What credentials do trainers need?

Introduction

Over the past few weeks I have been thinking about what tasks do trainers perform and what credentials do trainers need. This was triggered by the release of the Australian Skills Classification by the National Skills Commission. The occupation profile for a vocational trainer described in the Australian Skills Classification was appalling. My various thoughts have been recently published in four articles:

I would like to thank the many people who commented in response to these previous articles on this topic. In this article, I want to put together my many and varied thoughts.

What tasks are performed by trainers?

Qualifications must have an occupational outcome. Therefore, we need to develop an occupation profile based on work tasks and activities performed by a trainer. There are different types of trainers and not all trainers perform the same range of tasks.

What are the different types of trainers?

Some trainers work as part of Australia’s vocational education and training (VET) system. And some do not. This is the first significant difference between trainers:

VET trainers
Non-VET trainers.

Another difference is the job role performed: [1]

Employed as a VET trainer (TAFE, private RTO, other RTO)
Employed in a job role other than a VET trainer (experienced worker, workplace supervisor, workplace manager, etc.)
School teacher delivering a VET in Schools program.

And another difference is the employment status: [1]

Permanent employee (full-time and part-time employee)
Non-permanent employee (casual, sessional or employed under fixed-term or short-term contract)
Volunteer.

What are the different types of RTOs?

It has been said that VET trainers perform different tasks depending on the type of RTO they work for. The Education IRC identified six types of RTOs: [2]

TAFE Institute
University RTO
Private RTO
School RTO
Community RTO
Enterprise RTO.

I am not convinced that a person delivering training and assessment services for different types of RTOs actually perform profoundly different tasks:

Are trainers expected to deliver training?
Are trainer expected to keep training records?
Are trainers expected to monitor progress?
Are trainers expected to resolve issues?
Are trainers expected to assess competence?
Are trainers expected to keep assessment records?

Fundamentally, I think trainers will perform the same core tasks regardless of the type of RTO they work for. Some people may disagree with me, but they haven’t provided any details to persuade me otherwise.

I do acknowledge that trainers may operate under different conditions:

Different types of learners, with different characteristics and needs
Different types of content for different industry sectors
Different types of training and assessment resources
Different types of locations where training and assessment is conducted
Different technology to be used (Moodle, Canvas, other LMS, Zoom, Cisco Webex, other web conferencing platform, etc.).

The different conditions do not essentially alter the work tasks or activities performed by a trainer. One important feature of the Australian VET system is ‘contextualisation’, and this allows RTOs to customise what they deliver to respond to different conditions. Therefore, an RTO delivering a TAE Certificate IV qualification can tailor content for a particular learner group need.

What qualifications, skill sets, and units of competency are needed?

Units of competency are used to describe the performance of work tasks and activities. They are then used as the building blocks for qualifications and skill sets. The needs of industry determines qualifications, skill sets, and units of competency. And the VET industry is mainly represented by the VET regulators, in particular ASQA, lobby groups, and the employers of VET trainers.

What are the regulatory requirements?

VET is highly regulated to ensure quality and to protect clients. The regulations specify the credentials that must be held by a VET trainer.

Deliver training within the VET context

An RTO’s training must be delivered only by a person who has the appropriate credential. Currently, this credential is the TAE40116 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualification or a diploma or higher-level qualification in adult education. [3]

Where the RTO engages an individual, who does not hold the appropriate credential, the individual can deliver training but they must be supervised by a person who does have the appropriate credential. The supervisor must monitor the individual under their supervision. And the supervisor is accountable for the quality of the training provided and the quality of assessment evidence collected. [3]

Assess competency within the VET context

Assessment must be conducted by a person who has attained the following units of competency: [3]

TAEASS401 Plan assessment activities and processes
TAEASS502 Design and develop assessment tools
TAEASS402 Assess competence
TAEASS403 Participate in assessment validation.

Alternatively, the person conducting assessments can have a diploma or higher-level qualification in adult education. [3] Do all higher-level qualifications in adult education ensure competence in the TAEASS401, TAEASS402, TAEASS403, and TAEASS502 units?

