a rich tapestry - changing views

8/8/2019 A Rich Tapestry - Changing Views

1/13

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher EducationVo!. 33, No. 3, November 2005, pp. 339-351

A rich tapestry: changing views ofteaching and teaching qualifications inthe vocational education and trainingsector!Erica Smith*Charles Sturt University, Australia .

Copyright Agency Limited (CAL) l i c e n . s e d s o R y , F u r t 9 ~ r copying and .communication prohibited except on payment of fee per Copy or Commumcaltonand otherwise inaccordance with the licence from CAl. to ACER. For moreinformation contactCAL on (02) 9394 7600 [email protected] paper describes and critiques changes in the nature, status and qualification requirements ofthe teaching workforce over the past 15 years in the vocational education and training sector inAustralia. Changes in the settings in which VET is delivered, expansion of the VET market, andnew initiatives in qualifications for VET teachers have created a detailed tapestry. In this tapestryare woven together threads representing pedagogy, assessment, industry requirements andpractitioner sophistication. The threads interact in complex and rich ways. The article draws on anumber of data sources which illustrate the potential dangers of any assumption that improving thequalification levels of VET teachers might be unproblematic or even always desirable.

IntroductionA paper of mine (Smith, 1999) that was previously published in this journaldocumented the changes in teaching in vocational education and training (VET)that resulted from the implementation of competency-based training in the sector.Since that paper was written, in the late 1990s, the VET sector has continued toundergo considerable changes in policy and practice, and these changes haveimpacted upon the role and status of teachers in the sector and upon qualificationsrequired of them. The early 2000s have proved to be something of a watershed in thedebates around VET teaching; they have brought changes in the perceived status ofVET teaching as well as new VET teaching qualifications that are about to beintroduced. This paper discusses the complexity of these changes and the ways inwhich different agendas have contributed to the construction of an imagined idealVET practitioner.

"School of Education, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, 2678, Australia.Email:[email protected] 1359-866X (print)!ISSN 1469-2945 (online)/05/030339-13 2005 Australian Teacher Education AssociationDOl: 10.1080/13598660500286374

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . -


2/13

340 E. Smith

BackgroundSince the late 1980s, the vocational education and trammg sector has beenundergoing almost continuous change in Australia, as in other English-speakingcountries (Smith & Keating, 2003). Traditionally (and still, although to a lesserextent) VET has been dominated by technical and further education colleges('TAFE'), which are public providers funded by each state and territory. Now thesector now offers equal opportunity to private training providers (known, along withTAFE, as Registered Training Organisations) to offer nationally-recognizedqualifications. The 4000 RTOs that deliver national qualifications have needed tomeet certain requirements for course development and delivery. Since 2002 theserequirements have been included in the Australian Quality Training Framework(AQTF) (Brennan & Smith, 2002). Courses which attract government funding haveadditional accountability requirements.Along with the expansion of the training market-to the point that 1.7 million

students are now studying publicly-funded VET at anyone time (NCVER, 2003)the other major change has been the move to competency-based training (CBT)(Smith, 1999), a continuing development that has taken most of the last 15 yearsand is still resisted, particularly in some sections of TAFE. CBT is now enshrined inpublicly-available National Training Packages for each of 80 indus try andoccupational areas (Down, 2002). Train ing Packages, whose development isoverseen and endorsed by the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA),consist of national units of competency, derived from consultations with industry,'packaged ' into qualifications, together with assessment guidelines. TrainingPackages are similar to the VIZ system of National Vocational Qualifications(NVQs) (Fletcher, 1991). As with NVQs, assessment assumes pre-eminence overteaching because the units of competency refer to learners' competence to performtasks not to learning processes. There is thus increasing opportunity for workers andstudents to gain qualifications through Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) ratherthan through learning programs. An increased focus on on-the-job rather than offthe-job training has also contr ibuted to the shift in focus, in VET practitioners'work, to assessment from teaching, since on-the-job training is normally carried outby workplace supervisors rather than teachers.The move to CBT has been fiercely resisted by many practit ioners in the TAFE

