so
than is explicitly valued. Although this is also true of teachers in primary, secondary and university
education, the immediate relevance of what they bring to the learning experience puts the VET
teacher in a potentially different place to other teachers. They come with work related war stories
and have the capacity to engage with students in immediately meaningful ways.
In my view, an effective VET teacher is high in ‘capability’ quality as defined by John Stephenson –
Capability is an integration of knowledge, skills, personal qualities and understanding
used appropriately and effectively – not just in familiar and highly focused specialist
contexts but in response to new and changing circumstances. Capability can be
observed when we see people with justified confidence in their ability to take effective
and appropriate action; explain what they are about; live and work effectively with
others; and continue to learn from their experiences as individuals and in association
with others in a diverse and changing society. (Stephenson 1998, p. 2)
And in alignment with the research of my wife (Libby) and I (Hughes & Hughes 2011; 20120,
this capability attribute of an effective TAFE teacher has much to do with them being
3

educationalist in orientation, their consequent nurturing of social capital qualities in students,
and, significantly, their influence as a model for their students.
Notwithstanding the special qualities of technical (broadly defined) capability entwined with
teaching capability, the contribution of an effective TAFE teacher is largely not recognised beyond
their students and immediate colleagues; and, hence, is not more widely explicitly valued. This may
explain why the learning‐to‐teach preparation of Australian VET teachers has, without pubic
challenge, shifted from a two year program in Victoria of formal learning integrated with mentored
teaching practice to a nominally 300 hour Certificate IV in Training and Assessment 4 (see following
outline) which has come to be commonly delivered in an approximation of a 10 day face‐to‐face
mode spread over a few months and without mentoring or necessarily involving practicum. I
sometimes wonder if non‐educators, with influence, have purposefully brought this about (at least
in part) to accommodate casual employment of VET teachers – but maybe this is too dark a thought
as people with industrial training experience would know that the preparation of a trainer to train is
critical to achieve target outcomes 5 .
I have particular concern that otherwise quality committed providers of the Certificate IV in Training
and Assessment have been forced to join the race‐to‐the‐bottom of short course delivery as a
market place survival imperative (Hughes 2012). It is not surprising that some (if not most) potential
students will choose a quick course (albeit at the same or even greater cost) over a longer course – it
is ‘the ticket’ which they seek, not the competency. And, further, this has a negative modelling effect
when a VET teacher graduate of shallow learning goes on to facilitate the learning of others. It is
germane to my concerns that Skills Australia 6 (2011, p.5) identifies the need for comprehensive
reforms in the VET sectors delivery and assessment practices.
A thought – Where would we be as a community without a strong VET sector and effective
VET teachers?
Notwithstanding my reservations about delivery practice in respect of the Certificate IV in Training
and Assessment, it is adequate as a VET teacher entry level qualification when well taught.
Importantly, when well taught, participation in this will cause an awakening within the student to
deeper issues and motivate going on to further pedagogy (adult related) learning. It was noticeable
within a recent social media discussion, about whether university level qualification (teacher
4 There have been two iterations of the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (presently TAE40110) and
both have been similar placed at risk by instances of shallow delivery. Even though it is acknowledged that this
qualification is at‐risk of being highly suspect (PC 2010, p.8.7; AWPA 2012, p.72), there is not yet publicly
available evidence that VET regulating authority is taking action to insist on adequacy of student effort.
5 I do acknowledge that my view that teachers should be well prepared is at odds with the Productivity
Commission (2011 p.220) apparent position that there isn’t a confirmed relationship between pre‐service
training and VET student achievement. In this regard, I do have experience of substantially trained teachers
being inadequate as facilitators and teachers with no training being superb facilitators of learning, but these
are exceptions to the rule as I see it.
6 In June 2012, the advice to Government and other functions of Skills Australia were absorbed into the newly
formed, with broader functions, Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency (AWPA). This has happened at
a time when there has been a 2011 shift to a national quality regulator – The Australian Skills Quality Authority
(ASQA) – and there is an expectation that the Skills Australia/AWPA ;presence in the VET environment will lead
to delivery and assessment reforms in respect of insistence upon quality..
4

training) should be required of a VET teacher, that those who had gone on to further learning
(following the Certificate IV) placed high value upon what they accrued from the experience 7 .
Extending contribution to social media discussion – ‘… the gaining of the qualification is only the
start of a journey, trouble is a majority of trainers believe it is the end – their time to celebrate their
achievement. Few actually participate in lifelong learning which is what the training profession is all
about.’ This comment goes to the core of the focus of this paper – The importance of sustaining
valuing of learning in the heart and soul of VET teachers across the employment spectrum.