Where the RTO engages an individual, who does not hold the appropriate credential, the individual can contribute to assessment by collecting assessment evidence and providing it to a ‘qualified assessor’. It is the ‘qualified assessor’ who is accountable for the assessment process and determines the assessment outcome. The ‘unqualified individual’ is prohibited from determining assessment outcomes. [3]

Industry experts may also be involved in the assessment judgement, working alongside the ‘qualified assessor’. Again, it is the ‘qualified assessor’ who is accountable for the assessment process and determines the assessment outcome. The ‘unqualified individual’ is prohibited from determining assessment outcomes. [3]

What tasks are performed by a trainer?

The following diagram shows the relationship between:

Tasks performed by a trainer
Regulatory requirements
Qualifications, skill sets, and units of competency.

I acknowledge that not all trainers perform the same range of tasks. Some work for RTOs and others do not, and maybe some RTOs expect their trainers to do things that are not required when working for other RTOs. Therefore, I have created five categories of trainer.

Category 1 trainer

Deliver training within a non-VET context
Deliver training under supervision within a VET context
Prohibited from conducting assessment within a VET context

Category 2 trainer

Deliver training under supervision within a VET context
Contribute to assessments within a VET context
Prohibited from conducting assessments within a VET context

Category 3 trainer

Deliver training under supervision within a VET context
Conduct assessments within a VET context

Category 4 trainer

Perform the role of trainer or TAFE teacher
Deliver training within a VET context
Conduct assessments within a VET context
Has the capability to design and develop training and assessment resources
Has the capability to participate in assessment validation and moderation activities

Category 5 trainer

Perform the role of senior trainer or senior TAFE teacher
Has all the capabilities to perform the role of a Category 4 trainer
Has the capability to design and develop training and assessment strategies
Has the capability to lead assessment validation and moderation activities
Has the capability to evaluate training and assessment services
Supervise or mentor trainers or TAFE teachers.

The following table identifies the typical tasks performed by each category of trainer.

Tasks performed will determine the category. For example:

What category would match the requirements of a school teacher who is delivering a VET in Schools program? Probably, most would be a Category 3 trainer. Some would be a Category 4 trainer.

What category would match the requirements for a volunteer trainer working for a community-based RTO? Depending on the RTO requirements and supervision arrangements, the volunteer could be Category 1, 2, 3, or 4 trainer.

How to select the appropriate qualification or skill set

The following diagram can be used to help select the appropriate qualification or skill set.

A person only needs the TAE Certificate IV if:

They are a trainer working in the VET system
They will be responsible for conducting assessments
They will not work under supervisions (as per the Standards for RTOs)
They a new to the VET system.

Is AQF Level 4 appropriate for VET trainers?

The qualification for new trainers has been at the AQF Level 4 for the past 23 years. Some people think that the current qualification for VET trainers is at the wrong AQF level. I think it is the right level because of the supervision responsibilities of a trainer: supervise learners, supervise their safety, supervise their progress, etc.

Should there be more than one TAE Certificate IV qualifications?

Some people suggest that more than one TAE Certificate IV qualification is needed. How many qualification are needed? What units of competency would be included in each qualification? What units of competency would be the same? And what units of competency would be different?

I am not convinced that we need multiple qualifications. If people think some tasks are not being covered, then maybe the solution is have a few elective units. Currently, the TAE40116 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualification only has provision for one elective unit. If there was two or three elective units, then RTOs could select electives to meet different needs. Having said that, most RTOs would probably continue to deliver a fixed program.

In conclusion

In this article, I have introduced the concept of five categories of trainers.

Each category is supported by a different credential. Category 1, 2, and 3 trainers are covered by skill sets. Category 4 trainers are covered by a Certificate IV, and Category 5 trainers are covered by a Diploma. A pathway from Category 1 trainer to Category 5 trainer is provided with minimal duplication. In other words, one credential leads onto the next.

References

[1] https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/understanding-the-australian-vocational-education-and-training-workforce accessed 20 April 2021

[2] Education IRC, Industry Skills Forecast and Proposed Schedule of Work, March 2019 assessed 20 April 2021

[3] https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2019C00503 accessed 20 April 2021

What tasks do trainers do?

Background

Some people are working towards shifting Australia’s VET system from being a ‘training system’ to being an ‘education system’.