system and by many academic commentators (see Misko, 1999). There have beenconcerns about perceived lower standards because of CBT's seemingly atomisticlearning style, and also about a drop in quality that seems inevitable following fiercecompetition among providers. A major concern of teachers has been that CBT isoutcomes rather than input-based and therefore is not concerned with how studentslearn to perform the desired outcomes bu t only with the Outcomes. A furtherconcern is the privileging of 'industry' as a stakeholder above individual learners. Allof these concerns and others have been well documented in various parliamentaryinquiries into VET (see Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business& Education References Committee, 2000) and resulted in the implementation ofthe Australian Quality Training Framework (AQTF) in 2002 (Brennan & Smith,


3/13

Changing views of teaching 3412002). The AQTF has set stringent new accreditation and monitoring standards forRTOs.

Teachers in VETIt is difficult to establish the size of the VET teaching workforce but it is thought thatthere are around 40,000 full time TAFE teachers and perhaps 300,000 other peopleinvolved in VET teaching and training (Guthrie, 2003). The larger figure involvesassessors and others involved in workplace delivery ofVET, for whom training mightonly be a small part of their job, as well as part time TAFE teachers.

Until the early 1990s most VET teachers were employed byTAFE and comprised acore of full time teachers with a considerable proportionofpart time staff who generallytaught as an addition to their 'day' jobs in trades and professions. Therewere also somepart t imers whose only work was in TAFE. This pattern persists although there hasbeen an extension of casualization and temporary contract staff (Forward, 2004). TheTAFE workforce is relatively old, with many teachers in their 40s and 50s. TAFE isbecoming increasingly 'feminized' withmany female teachers being appointed to teachthe relatively new teaching areas such as hospitality, retail and community serviceswhile the more traditional TAFE areas such as engineering and construction are inrelative decline (Guthrie, 2003). Part time and casual VET teachers are more likelytobe female than male, as in the workforce as a whole (Harris et aI., 2001).

With over 4000 RTOs now registered (www.ntis.gov.au), the non-TAFE VETworkforce is much larger than it used to be. Non-TAFE practitioners have somedifferent characteristics from TAFE teachers; for example, private RTOs oftenrecruit younger staff early in their careers who are willing to accept a relatively lowrate of pay (Guthrie, 2003). These practit ioners are more likely to be involved inselling training to companies, in assessment and in administrative work rather thanin teaching. Non-TAFE RTOs are heavy users of nationally-developed learningmaterials in their teaching and assessment; their staff are less likely than TAFEteachers to be involved in programming work. Many VET teachers and trainers,however, operate across a range of providers including both TAFE and non-TAFEsettings, so such distinctions are not clear-cut. To add to the complexity of thesituation, non-educational companies and other organizations (hereafter referred toas 'enterprises ') may deliver national ly accredited VET qualifications to theirworkers, either as RTOs in their own right or in partnership with RTOs (Smith et al.,2004). Some ofAustralia's biggest organizations, such as Cole-Myer and Centrelink,are heavy participants in this type ofVET.

In addition, the rapid growth ofVET in schools (Polesol etaI., 2004) has led to manyschoolteachers becoming qualified to deliver accredited VET qualifications throughcurriculum based on Training Packages. VET in schools teachers are, however, outsidethe scope of this paper. The paper focuses only on theVET sector itself (i.e., registeredtraining organizations); Qualifications for teachers of VET in schools provide inthemselves a complex arena (Green, 2004) which incorporates an added level ofregulatory requirements to do with state and territory teacher accreditation bodies.


4/13

342 E. SmithIn summary, VET teachers may be

Full time TAFE teachers involved in teaching, for whom assessment is generallyviewed as a part of that activity.

Full time private RTO staff, who are as likely to be involved in assessment-onlyactivities as in teaching.

