Whoever comes up with a framework that can accommodate skills, qualifications and training will shape post-school education systems, or if the ambitious have their way, system.
Jobs and Skills Australia is already on to it – proposing a national skills taxonomy. It could make possible a national skills passport across VET and HE and linked to the three big user-needs for skills categories, industry, qualification and occupation. The problem is that the challenge to combine elements of the existing ten taxonomies is so vast and the options so disconnected nobody quite knows how to connect them or if they do, how to sell it.
It shows in a summary of stakeholder thinking, release by JSA, which demonstrates that when it comes to skills people will argue about anything; “some stakeholders noted that ‘Dynamic’ could conflict with ‘Comprehensive’ – a highly comprehensive taxonomy might become stagnant and challenging to update. Others saw conflict between ‘Dynamic’ and ‘Interoperable’ – linking the NST to other taxonomies that are outdated or have long update times may impair its ability to remain dynamic.”
As for VET and HE providers, they “expressed some hesitancy, ” at the cost of applying a national skills taxonomy to their courses plus adding to “reform fatigue.”
Then again, “skills advisors and experts” liked it a lot, “providing better connections for tertiary education to the job market, ensuring learner outcomes align with industry need.”
And while nobody much agreed on what an NST would be, or accomplish, there was “strong support” for all lobbies keeping an eye on each other – government, employers, unions and “educators.” As to governance, “the most common governance model” was JSA with advisory groups.
But optimism is eternal and “stakeholders” set out a “staged and iterative approach” to make the process happen.
- define skill: “This definition must be acceptable to all stakeholders, particularly addressing the tensions within the tertiary education sector between ‘skills’ and ‘knowledge’ “
- JSA to maintain momentum by engaging stakeholders: “ensuring they actively shape and refine the taxonomy”
- iterative user testing and feedback: “regular user testing at each stage, gathering feedback from stakeholders to ensure the taxonomy is practical and effective”
And then there is the issue that, on the basis of this paper, will ensure that nothing will likely happen:
- “incorporate the NST into policy design:” “stakeholders highlighted the critical role of government in fostering the adoption of the NST by incorporating it into policy design, particularly in relation to skills-based policy developments.”
Think this could happen? Consider the still unimplemented 2019 plan for transformed Australian Qualification Framework and think again.