I have recently written articles exploring the difference between ‘training’ and ‘teaching’, and the difference between ‘trainers’ and ‘teachers’. I appreciate that there can be a crossover but the responses to my articles have overwhelmingly endorsed my view that there is a difference.

A difference between teaching and training can be expressed as:

Teaching is about imparting knowledge and providing information, while training is about developing capabilities.
Teaching is more theoretical and abstract, while training is more hands-on and practical.
Teaching is more academic and knowledge based, while training is more practical and skills based or job focused.

In the Australian context, vocational education and training (VET) is about helping others learn to perform work tasks and activities. The prime focus has been on helping people get a job or get a better job. And the prime role of a trainer or TAFE teacher has been to deliver ‘training’, not ‘teaching’. Training involves ‘hands-on learning’. It involves performing the task or activity, and practicing until it has been learnt. Some learning is quick and easy. And sometimes learning can be a long and slow process.

Tasks performed by trainers

Australia’s VET system has been organised around qualifications. Each qualification relates to an occupation or a job function. However, in the past decade, skill sets have emerged to develop skills relating to part of a job. It is highly likely that the required qualification to be a trainer working in the VET sector will be reviewed during 2021/22. I look forward to the TAE40122 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualification, or whatever the qualification code and title will be. Maybe there will be more than one qualification targeting the work needs of different types of trainers.

An Australian VET qualification is meant to be a pathway to an occupational outcome. A review of the current TAE40116 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualification will require an analysis of the work tasks and activities performed by trainers and assessors.

The main target audience for the TAE40116 qualification are individuals delivering training and assessment services in the vocational education and training (VET) sector.

The following are some tasks performed by trainers and assessors working in the Australian VET sector:

Complete administrative tasks
Design and develop training and assessment resources
Plan, organise, and deliver training
Plan, organise, and conduct assessments
Participate in assessment validation and moderation activities
Evaluate training and assessment services
Plan, organise, and monitor learning in the workplace
Maintain and enhance vocational competencies.

Task titles can be vague

The task titles above may be a bit vague. Knowledge and skills required to perform a task can be hidden in the details. Therefore, the following begins to clarify some of the typical tasks performed by a trainer, without getting into too much details.

Complete administrative tasks may include the following sub-tasks:

Attend meetings
Reply to emails
Resolve issues.

Design and develop training and assessment resources may include the development of technology based resources and non-technology based resources. There may be an advantage to splitting this task into two sub-tasks:

Design and develop assessment resources
Design and develop training resources.

It has become a common task for trainers to address adult language, literacy, and numeracy skills. Many adult learners have LLN skills that are less than the required level for the specified outcome of the training program. This task would be performed in conjunction with the delivery of training and assessment of competency.

Plan, organise, and deliver training may include the following sub-tasks:

Plan and prepare for the delivery of training
Request facilities or equipment required for assessment
Conduct safety risk assessment
Gather training materials, including photocopying
Ensure safe learning environment
Deliver group-based training
Maintain records, including attendance and participation records
Provide support and training to an individual
Gather feedback or evaluation data about training services.

Plan, organise, and conduct assessments may include the following sub-tasks:

Request facilities or equipment required for assessment
Conduct safety risk assessment
Gather assessment materials, including photocopying
Ensure safe assessment environment
Assess competence
Maintain records, including assessment evidence and results
Gather feedback or evaluation data about training and assessment services.

RTOs may require their trainers and assessors to participate in assessment validation and moderation activities. This is an important task for ensuring quality and continuous improvement.

RTOs may require their trainers and assessors to analyse feedback and evaluate training and assessment services. This task may include identifying trends and recommending improvements.

Plan, organise, and monitor learning in the workplace is required when coordinating apprenticeships, traineeships, or work placements.

Trainers and assessors must maintain and enhance their vocational competencies, including their the continued development of their training and assessment skills (as specified by the Standards for RTOs).

Note: Additional tasks may be performed by an experienced trainer or senior TAFE teacher. For example, supervise and mentor new trainers.

Are all VET trainers the same?

Not all trainers perform the same tasks or spend the same amount of time on performing a particular task or activity.