Part time teachers working for one RTO only, or for several. Full time trainers delivering na tiona lly acc redi ted t ra in ing programs m

enterprises; or Enterprise personnel involved in some training delivery and on-the-job assessing.For TAPE teachers in particular, there have been many changes in their working

environment since the early 1990s, arising directly from the changes in the VET sectordiscussed earlier. Many staff have faced uncertainty about the future of their subjectareas because of competition from other providers and/or because their industry areawas contracting or changing rapidly. New teaching areas (such as beauty) have beenintroduced and others (such as hospitality and IT) have been greatly expanded, thusaltering the make-up of the teacher workforce and the relative power of teachingdiscipline areas within colleges. Teachers have needed to change the way in which theytaught, because of the introduction of competency-based training, becoming moreinvolved in team teaching and the development oflearning resources, and losing someof their power in relationships with students because the units of competency aretransparent and accessible to students as well as to teachers (Smith, 1999). TAFEteachers are expected to identify opportunities for commercial activity and to developcourses to suit particular employers. Chappell and johnston (2003) note that eventhose VET teachers not involved in commercial work have been affected bycommercialization because of the ways in which TAPE Institutes have changed theirmanagement structures to meet the new competitive environment.

Because of the increased workplace focus of VET, teachers need new skills todevelop assessment tasks which integrate classroom and workplace learning. Manyteachers in TAFE and other RTOs are responsible for the training of apprentices andtrainees in 'flexible work-based delivery' contracts of training, i.e., who are doing theirtraining on the job and not attending an RTO for face-to-face training (Keevers &Outhwaite, 2003). In such cases, visits to worksites involve difficult and sensitivenegotiations/ because employers rarely prioritize training above production.

For teachers in private RTOs, many of which did not exist before the early 1990s,the changed landscape of VET that has been described is taken for granted, as theseteachers are relative newcomers to VET practice. In contrast, some TAFE teacherssee a landscape that has been considerably altered and, in the perceptions of many,degraded, over the past 15 years.

Status of VET teachingMany VET teachers feel that they were ignored in VET developments during the1990s. ANTA documentation frequently failed to mention teachers as an important


5/13

Changing views of teaching 343part of VET, focusing instead on employers, providers and learners as key players.TAFE teachers were excluded and offended by this omission (Lowrie et al., 1999),and were also distressed that the basic qualification for VET teaching, the Certificatein Assessment and Workplace Training (hereafter referred to as 'Cert IV') has beenviewed in some quarters as a sufficient qualification to teach in VET. This contrasts,of course, with the public school sector where all teachers must have a degreequalification.Partly in response to these concerns, an organization was formed in late 1999called the Australian VET Teacher Educators ' Colloquium (AVTEC). AVTECmembers comprise in approximately equal numbers university academics whodeliver VET teacher training degree and postgraduate programs, and VET sectorpersonnel interested in teacher status and staff development." AVTEC acts as alobby group to remind VET managers and policy-makers of the importance ofteachers and teaching, and has been heavily involved as a stakeholder in the review ofthe Training Package in Assessment and Workplacc Training, which is discussed inthe next section.

Required qualifications for teaching and assessing in VETThe AQTF (ANTA, 2001) sets out requirements for teaching and assessingaccredited VET qualifications. Teachers are supposed to possess a Certificate IV inAssessment and Workplace Training (the 'Cert IV'), a lthough a 'get-out' clauseallows those without these qualifications to teach 'under the supervision' of someonewith the Cert IV (ANTA, 2001). This 'get-out' is more often invoked by TAFE thanby smaller RTOs (Brennan & Smith, 2002, p.14). Those assessing units ofcompetency must at least possess that unit of competency (or equivalent) and alsomust hold the three assessment units of competency from the Cert IV 'planassessment', 'conduct assessment' and 'review assessment'. Through the AQTF theCert IV has thus become enshrined in VET practice and any changes to the Cert IVhave wide ramifications.In TAFE it is still common for full t ime and many part time teachers to holddegree qualifications or graduate diplomas inVET or adult education. In the case ofNew South Wales, individual TAFE Institutes pay for completion of such coursesfor new full time staff that do not have teaching qualifications. Private RTOs aremore likely than TAFE systems to expect teachers to join them with requiredteaching qualifications rather than offer training for them (Harris et al., 2001) Inaddition to teaching qualifications, TAFE teachers are also required to hold relevantvocational qualifications (e.g., in hairdressing, hospitality or community work) andhave a minimum period of industry experience. The vocational qualificationrequirements of TAFE as an employer may exceed the requirements of the AQTFand of the Training Package being taught and/or assessed. ' Private RTOs do notalways regard 'content knowledge' as essential because their teaching andassessment staff often carry out in conjunction with indusrry-based assessors whohave vocational competencies. The AQTF makes provision for such assessment