TAE40110 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (A qualification within the TAE10 Training
and Education Training Package 8 ) 10 units of competency – 7 core units plus 3
electives
Core units:
TAESS401B Plan assessment activities and processes
TAESS402B Assess competence
TAEASS403B Participate in assessment validation
TAEDEL401A Plan, organise and deliver group‐based learning
TAEDEL402A Plan, organise and facilitate learning in the workplace
TASEDES401A Design and develop learning programs
TAEDES40A Use training packages and accredited courses to meet client needs
Each unit of competency has elements and associated performance criteria as exampled
below for TAEDEL401A Plan, organise and deliver group‐based learning. (TAE10 Training and
Education Training Package, page 204 of 1013)
ELEMENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
1. Interpret learning
environment and
delivery
requirements
1.1 Access, read and interpret learning program documentation to
determine delivery requirements
1.2 Use available information and documentation to identify group and
individual learner needs and learner characteristics
1.3 Identify and assess constraints and risks to delivery
1.4 Confirm personal role and responsibilities in planning and delivering
training with relevant personnel
2. Prepare session plans 2.1 Refine existing learning objectives according to program requirements
and specific needs of individual learners
2.2 Develop session plans and document these for each segment of the
learning program
2.3 Use knowledge of learning principles and theories to generate ideas for
managing session delivery
7
There are now (recent) available VET Diplomas and Vocational Graduate Certificates which aware pathways
to further learning, but they are yet to prove their worth.
8
Training Packages are not what the name implies. They are not an assembly of defined curriculum and
resources. Instead, they are a collation of endorsed competency standards, assessment guidelines, and
direction regarding packaging of competencies to form qualifications. Training Packages provide ‘the what’ but
not ‘the how’. Training Packages are developed by Industry Skills Councils – of which there are eleven.
5

3. Prepare resources
for delivery
4. Deliver and facilitate
training sessions
5. Support and monitor
learning
3.1 Contextualise existing learning materials to meet the needs of the
specific learner group
3.2 Finalise learning materials and organise facility, technology and
equipment needs in time for delivery of learning sessions
3.3 Confirm overall delivery arrangements with relevant personnel
4.1 Conduct each session according to session plan, modified where
appropriate to meet learner needs
4.2 4.2 Use the diversity of the group as another resource to support
learning
4.3 Employ a range of delivery methods as training aids to optimise learner
experiences
4.4 Demonstrate effective facilitation skills to ensure effective
participation and group management
5.1 Monitor and document learner progress to ensure outcomes are being
achieved and individual learner needs are being met
5.2 Make adjustments to the delivery sessions to reflect specific needs and
circumstances
5.3 Manage inappropriate behaviour to ensure learning can take place
5.4 5.4 Maintain and store learner records according to organisational
requirements
The above is sourced from training.gov.au and a search for the TAE40110 Certificate IV in Training
and Assessment . This is part of the Unit or Competency detail; and what follows (below)is also an
inclusion which is offered here to give an indication of the depth of required student effort and the
improbability that this qualification can be awarded after a few days of training.
Note: ‘training.gov.au’ is the title of the national site providing information on VET in
Australia. If you go to this site and view this unit of competency, you will find that the detail of
the unit addresses much more than is reproduced in this paper.
TAE40110 Critical aspects for assessment and evidence required to demonstrate competency in this unit
(TAE10 Training and Education Training Package, p. 208 of 1013) –
Evidence of the ability to facilitate group‐based learning by preparing and delivering a series of training
sessions, including:
� At least two consecutive sessions, of a duration commensurate with a substantive training
session (e.g. 40‐60 minutes), that follow one of the leaning program designs
� At least one session delivered to a different learner group, with evidence of how the
characteristics and needs of this group were addressed
� Identify and respond to diversity and individual needs
� Access and use documented resources and support personnel to guide inclusive practices
In Australia, VET is the tertiary learning pathway to qualifications which are job specific in nature.
Although the intersection with university education is becoming blurred as VET providers 9 (in some
instances) are entering into the higher education space and universities are becoming more active in
9 The National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER 2009) reports approximately 5000 registered
training organisations (RTOs) of which 59 are publicly funded and known as TAFE Institutes. NCVER (2012)
reports 2241 training organisations delivered publicly funded VET in 2011. Although much smaller in number,
TAFE Institutes have broader scope of delivery and much larger numbers of students than private providers. It
should be noted that ‘private provider’ is a catch all term embracing enterprise RTOs, community based RTOs,
and those RTOs (overwhelmingly the largest number) which operate as private businesses in the education
and training market place.