There can be a difference determined by the type of trainer:

Full-time trainer
Casual trainer
Volunteer trainer
School teacher who delivers a VET in Schools program
Workplace or industry trainer who’s main job is not being a trainer.

The following table gives an indicative amount of time on performing the various tasks.

In conclusion

I am seeking your help to further clarify or confirm the tasks performed by trainers. A clear understanding of work tasks and activities can have, and should have, an impact on the future qualification or qualifications required to be a trainer.

Are the tasks I have identified, the tasks performed by trainers?
Are my estimates for the indicative amount of time performing each task reasonable?
Are there other tasks performed by trainers that I haven’t listed? For example, should I include ‘design and develop a training program’ task?
Do you think there should be one TAE qualification for all trainers, or should there be different qualifications for different types of trainers?

If there are different qualifications we may have some trainers restricted in moving from one type of RTO to another type of RTO, or from one type of employment as a trainer to another. This may create a ‘gap training’ requirement, and a delay in taking up new job or career opportunities until the ‘qualified trainer’ gets further qualified. Is it desirable to set up two categories of ‘qualified trainers’? Would this confuse would-be trainers? How many would-be trainers will want to pay money to become a ‘qualified but restricted trainer’?

I welcome your comments.

I am especially keen to hear from RTO managers who employ trainers. What tasks do you want a ‘qualified trainer’ to perform when they work for your RTO?

What AQF level is appropriate for a qualification that targets a trainer working in the VET sector?

The Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) specifies the expected outcomes for qualifications in Australia. It consists of 10 qualification levels, and has a descriptor for each level.

This article is a case study in using the AQF to determine the appropriate level for a qualification. The aim is to answer the question:

What AQF level is appropriate for a qualification that targets a trainer working in the VET sector?

The target audience are people wanting to work as a trainer in the Australian VET sector. These people have not previously worked in VET. I would narrow the choice to AQF Levels 3, 4, or 5.

For the past 23 years, the qualification for this target audience has been pitched at the AQF Level 4. We are checking if this is still the appropriate level.

Here is the descriptor for the AQF Level 3.

Here is the descriptor for the AQF Level 4.

And here is the descriptor for the AQF Level 5.

The following table makes it a little easier to compare the various levels. Highlighted in ‘red’ are some key words that we can use to explore the difference between the AQF levels.

The current qualification required to be held by trainers working in VET is at the AQF Level 4. The following questions can be used to confirm or dispute the current AQF level.

Does a trainer need narrow or broad factual knowledge about training?
Does a trainer need skills to complete routine and non-routine activities?
Does a trainer need skills to solve a variety of predictable and sometimes unpredictable problems?
Does a trainer work in stable or changing environment?
Does a trainer have limited responsibilities?

The first four question above can help to differentiate between AQF Levels 3 and 4. The last question begins to differentiate between AQF Levels 4 and 5.

AQF Level 3 qualifications are used for skilled worker occupations. AQF Level 4 qualifications are often used for supervisory occupations. And AQF Level 5 qualifications are often used for management occupations. Does a trainer need to take the responsibility of a skilled worker, supervisor, or manager?

Trainers must supervise people when they deliver group-based training. There is a limit to their responsibilities. RTO management, not the trainer, are ultimately responsible for quality and the delivery of training and assessment services.

What are the consequences of selecting an AQF level that is lower than is required?

If the AQF level for a qualification is too low, then ‘qualified trainers’ will not have the knowledge and skills to perform their job. Delivery of poor quality training and assessment services would follow.

I think the AQF Level 3 is too low for the responsibilities of being a trainer. And the AQF Level 4 seems to be the appropriate qualification level. What do you think?

What are the consequences of selecting an AQF level that is higher than is required?

If the AQF level for a qualification is greater than what is need to perform the occupation, then this will severely limit who can get qualified. The VET system would have insufficient trainers.

I think the AQF Level 7 is far too high for the job role of trainer. And the AQF Level 5 is too high for a new trainer. Currently, there are two TAE Diplomas. One Diploma is used as the pathway to become a senior trainer. And the other Diploma is used as the pathway to become an instructional designer or resource developer.

In conclusion

Some people say AQF Level 4 is too low. Of these people, some say the AQF Level 5 is the correct level. And others say AQF Level 7. To make things really confusing, there are some people who say the AQF Level 3 is the correct level. Not everyone can be right.