6/13

344 E. Smithpartnerships. All of these differences reflect the difference between TAFE andprivate RTOs in the relative weight placed on teaching as opposed to assessment.

Because of the industry requirement for VET practitioners to possess Cert IV,those universities that offer VET teacher-training have generally felt the need toembed Cert IV qualifications within their degree and graduate diploma courses inVET. If they did not, their graduates would be unable to practice as VET teachers.This issue is a common theme of discussion by AVTEC members. An informalsurvey of universities through AVTEC in early 2004 indicated that there are over2000 students enrolled in VET/adult education or graduate diploma courses at anyone time. The majority of these students have either received credit into theircourses because they already had a Cert IV, or are studying an embedded Cert IV.To award the Cer t IV, universities need to partner with an RTO, either an externalone or one attached to the university (Smith & Pickersgill, 2003) and are supposedto observe AQTF-compliant assessment processes.

Certificate IV in Assessment and Workplace TrainingBecause of the pivotal nature of the Cert IV qualification, this section discusses indetail its origins and recent revision. During the early 1990s, units of competencywere developed for workplace training and assessing. The original workplace trainerunits divided workplace trainers into two categories. 'Category 1 trainers' were thosewho occasionally undertook training tasks as part of their work. 'Category 2 trainers'had training as their main activity. The units for Category 2 trainers were, therefore,more rigorous and detailed than those for Category 1. A Certificate IV in WorkplaceTraining" was for Category 2 trainers (NAWT, 2001). In addition, workplaceassessor units of competency were developed in 1993. Training for workplaceassessors was aimed primarily at people who carried out assessment in theworkplace, but was sometimes undertaken also by people who taught in VETinstitutions.

In the second half of the 1990s, these units of competency on training andassessment were revised and gathered together into a Training Package, the TrainingPackage in Assessment and Workplace Training. This was endorsed in 1998.Although the title of the Package suggests that it is designed for people who work in aworkplace rather than an institutional setting, the Cert IV became widely adopted inTAFE colleges and other RTOs even before the AQTF made the Cert IV arequirement for practice. There is also a diploma qualification which is not widelyused because of its restricted occupational applicability. The Cert IV contains eightunits of competency: Plan assessment. Conduct assessment. Review assessment. Train small groups. Plan and promote a training program. Plan a series of training sessions.


7/13

Changing views of teaching 345Deliver training sessions.Review training.Some serious shortcomings have been identified with the Training Package itself,delivery and its application (NAWT, 2001). As can be deduced from their titles,units of competency are wri tten in words that reflect the work of workplace

trainers and not teachers in an RTO setting. While the Cert IV may be suitable forwho per form a limited range of teaching and assessment tasks in a l imi tedof settings, a problem is that it has been viewed, or at least utilized, as though it

suitable for the full range of VET teaching activity. Research evidence shows thatteachers who only have a Cert IV generally have a very different approach toteaching from those who have a degree level qualification (Lowrie et al., 1999); theformer tend to have a restr ic ted view and to be uncritical and unreflective in theirapproach to teaching. An addit ional concern arises from the fact that many RTOs(including TAFE) have delivered the qualification to their own teaching staff, thuscreating a possible conflict of interest, as in the pressure to qualify their own staff

might be tempted to apply less than rigorous assessment.As has already been mentioned, the quality ofVET has been a concern among many

commentators, As the Cert IV is the qualification for VET practitioners it is essentialit is delivered and assessed well to help assure the quality of VET teachers.However the Cert IV has become especially notorious among Training Packagequalifications for the poor quality of delivery. For example, a 'strategic audit' carried

by the Victorian State TrainingAuthority (Bateman & Dyson, 2003) in 15 privateand one TAFE college made a number of worrying discoveries:

Despite the fact that the 'nominal hours ' for the qualification are over 300, CertIV delivery in Victorian RTOs ranged from 5-12 days down to two days indelivery modes where it was assumed that participants would gain a large amountof Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL).Many RTOs depended heavily on the purchasable 'support materials' for theTraining Package for delivery and assessment and did not produce their ownmaterial.The quali ty of assessment 'was poor and often did not comply with the AQTFstandards or the requirements of the Training Package' (Bateman& Dyson, 2003,p. l) .It is ironic that the qualification that prepares people to teach is generally viewedthe worst-taught qualification in the VET system.State TAFE systems have been worried about the drop in teach ing s tandards

could ensue if their teaching workforce came to consist predominant ly ofpeople with only a Cert IV. But States are also concerned about keeping costs ofteacher development down, and most States are currently examining options whereteacher-training can be delivered at least partly in-house rather than at universities.ca'cw" unions, however, prefer teachers to get qualifications outside thei r ownsystems." This preference is partly to contain the power which employers have overteaching staff, and partly to ensure that teachers get a much broader view of VET


8/13


9/13

Changing views of teaching 347particular, there is little mechanism within theTraining Package framework to addressproblems of 'shonky' delivery practices; Training Packages cannot specify deliverycontexts, only assessment contexts. There remains the problem that the Cert IV couldbe regarded as a sufficient (rather than base-level) qualification. A futther challengewill be transi tion arrangements, especially any requirements for people with thecurrent Cert IV (ofwhom there are many tens of thousands) to upgrade to the newqualification. The following comment by an AVTEC member (Walsh), posted to theAVTEC discussion list, highlights many people's concerns that quality problemsassociated with the old qualification may be perpetuated with the new:

If RTOs are allowed to assess and issue qualifications for their own staff we're likely tosee the slow degradation of the new qualifications (Cert IV & Dip) just as happenedwith the old/current ones. One solution will be the development of robust cross-organizational assessment validation arrangements.

Pedagogy revisitedWhile the impact of the new Cert IV remains to be seen, some other developments inVET teaching are already in train. As discussed above, many teachers have beenconcerned about the absence of an emphasis on pedagogy, both in official discussionabout the training ofVET students, and in the delivery of the Cert IV. Teaching as acomponent of the VET system has often seemed to be absent from the official'discourse' of the VET system (Lowrie et aI., 1999); for example, there are ANTAawards for apprentices, trainees, other learners, training providers and employers,but none for teachers. VET sector teachers have therefore been concerned about thefuture of their profession. The formation of AVTEC was in part a response to theperceived undervaluing of VET teachers, and created an 'emotional space' in whichto pour out feelings through the email discussion list as well as to try to influence thesector towards more pedagogical emphasis.Some recent developments in VET have been encouraging for teachers. The

recent Australian National Training Authority? (ANTA) strategy for 2004- 2010(which can be viewed at www.anta.gov.au), produced from extensive nationalconsultation, signals some changes of emphasis in the VET system. There appears tobe a greater emphasis in the strategy upon individual learners and upon communitiesas compared with industry; and a greater emphasi s upon TAFE as the publicprovider and its special role compared with non-TAFE training providers. Also inthe ANTA national strategy and in other current developments in the VET system,the re seems to be a greater emphasi s upon teachers and their work.Teachers and teaching are now being discussed more often and in all policy

forums. 'VET pedagogy' is now a phrase being used within the VET system andsenior TAFE managers have been talking since the turn of the century about'putting learning back on the agenda ' (see Shreeve, 2002) . Studies have beencommissioned in several states to establish standards (sometimes described as'capabilities') for VET teachers (see Rumsey, 2002). A current research project onconstructions of learners and learning in the delivery of the Cert IV, examining how


10/13

348 E. Smithpeople who are undergoing that form of teacher-training are taught to think aboutteaching and learning (Simons et al., forthcoming), was funded to provide data tofeed into the changes that will occur as a result of the revision of the Cer t IV.