6

the VET arena, a community perception, seemingly, remains that VET is non‐academic and,
generally, a learning pathway for people who don’t have the academic capacity to achieve a
university qualification.
Whilst Australian VET does provide a continued learning pathway for secondary students who don’t
have university entry scores at the completion of their secondary education (or acquired later in
life), people with university qualifications do enrol in VET courses so as to strengthen their
professional capabilities. Also, VET does provide a second chance at learning for many; and some
within this ‘second chance’ cohort go on to achieve university qualification.
It is becoming common place for articulation arrangements to be in place between Australian VET
providers and universities; accordingly, there is reason to believe that VET will be valued if
“awakening’ is applied – when compared with universities ‐ more for its alternative pathway offering
than being perceived as a lesser learning experience. This is a rich story which has not yet been
adequately told.
Continuing with the richness theme, I wonder if even VET teachers (in general) realise the
uniqueness of their learning facilitation. As there are mostly no entry barriers to VET, it is not
uncommon for an Australian VET teacher to be engaged with a group where some students have
joined with high support needs.
i.e. a broad spectrum of possibilities which might include low self‐confidence/image, learning
difficulties, cultural challenges, past failures at education, low levels of language, literacy and
numeracy, etc.
and other students will be so advanced in their learning confidence that frustration arises with
respect to perceived inadequacy of the pace and depth of learning. In these circumstances, the
ability of the VET teacher to facilitate the learning in such a way as to forge group cohesion and
energetic learning partnership is a high order capability, of much value, which may be overlooked.
However, notwithstanding probable under‐valuing by others, an educationalist orientated teacher
takes much pride playing a part in an initially disparate group of learners forging a partnership in
learning and, frequently, on‐going friendships. For a VET educationalist teacher, these events are
part of the joy of teaching and are indicative of the social capital outcomes from VET.
In Libby and my research into VET and social capital it is clear that, for many students, VET is a life
changing experience and not limited to those who come with academic weakness. Therefore, I
suggest that a VET teacher has potential influence reaching beyond what many (teachers included)
might recognise. I find it intriguing to reflect upon why my experience of VET in bringing about
strong learning bonds leading to increased self‐esteem isn’t reflected in my experience of university
education.
With the forgoing in mind, Australian VET teachers are richly diverse in terms of their life experience
and what they bring to VET. Mostly, they come to VET teaching from a substantial and varied work
experience background – it is a requirement that they have both vocational competence and
teaching competence (see following). They also have differing motivations for what is a profound
career change. It is unlikely that a VET teacher sets out in life with a teaching career in mind; and this
may be a significant point of difference when compared with primary and secondary teachers and
7

university academics. But, particularly in traditional trade areas, there is tension between whether
VET teachers sees themselves as a technical (broad in meaning) person who happens to be a teacher
or strongly identifying as a teacher drawing upon technical/work experience.
Extract from the Standards for National VET regulator ( NVR) registration of a VET provider:
The applicant has a defined strategy, procedures and measures to ensure training and assessment
services are conducted by trainers and assessors who:
(a) have the necessary training and assessment competencies as determined by the National
Quality Council or its successors;
(b) have the relevant vocational competencies at least to the level being delivered or assessed;
(c) Can demonstrate current industry skills directly relevant to the training/assessment being
undertaken; and
(d) Continue to develop their vocational education and training (VET) knowledge and skills as well
as their industry currency and trainer/assessor competence.
(Commonwealth of Australia 2011, p.10)
National Quality Council requirement of a VET teacher or assessor as determined in July 2010
1. The NQC requirement for VET trainers and assessors are –
Trainers must:
(i) Hold the TAE40110 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment from the TAE10 Training and
Education Training Package
Or
(ii) Be able to demonstrate equivalent competencies to the TAE40110 Certificate IV in Training and
Assessment from the TAE10 Training and Education Training Package
Or
(iii) Work under the direct supervision of a person who has the competencies specified in (i) or (ii)
above.