But maybe the AQF level of the qualification is not the real issue. Some people find studying to attain their TAE40116 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualification as being too difficult, or too time consuming. This is further complicated because some people may not have the capability to attain the required competencies. Sometimes, the person may have the capability but the training strategy delivered by the RTO does not help the person to learn, or training duration is insufficient.

And some people disagree with certain units of competency being core units, such as TAEASS502 Design and develop assessment tools. ASQA decided that the TAEASS502 unit had to be a core unit. The aim was to improve the quality of assessment. Has the aim been achieved or is there progress towards achieving the aim? I assume that there will soon be a review of the TAE40116 qualification. And this would include a review of the TAE units of competency.

I welcome your comments.

Is training the same thing as teaching?

For several years, some people have been trying to shift vocational education and training from being a ‘training system’ to a ‘tertiary education system’. This requires the removal of the words ‘training’ and ‘trainer’ from the lexicon.

Some people have started to drop the word ‘training’ and starting to use ‘vocational education’ instead of ‘ vocational education and training’. I believe that removing the words ‘training’ and ‘trainer’ undermines the value of VET. It is trying to make VET something that it is not. It seems to be a shift towards academic studies rather than training and developing skills for work.

The recently released Australian Skills Classification has used the occupation title of ‘Vocational Education Teacher’ instead of trainer and assessor. In a previous article, I have expressed my disappointment with the use of this occupation title. Also, the Australian Skills Classification does a poor job at describing the occupation and describing the tasks performed by trainers and assessors working in the Australian VET system.

The Australian Skills Classification has used the icon of a mortarboard (also known as a graduate cap or academic cap) to represent the occupation of trainers and assessors. For me, this icon is symbolic of university. It isn’t the best icon for representing trainers and assessors working in the VET sector.

Having earned a bachelors degree, masters degree, or a PhD is no guarantee that a person can be an effective trainer, especially an effective trainer in the Australian VET system. People need vocational skills to be a trainer, not academic achievement.

Training skills and methods can be fundamentally different to the skills and methods needed to teach. Teaching school children and teaching university students is not the same as training job seekers and workers. And being a current teacher or university lecturer does not automatically mean that the person can deliver competency-based training and assessment services without receiving the appropriate training.

Australia needs skilled and experienced butchers, bakers, dress makers, florists, hairdressers, carpenters, brick layers, roof tilers, plumbers, electricians, air-conditioning mechanics, civil construction workers, welders, machine operators, warehouse workers, office admin. workers, farm worker, gardeners, truck drivers, bus drivers, heavy equipment operators, vehicle mechanics, pet groomers, veterinary assistants, dental assistants, laboratory technicians, operation theatre technicians, chefs, cooks, kitchen assistants, aged care workers, disability support workers, etc. to be trainers. We need people with vocational skills and current work experience, and we need these people to proudly identify as being a ‘trainer’.

The mortarboard icon does not symbolise a trainer in the Australian VET workforce.

Teaching is not the same as training. And a teacher is not the same as a trainer.

A teacher will have a four year Bachelor of Education or a minimum of a three year degree, followed by a postgraduate course such as, Graduate Diploma or Master of Teaching for a particular age group, for example, early childhood, primary or secondary. Each state or territory may have slight variations to the qualification requirements to be a teacher. Basically, teachers will have attained a qualification at the AQF Level 7 or above.

Will a Vocational Education Teacher need to meet the same qualification requirements?

If no, we are setting up two-tiers of teachers: ‘real teachers’ and ‘un-real teachers’, ‘first-class teachers’ and ‘second-class teachers’, or ‘higher educated teachers’ and ‘lower educated teachers’.
If yes, we are stopping skilled and experienced workers from helping others to learn the skills to perform work , a trade, an occupation, or a para-profession.

A person can be a trainer without being a teacher. And the qualification requirements for a trainer doesn’t need to be at the same level as a teacher.

What level of qualification does a trainer need?