One result of the inclusion ofmore pedagogical content in the Cert IV is resistancefrom many industry trainers and their representatives, and from post-training reformCBT enthusiasts. For example , a s taf f member from Reframing the Future, themajor body awarding funds for VET staff development, recently said to the authorthat 'assessors are concerned that too much emphasis is being placed on teaching'.Two case studies carried ou t by the author for the previously-mentioned project onconstructions of learners and learning (Simons et al., forthcoming) provide furtherevidence of resistance to the new qualifications. A teacher who delivered the Cert IVat an agricultural college said:

I voiced my concerns at the very start [of the Training Package review]. I went to ameeting about it and I was basically laughed at. [But] a couple of people came up to mefrom the rural sector and said, 'I agree with you. It's going too academic'. I don't thinkthe rural community is going to wear it. .,. We might slip back into just giving them theinformation they need rather than going for this qualification.

A part t ime trainer in a wool process ing plant said:My first remark was 'What's it going to do for the guys that are out on the floor?'. It'sgoing to make it very difficult to undertake the subject [sic] with ease. They're going tobaulk at it and say 'we don't know what to do with it'. That was the first impression Ihad when I heard that everything was getting 'souped up', so to speak. Because to me itwas starting to take the training from where it should be, just out on the shop floor, andit was bringing it out of there.

The concern of these VET practitioners that the revised Cert IV was too 'soupedup' and 'academic' clearly supports the views of industry representatives involved inthe review of the Training Package that a more pedagogically-focused Cert IV wouldnot necessarily be appropriate for use in enterprise settings. Interestingly, in the earlystages of the Training Package review, an additional Certificate III level qualificationwas proposed. This was to be 'quarantined' for use only in industry settings and wasdesigned to be used by trainers working closely under the supervision of someonewith a Cert IV. However, the Cert IIIwas rejected by stakeholders; while the reasonsfor rejection were no t made public, it was commonly believed that state educationdepartments rejected the idea for fear that a Cert II I would become the new 'lowestcommon denominator'. All that remains of the proposed Cert III are two 'freefloating' units of competency 'Provide training through instruction and demonstra-tion of work skills' and 'Contribute to assessment' that are des igned for shop floorworkplace trainers (a little like the old 'Category I trainers' ) bu t do not contributetowards a qualification unless included as elective units in the Cert IV.

ConclusionWhether because of the influence of bodies such as AVTEC, or because there is agreater understanding that quality in VET can only be achieved by skilled and


11/13


12/13

350 E. SmithNotes1. Parts of this paper were included in a conference paper delivered to the Australian Teacher

Education Conference in July 2004.2. Comments made by teachers at meeting of South Australian TAPE retail teachers, 200l.3. AVTEC's web site is at http://education.currin.edu.au/avteclavtec.html.4. Every Training Package includes assessment guidelines which indicate the qualifications and

exper ience requ ired to deliver the package 's qualif icat ions and/or individual uni ts ofcompetency within it.

5. In the eight-level Australian Qualifications Framework, a Certificate IV is equivalent to the old'Advanced Certificate' and is one step up from a t rade qualif ication such as plumbing orhairdressing. Within the VET sector, there are two higher-level qualifications: Diploma andAdvanced Diploma.

6. Conversati on with Pa t Forward, national Austral ian Education Union TAFE sectionpresident, 2001.

7. Many comments on these lines have been posted to the AVTEC discussion [email protected]) and were also directed to the author when presenting a paper on VETteaching qualifications to the South Australian branch of the Australian Education UnionTAFE section, in 2001.

8. Comment by industry representative, meeting of national steering committee for the review ofthe Training &Assessment Training Package, Sept 42003. This training manager said that histrainers only needed enough skills to train by doing 'monkey see) monkey do'.9. At the end of 2004 it was announced thatANTA would be abolished from 1 July 2005 and it iscurrently unclear which bodies will take over its functions and how much of an impact thechanges will have on attitudes towards teaching.