Assessors must:
(i) hold the following three competencies from the TAE10 Training and Education Training Package:
(a) TAESS401A Plan assessment activities and processes
(b) TAESS402A Assess competence
(c) TAESS403A Participate in assessment validation
Or
8

(i) be able to demonstrate equivalent competencies to all three units of competency listed in (ii)
2. The functions of the National Quality Council (NQC) were transferred to the National Sills
Standards Council (NSSC) on 1 st July 2011. This is a committee of the Standing Council on
Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment (SCOTESE)The is a standing Council reporting to the
Council of Australian Governments (COAG) the members of which are the Prime Minister, State
and Territory Premiers and Chief Ministers and the President of the Australian Local
Government Association . (NQC special bulletin, 7 July 2010)
As the Australian VET system moves more toward part‐time and sessional teachers the ‘Am I a
trades person (or the like) or am I a VET teacher?’ tension will increase. There is a likelihood of
increasing teacher rejection of the importance of learning how to teach. In the (earlier referred to)
recent, highly vigorous, social media discussion there was polarisation between VET engaged people
who held that learning to teach by participation in university delivered programs had multiple
benefits in the VET arena and those who felt that the Australian Quality Framework (AQTF) 10
requirement for a VET Certificate IV in Training and Assessment is excessive.
The rejection of even a Certificate IV qualification by some VET colleagues, seems to arise as a
consequence of having narrow duties as a VET teacher – i.e. acting more as an instructor. I don’t
intend discourtesy by this comment, but the delivery of Australian Training Packages requires a
teacher to be responsive to the particularities of the learner needs and the environment of the
learning; thus calling upon teacher capabilities of a high order which require learning to teach in VET.
Even VET teachers who have teaching qualifications are required to have the Certificate IV
qualification and many are resentful 11 .
With the foregoing in mind, my view is that the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment ‐ if well
taught ‐ it is a useful entry level qualification for an Australian VET teacher, given that being
competent to act within the framework of Training Packages and Accredited Courses 12 is an
important foundation upon which to construct capability as a VET teacher. The following outline
shows this in Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) terms.
The AQF has ten levels (VET levels are 1 – 7) and addresses tertiary (post compulsory – 15
years and over) education –
Level 1/ Certificate I: knowledge and skills for initial work, community involvement and/or
further learning;
Level 2 / Certificate II: knowledge and skills for work in a defined context and/or further
learning;
Level 3 / Certificate III: theoretical and practical knowledge and skills for work and/or further
learning;
Level 4 / Certificate IV: theoretical and practical knowledge and skills for specialised and/or
skilled work and/or further learning; (Location of the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment)
10 The AQTF is the set of standards which prescribes what is required for registration of a VET provider and
what is required for continuing registration. With the 2011 establishment of a national VET regulator –
Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) – the AQTF continues as the foundation for the VET Quality
Framework applied by ASQA.
11 There has been much objection by persons holding teaching qualifications to the requirement that they also
have a Certificate IV in Training and Assessment – seemingly, the reasons have not been adequately explained.
12 Accredited course are an alternative to Training Packages where a quick/and or lesser response to a VET
need arises.
9

Level 5 / Diploma: specialised knowledge and skills for skilled/paraprofessional work and/or
further learning;
Level 6 / Advanced Diploma or Associate Degree: broad knowledge and skills for
paraprofessional/highly skilled work and/or further learning;
Level 7 / Bachelor Degree: broad and coherent knowledge and skills for professional work
and/or further learning;
Level 8 / Bachelor Honours Degree or Graduate and Vocational Graduate Certificate or
Graduate and Vocational Graduate Diploma;
Level 9 / Masters Degree: Specialised knowledge and skills for research and/or professional
practice and/or further learning;
Level 10 / Doctoral Degree: systematic and critical understanding of a complex field of
learning and specialised research skills for the advancement of learning and/or for
professional practice.
Although not necessarily worrying, it may come to pass that VET as we visibly know it in Australia
evolves (contracts) to Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) levels 1, 2 & 3 being delivered –
more so than is presently the case ‐in secondary schools; and AQF level 6 being serviced by
universities more so than is presently the case. In these respects, it may come to pass that TAFE
Institutes move away from low AQF levels and move more, than is presently the case, into the higher
education domain along with larger private providers getting larger through, amongst other
strategies, acquisition of smaller providers; and smaller private providers, who choose to remain,
forming partnerships with secondary schools which are increasing their VET in Schools 13
engagement. Even beyond increased activity at AQF 6, there is also the possibility that universities
will become more active in the VET arena in response to TAFE Institutes and larger private providers
moving into the university domain – there are presently four dual sector (i.e. serving both higher
education and VET) universities in Victoria.
The effect of the foregoing being that, although the volume of VET delivery is likely to expand, the
visible (as previously known) VET sector will shrink. If this does happen, the need for VET teachers to
be adequately trained in accord with the particularities of VET will still exist, but the seeming
location of VET teachers will change; and, hence, they may require additional qualification to the
Certificate IV in Training and Assessment as is appropriate to their location of engagement. Some
will be engaged with secondary schools and others will be engaged with universities; and hence a
diffusion of VET identity at both ends.