The first qualification designed for vocational trainers was introduced in 1998. It was the BSZ40198 Certificate IV in Assessment and Workplace Training. After 23 years, some people are saying that this qualification, and the subsequent qualifications that have replaced it, have been pitched at the wrong level:

TAA40104 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment
TAE40110 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment
TAE40116 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment.

What AQF Level is the correct level of trainers working in the VET sector? Some people say AQF Level 4 is too low. Of these people, some say the AQF Level 5 is the correct level. And others say AQF Level 7. To make things really confusing, there are some people who say the AQF Level 3 is the correct level. Not everyone can be right. We can go to the AQF document and use it to determine the correct level. No need for discussion. No need for opinions.

Go to the Australian Qualification Framework (AQF):

Review the criteria for the various AQF Levels
What descriptor for knowledge and skills best fits the role of a vocational trainer?
Does the description of autonomy, judgement, and responsibility match the role of a vocational trainer?

Please tell me what you think the correct AQF Level is.

What is the Australian Skills Classification? And how does it describe the tasks performed by a trainer working in the VET sector?

What is the Australian Skills Classification?

The Australian Skills Classification was announced and publicly released by the National Skills Commission on the 18th of March 2021. It includes skills profiles for 600 occupations. Each skill profile has three elements:

specialist tasks
core competencies
technology tools.

The announcement says that each skill profile clearly outlines what skills are required for a particular occupation. [1]

The Australian Skills Classification has 25 cluster families. [2]

How does the Australian Skills Classification describe the tasks performed by a trainer working in the VET sector?

The cluster family that covers a trainer working in the VET sector is ‘Teaching and education’. The following shows the details for the ‘Teaching and education’ cluster family. [3]

‘Teach tertiary and vocational courses’ seems to be the obvious place to look within the cluster family for the occupation of trainer in the VET sector. However, is being a lecturer or tutor at a university the same thing as being a trainer delivering a VET course? I think there is a difference. Many university lecturers and tutors are highly qualified academics. How do they feel being lumped together with their VET counterparts? And the qualification requirements are, and should, be different for a person who delivers VET training courses.

‘Teach tertiary and vocational courses’ gives a list of related occupations or roles. I am surprised that trainers working in the VET sector are classified with economists, geologists, biochemists, meteorologists, and historian. Are economists, geologists, biochemists, meteorologists, and historian happy being grouped with trainers? Has the National Skills Commission got their classifications right? I assume that many people with big brains have been paid big bucks to develop the Australian Skills Classifications. Could they have got it wrong?

Is teaching the same thing as training?

The National Skills Commission has created the occupation title of ‘Vocational Education Teacher’. The following is the description that is given for this occupation. [4]

I think there is a difference between teaching and training. And I think there is a difference between a teacher and a trainer. Teachers are degree qualified (AQF Level 7 or above). Trainers are Certificate IV qualified (AQF Level 4). Vocational training can, and should be, delivered by a person with the vocational competence and relevant work experience. For example:

Plumbers should be trained by a person who is a plumber
Hairdressers should be trained by a person who is a hairdresser
Prison guards should be trained by a person who is a prison guard
Sheep shearers should be trained by a person who can shear sheep
Cleaners should be trained by a person who has worked as a cleaner
Café workers should be trained by a person who has café experience
Aged care worker should be trained by an experienced aged care worker
Etc.

People training others to be a plumber, hairdresser, prison guard, sheep shearer, cleaner, café worker, or aged care worker do not need a degree. They do not need a teaching degree. They do need the vocational skills that they are helping others learn. They do need relevant and current workplace or industry experience relating to those vocational skills.

Will trainers of the future be called teachers? And will they need to be degree qualified? Will they need a teaching degree? Will part-time trainers, volunteer trainers, community trainers, workplace trainers, and industry trainers need a teaching degree? Or will there be first-rate teachers (those with a teaching degree and work in schools) and second-rate teachers (those without a teaching degree and work in VET)? When did a trainer and assessor become a teacher? Are teachers outraged that their profession is being undermined?

Also, the National Skills Commission has described the ‘Vocational Education Teacher’ occupation. The description does not cover all trainers and assessors in the current VET workforce. What about the trainers and assessors who do not work for TAFEs, polytechnics, and other training institutes? Many trainers and assessors work for small private RTOs, community-based RTOs, and enterprise RTOs. And there are many people who work in schools and organisations that have an auspice arrangement with an RTO to deliver training as an expert or experienced worker.

Did the National Skills Commission consult with VET before giving the occupation a new title and limiting the role description to institutional training? If there did consult, who did they consult? I can only assume they did consult with VET people. It seems that the consultation process got things wrong. Did the National Skills Commission consult with the wrong people? Or did the National Skills Commission ignore the information provided by VET people?

Occupation profile

The following is the occupation profile for Vocational Education Teachers. [5]

There are 21 tasks identified. The percentage (%) of time likely to be spent on the task by a person working in this occupation is given by ‘clicking’ on each box.

The following table lists the 21 tasks, the % of time on task given by the Australian Skills Classification, the % of time on task from my own experience as a trainer, and some additional comments.

I think the 21 tasks are unreal:

Much of the terminology used are not common VET terms
Some of the percentages of time spent performing tasks seem to be wrong
Some sub-tasks have been given the same status as tasks
Some uncommon tasks should not be on the list, for example, ‘Supervise laboratory work’
Tasks with 0% of time on task have been listed (this means that task not performed by a trainer have been listed as part of their occupation profile).

Here is my revised list consisting of 5 tasks. I have used the same terminology or task titles as used in the Australian Skills Classification.

And here is my revised occupation profile for a trainer and assessor working in the Australian VET sector, referred to as a Vocational Education Teacher by the Australian Skills Classification. In this example I have used terminology more commonly used in VET.

Limitations of the Australian Skills Classification

The Australian Skills Classification is said to offer a deeper understanding of the labour market. This may be true, but it is too shallow to be used for planning, designing, and delivering vocational training and skills development. The Australian Skills Classification identifies occupations and lists tasks performed by an occupation as represented by the following diagram.

The developers of the Australian Skills Classification seem to be fixated on labour market analysis and the transferability of skills across occupations. Some people may think the Australian Skills Classification has applications beyond its capability. It is limited. Should the Australian Skills Classification be renamed as the Australian Labour Market Classification to avoid misunderstand?

The following diagram represents the depth of the current VET system.

This is the depth of specification required for:

analysis of training needs
design of training and assessment programs
delivery of vocational training and skills development
assessment to determine if the specified outcomes have been achieved.

I hope our politicians and bureaucrats responsible for VET are smart enough to know they should not tamper with the current VET frameworks in an attempt to find alignment with the Australian Skills Classification. Alignment would be a disaster for VET.

In conclusion

The Australian Skills Classification can be thought of as the Australian Labour Market Classification. It has limitations and should not be used to change the current VET frameworks.

The Australian Skills Classification has used the Vocational Education Teacher as the occupation title for a trainer working in the VET sector. It seems to be a deliberate attempt to remove the words ‘training’ and ‘trainer’. A teacher is not the same as a trainer. And teaching is not the same as training.

It is unfortunate that the same acronym for vocational education and training (VET) can be used for the vocational education teacher (VET) occupation. Some people may get confused between VET (the system) and VET (the individual).

There are 21 tasks listed for the Vocational Education Teacher occupation. The tasks are poorly titled or use terminology that is foreign to VET. And there are unnecessary tasks listed. The percentage of time on tasks are not realistic. Are other occupations poorly described by the Australian Skills Classification?

Are we entering a new era? An era when there will be no ‘training’, only ‘vocational education’. And there will be no ‘trainers’, only ‘teachers’. I am proud to say that I am a ‘trainer’. I lament the demise of ‘vocational training’. Why have people pursued an agenda to remove the words ‘training’ and ‘trainer’ from our lexicon? How will the removal of these words change things? (Will industry start calling their trainers, teachers? I don’t think so. Why create a divide between VET and industry?)

Also, I have looked at the ‘core competencies’ found in the Australian Skills Classification . I’ve decided to reserve my comments because this article has gone on for long enough. I may decide to write an article dedicated to the ‘core competencies’.

The Australian Skills Classification may be useful for labour market analysis (assuming that something is wrong with the current way of doing it). It is not useful for VET (the system).

In closing, I should say something nice. The Australian Skills Classification has used a spectrum of pretty colours and an array of icons.