Notwithstanding the correctness of my prediction, the number of VET teachers is likely to increase
and the requirement that they are professionally prepared to contribute with varying levels of
autonomy in learning design and innovation capacity will expand. My sense is that VET in Australia
has much alignment with the supposedly Swedish proverb “the afternoon knows what the morning
13 Vet in Schools (VETiS) was introduced to the Victorian secondary school system in 1994 And in other States
around this time) as a strategy to add to learning pathways for senior secondary students and thus increase
the number of students completing Year 12 (the point at which secondary education finishes in Australia). The
students undertake recognised VET studies (typically at Certificate II or Certificate lll level) which count toward
either their Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE – academic pathway) or Victorian Certificate of Applied
Learning (VCAL). School Based Apprenticeships, where the student has one day in the workplace and part of
their learning facilitated by a VET provider, are an aspect of this initiative.
10

never suspected”; and this puts demand upon the VET teacher to be adaptable and taking pride in
this personal attribute. But there is an elephant in the room as follows ‐
The paradox of need for committed professionalism in our VET teachers whilst
acting in what is perceived as a non‐valuing manner
I especially note the Grollmann and Rauner ((2007) bewilderment (paradox) at how can it be that
vocational educators in Germany are not appropriately valued for their contribution to the economy.
This is a surprise to me because my impression has been that VET in Germany does not suffer – as is
the case in Australia ‐ from being second class to university education 14 . There is resonance between
the Grollmann and Rauner paradox that VET is part of the foundation upon which an economy is
built, but yet the VET teacher has low status and my Australian paradox in which need for strong
professionalism in VET teachers is apparent, but yet they are increasingly challenged by securing
certainty of employment.
Even if Australia does turn away even more from past long‐term employment of VET teachers where
the notion of career could be sustained, I assert that Australian VET being well delivered requires a
professional disposition by the teachers. This is a big challenge as security of employment is an
important underpinning for a VET teacher to engage with continuing professional development.
It is an AQTF requirement that a VET teacher does engage with continued professional development
(CPD) in respect of both their vocational competence and their teaching competence, but there is a
paradoxical element to this. On the one hand there is an auditable (of the RTO) requirement that the
VET teachers are pursuing CPD, but the teachers are increasingly drawn upon as disposable assets
(seemingly not professionally valued) and the RTO is reluctant to invest in the teacher and the
teacher may not have the passion to participate even if the opportunity was offered. It is as though
the VET system has not considered/recognised that VET teachers are losing professional identity as a
consequence of the architects of the VET system causing insecurity of employment. At the time of
insistence upon CPD for VET teachers, the professionalism of VET teachers is fading away.
In Australia, have we lost sight of the expectation that VET is delivered in highly customised ways
and that this involves more than just attention to knowledge and skill as specified in a pre‐structured
way? Has the “E” in VET evaporated because we ceased referring to competency based education
and training?
Note: The Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency in looking to the future of the tertiary
education and training sector observes – ‘The value of education in any nation will depend on the
quality of what is being offered, the results achieved and the way skills and knowledge are applied …
Is our education and training being consistently delivered to a high standard?’ (AWPA 2012, p. 65
14
The strength of the VETNET stream in the ECER European Educational Research Association conference
would seem to suggest that European VET is highly valued.
11

and 66). This could be read as universities being valued as educators and VET doesn’t embrace
education. I doubt that this is the intent, but it does encourage narrowing of VET activity to the point
where a VET teacher’s identity does not support the proposition of CPD in the being‐ an‐ educator
arena. If this is the intention, it is not my view and does not accord with my industry experience as a
‘trainer’ where the acquisition of skills was never isolated from education inputs and outcomes.
My concern is that if VET is confirmed as narrowly focused on skills, the product of VET – trained
people ‐ will be so narrow in competency that they will not have a place in the world of work as
predicted by governments and other agencies; and this is not in accord with the rich learning
intended as VET in Australia. Further, the role of a VET teacher in drawing upon Training Packages as
their facilitation framework requires professional capacity beyond what might be thought of as a
robotic trainer (but not as I see it) going through the motions of pre‐determined training processes.
The conceiving of competency based training (CBT) in Australia as governed by endorsed
competency standards but not ruled by centrally prescribed curriculum requires a high level of
teacher confidence in constructing and delivering customised learning – i.e. capability in design and
delivery of learning at a level not required where curriculum is predetermined. In particular,
unpacking units and elements of competency so as to crystallise meaning and facilitate rich learning
demands high order teacher capability with an educationalist stance. This is especially the case as
the delivery of Training Packages requires learning design capabilities and motivations which don’t
necessarily presently reside across the spectrum of providers.
A highly ethical approach is required to meet the needs of individuals and groups within differing
cohorts of students, but bring about arrival at a target competency and hence integrity of
qualification. As it is a VET system requirement that qualifications issued by one provider be
accepted by another, the integrity and capability of the teacher/assessor is profoundly important.
A VET teacher functions at a level above what is required of an instructor but there is, in the
preparation of a new entrant, a vulnerability to think and act as though the teacher is preparing to
be an instructor or maybe just the deliverer of a message – assessing facilitation competency by a
short video of the candidate presenting on some topic is indicative of this. VET teaching is about the
VET student learning more so than the teacher teaching (Hughes 2009) and requires professional
commitment, innovation and ethic to achieve this.
With the mutuality of commitment – teacher to provider and provider to teacher ‐ in mind, I can’t
put a precise date on when it started, but my sense is that around 2000 it began to be noticeable
that TAFE Institutes 15 were moving from hiring teachers under contract to short‐term appointments.
And, being the husband of a TAFE Institute Head of Teaching Department, I am aware of the
management stress which comes with maintaining teaching staff commitment when their (teaching
staff) having a job after Christmas is not certain, but I can only imagine ‐ with empathy – the
professional debilitation felt by the teacher as they are consequently on a quest to secure the next
job should the current position not be renewed. Even though they may be confidently employed full
time for one year, it is understandable if the teacher works with commitment for the first six months
15 In line with the Australian Government Productivity Commission Report (PC 2011) upon the vocational
education and training workforce, this paper refers to the TAFE Sector as the public provider and Non‐TAFE
Sector as the private provider.
12

and then looks for the next just‐in‐case job during the second six months. And, of course, in addition
to maintaining teacher morale, the VET teaching department manager is caught in a web of
uncertainty regarding staff availability, continuance of programs and next year’s serving promotion
to the client (student and employer) base.
The uncertainty of teacher tenure is not a peripheral issue to Australia achieving and sustaining a
competitive position in the knowledge based global economy which is said by our political leaders to
be an imperative to maintain our ‘first world’ membership. Indeed, in the1990s period of transition
from the constraint of centrally specified VET curriculum to the flexibility of competency‐based‐
training (CBT) the threat of being left behind was the driver of National Training Reform seeking to
move to CBT of high quality, flexibly delivered, with national consistency in training standards and
arising qualifications (Dawkins 16 1989). However, the exclusion of educators from the training reform
table (Pusey 1991, p. 148; Harris et al. 2009, p.25) left an education gap (training without educating)
in the thinking and action from which we are still recovering; and was the point at which CBT in
Australia seemingly adopted a posture of valuing training in a narrow skills‐for‐the‐moment sense
without regard to development of the person which accrues through education – the trainer in the
VET teacher was valued, but the educator attribute was superfluous.
Notwithstanding expressing concern that the VET teacher has seemingly suffered a loss of status in
terms of what they are valued for, I am of the view that there is a VET system expectation that a
graduate will bring more than just knowledge and skill to their work and the system under delivery
(where such occurs) is not so much in design, but is in the delivery practice (Hughes & Cairns 2009).
It is as though, on the evidence of competency specifications (albeit not perfect, but getting better)
and including employability skills, having pushed educationalists away there was still a lingering
sense that even training required attention to education outcomes such as nurturing an inquiring
mind, pride in self, confidence in extrapolating from the known to the unknown, and contributing to
the social cohesion of the workplace – outcomes from engagement with VET when well taught
which are of a social capital nature and wanted (Hughes & Hughes 2012 – paper to be presented at
ECER 2012).
Although I was initially concerned (Hughes & Cairns 2009) that a 2010 (quietly amended) revision of
the definition of competency deleted attitude, closer reflection suggests that the learning
experience requires going beyond just knowledge and skill.
Competency is the consistent application of knowledge and skill to the standard of
performance required in the workplace. It embodies the ability to transfer and apply
skills and knowledge to new situations and environments. (NQC Glossary 2010)
This definition of competency does require a learning experience which gives attention to the
application of knowledge and skill as a step beyond just the acquisition of knowledge and skill. Also,
the explicit transferring to the ‘new’ requirement is a significant step toward graduating a ‘capably
competent’ student as suggested by Hughes and Cairns (2009). Both of these enrichments, although
specific reference to ‘attitude’ has been deleted, have resonance with the Svendsen and Svendsen
16 At the time (1989), John Dawkins was the Minister for Employment, Education and Training. After leaving
parliament he has continued engagement with VET and is now (2012) the Chair of the National Skills Standards
Council (NSSC).
13

(2004, p.2) proposition that social capital is the missing production factor in the pursuit of economic
goals – i.e. in my and Libby’s terms, a person wanting and being able to make the most of what they
know and can do in a manner which adds to organisational achievement and their pride‐in self.
As Libby and I have found there is a ‘want’ within the VET system for a graduate to possess more
than just knowledge and skill (strong in social capital), it follows that the VET teacher who nurtures
this must also have pride in self. It is somewhat mystifying that this ‘want’ in respect of graduates
doesn’t appear to be held by the system in respect of teachers. It seems unreasonable to expect
professional commitment from teachers when their terms of employment are increasingly casual
and the impression is given that they are seen as disposable.
Taking note of the Harris et al (2009, p.29) observation that, in addition to having been largely
excluded from reform processes, Australian VET teachers have been conceptualised as occupational
rather than professional and, as a consequence, their preparation to teach and ongoing professional
development have been undermined. Maybe, this is at the heart of moving from rich pedagogical
alertness and responsiveness to setting the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment as the entry
requirement (in addition to vocational competence) for a VET teacher.
Note: In the Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) a Certificate IV –Level 4 ‐ is described as
‘Graduates at this level will have theoretical and practical knowledge and skills for specialised
and/or skilled work and/or further learning’. When compared to the next level up – Diploma –
‘Graduates at this level will have specialised knowledge and skills for skilled/paraprofessional
work and/or further learning’, it is apparent that a VET teacher doesn’t even rank, at entry, as
a paraprofessional. The question arises – What is the VET system understanding, and valuing,
posture of being skilled as compared to being professional? It is worrying, if the answer lies in
a view of VET teachers as being markedly of lesser fitness to facilitate learning when
compared to a secondary school teacher who requires professional qualification at level 7 in
the AQF – Bachelor Degree ‐ ‘ Graduates at this level will have broad and coherent
knowledge and skills for professional work and/or further learning’ (AQF).
So where to?
In my practice and researching experience, VET outcomes as prescribed in the foregoing require a
VET teacher to be ‘educationalist’ in orientation (Hughes & Hughes 2011; 2012). That is, the teacher
brings commitment and passion to their facilitating role; and it is not exaggerating the occurrence to
say that this is of an infectious nature.
I am particularly reminded of the truck driver who, having injured his back to the point where he had
to find a new career, and was persuaded to reluctantly give being a social worker a try, was
fortunate in coming under the influence of a VET teacher who nurtured passion within him to the
point where he now regards having the injury as good fortune (Hughes 2008).
In the ‘truck driver to social worker’ case the teacher was regarded by the student as highly
professional and, accordingly, deeply committed – presumably highly valued by the VET provider.
However, this teacher was likely to have been labouring under the uncertainty of continued
14

employment. Or if not this teacher, there are others in the system who also ‘give’ of themselves
notwithstanding the appearance of being regarded as disposable. Is this a sustainable paradox? My
response –‘NO’
Notwithstanding a wish for a perfect world in which VET teachers are so valued that they are
employed on long‐term contracts and diverted to professional development and/or strategic
development projects in times of low demand for teaching, I do accept that this is an unlikely
scenario in present circumstances where provider sustainability in the moment rules. So I turn to the
notion of a VET teacher as a Portfolio Professional. A portfolio VET professional could be engaged
with simultaneous teaching at a number of different providers and/or teaching for some of the time
and being vocationally engaged for some other part of the time.
In a mode of personal valuing – given that employer valuing is weak – the individual has pride in self
and draws upon their own social capital including strong networks and being highly regarded within
them, a VET teacher can construct a professional identity which is somewhat akin to a lawyer in
private practice. As for the lawyer, the VET professional builds a client base which is fluid at the
boundaries – new clients come as old clients go; and the investment in professional learning is the
foundation upon which this security of earning is constructed. If, from time to time, a long term
contract is secured the Portfolio VET Professional must still attend to the client base in a way which
secures it into the future, but allows commitment to the current role.
Importantly, the portfolio approach can accommodate being sometimes vocationally engaged, what
could be broadly described as being on‐the‐tools, and thus keeping vocationally competent. This
invites consideration of ways and means to have periods when being vocationally employed also
includes contributing in VET teacher mode as might apply if a VET teacher was to find a role in which
working at the job was combined with enterprise training and development. This thought gives rise
to the possibility that VET teachers in secure employment with a VET provider could be seconded to
a VET client enterprise from time to time – this is a way that a provider might keep their teacher at
no or little cost during periods of slack VET delivery work for the moment; and with advantage to all
involved including addressing the problem of a VET teacher remaining current in vocational terms.
Lewis Hughes
4 th August 2012
About the author
Dr Lewis Hughes is the principal of Enviro-sys a consultancy dedicated to people and organisations making the most of what they know
and can do in an economic and environmentally sustainable manner and with social equity. Lewis initially trained as a communications
engineer before becoming a mathematics and science teacher. This was followed by a diverse career in manufacturing, financial services
and consulting, but always with a strong core of individual and organisation capability building. Since 1999, Lewis’ principal engagement
with vocational education and training has been as a quality assurance consultant in respect of learning design and facilitation. Lewis is an
RABQSA Certified Principal Auditor, Life Member and past National President of the Australian Institute of Training and Development,
member of AARE, and is currently an Executive Committee Member of the VISTA Association of VET Professionals.
15

References
AWPA (2012), Australia’s skills and workforce development needs, Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency, Canberra.
Commonwealth of Australia (1‐2011), Standards for NVR Registered Training Organisations 2011, Federal Register of Legislative
Instruments F2011L01356
Dawkins, J. (1989), Improving Australia’s training system, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Grollmann, P. & Rauner, F. (2007), TVET Teachers: ‘An Endangered Species or Professional Innovative Agents?’, in P. Grollmann & F.
Rauner (eds.) International perspectives on teachers and lecturers in technical and vocational education, Springer, Dordrecht.
Grollmann, P. & Rauner, F. (eds.) (2007), International perspectives on teachers and lecturers in technical and vocational education,
Springer, Dordrecht.
Harrris, R,. Simons, M. & Maher, K. (2009), New directions in European vocational education and training policy and practice: Lessons for
Australia, National Centre for Vocational Education Research, Adelaide.
Hughes, L. (2008), Capacity building through awakening enthusiasm for further learning, CSHISC conference, Adelaide.
http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv52595 viewed 4 August 2012
Hughes, L. (2009), Learner‐Centred Facilitation – a CBT imperative, TAFE Development Centre, TAFE Teaching and Learning Forum,
Melbourne.
Hughes, L. (2012), What’s in a name?: VET as a significant, but under‐valued, contributor to ‘Social Capital’, VISTA Association of VET
Professionals conference, Yarra Valley. http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv51646 viewed 4 August 2012
Hughes, L. & Cairns, L. (2009), Competency‐Based Training: Nostradamus’s Nostrum: What happened and where might we “capably” go?,
ECER 2009, Vienna. http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv43021 viewed 4 August 2012
Hughes, L.B. & Hughes, L.C. (2011, Social capital building within a human capital focused VET system: an Australian case study
strengthening the deaf community, ECER 2011, Berlin. http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv51643 viewed 4 August 2012
Hughes, L. B. & Hughes, L. C. (2012) Social Capital and VET – Researching Coupling of ‘Want’ to ‘Need’: an Australian comparison with
Europe, ECER 2012, Cadiz.
NCVER (2009), A Profile of VET Providers, National Centre for Vocational Education Research, Adelaide.
NCVER (2012), Students & Courses, National Centre for Vocational Education Research, Adelaide.
Nielsen, S, (2007), ‘The professional situation and training of vocational teachers in Denmark’ in P. Grollmann & F. Rauner (eds.)
International perspectives on teachers and lecturers in technical and vocational education, Springer, Dordrecht.
NQC (2010), NQC Special Bulletin 7 July, National Quality Council, Canberra.
NQC (2010), Glossary, National Quality Council, Canberra.
PC (2011), Vocational Education and Training Workforce – Draft Report, Australian Government Productivity Commission, Canberra.
PC (2011), Vocational Education and Training Workforce: Research Report, Australian Government Productivity Commission, Canberra.
Pusey, M. (1991), Economic Rationalism in Canberra: A Nation Building State Changes Its Mind, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
TAE10 (2010), Training and Education Training Package Version 2, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. – available for viewing and/or
download from training.gov.au
Skills Australia (2011), Skills for prosperity: a roadmap for vocational education and training, Skills Australia, Canberra.
Stephenson, J. (1998), ‘The Concept of Capability and its Importance in Higher Education’ in J. Stephenson & M. Yorke (eds.), Capability &
Quality in Higher Education, Kogan Page, London.
16

Svendsen, GLH & Svendsen, G.T. (2004), The Creation and Destruction of Social Capital: Entrepreneurship, Co‐operative Movements and
Institutions, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
17