ReferencesAustralian National Training Authority (ANTA) (2001) Standards for registered training

organizations (Melbourne, ANTA).Bateman, A, & Dyson, C. (2003) Strategic audit report: certificate IV in assessment and workplacetraining (Melbourne, Office of Training & Tertiary Education).

Brennan, R. & Smith, E. (2002) Australian quality training framework: impact of provisionsrelating to teaching and teacher qualifications, Australian Vocational Education Review, 9(2),8-23.Chappell, C. & johnston, R. (2003) Changing work: changing roles for VET teachers and trainers(Adelaide, NCVER).

Down, C. (2002) Qualitative impact of training packages on vocational education and training clients(Brisbane, ANTA).

Fletcher, S. (1991) NVQs: standards and competence (London, Kogan Page).Forward, P. (2004) Profession and identity, Australian TAPE Teacher, 38(1),16-17.Green, A. (2004) Bridging two worlds: an alternative pathway to teaching, paper presented at the

Forumfor theAdvancementofContinuing Education Conference,2-4 July, University of Stirling.Guthrie, H. (2003) VET managers' and practitioners' work: how is it changing? Kit compiled for

Australian VET ResearchAssociation (A VETRAj Conferenceworkshop, AVETRA conference)Sydney, 9-11 April.

Harris, R., Sirnons, M.) Hill, D., Smith, E., Pearce, R.) Blakeley, J., Choy, S. & Snewin, D. (2001)The changing roleof staffdevelopment for teachers and trainersin vocational education and training(Adelaide, NCVER).

Holland, A. & Holland, L. (1998) Maintaining the technical currency of vocational educators,paper presen ted to the European Educational Research Association Conference, Ljublana,Slovenia, September.


13/13

Changing views of teaching 351Keevers, L. & Outhwai te , S. (2003) A work-based pedagogy: issues for VET teachers, paper

presented at the 11th Annual International Conference on Post-Compulsory Education andTraining, Surfers Paradise, 1-3 December.Lowrie, T.) Smith, E. & Hill, D. (1999) Evaluation of the contribution that competency-basedapproaches have had on the role of instructors (Adelaide, NeVER).

Misko,1. (1999) Competency-based training: review of research (Adelaide, NeVER).Misko, J. (2002) Online learning in the knowledge-based society: a VET perspective, Unicorn,28(3),65-70.National Assessors and Workplace Trainers (NAWT) (2001) Review of the training package forassessment and workplace training, final report stage 1 (Melbourne, ANTA).National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) (2003) Pocket guide: AustralianVET statistics (Adelaide, NCVER).Polesol, J., Helme, S., Davies, M., Teese, R., Nicholas, T. & Vickers, M. (2004) VET inschools: a post-compulsory perspective (Adelaide, NCVER).

Robinson, P. (1993) Teachers facing change: a small-scale study of teachers working with competencybased training (Adelaide, NCVER).Rumsey, D. (2002) Shaping the VET practitioner for the future (Perth, Western Austral ianDepartment of Training).Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education References Committee(2000) Aspiring to excellence: report into the quality of VET in Austrah'a (Canberra, SenatePrinting Unit).

Shreeve, R. (2002) Putting learning back On the agenda, Training Agenda, 10(2) , p. 2.Simons, M" Smith , E, Harris, R" Rosenblat t, E. & Bush, A. (forthcoming) Constructions oflearners and learning in the Certificate IV in Assessment & Workplace Training.Smith, E & Keating, J. (2003) From training reform to training packages (Tuggerah Lakes, SocialScience Press).

Smith, E, Pickersgill, R, Smith, A. & Rushbrook, P. (2004) How enterprises engage withnationally recognized training, paper presented at Doing, Thinking, Activity, Learning: 12thAnnual International Conference on Post Compulsory Education and Training, GriffithUniversity Centre for Learning Research, Surfers Paradise, 6-9 December.Smith, E. & Pickersgill, R. (2003) Gaining acceptance for accredited training within a university.The changing face ofVET: Reflection, regulation and re-engineering, paper presented at theSixth Annual Conference of the Australian Vocational Education and Training ResearchAssociation, 9-11 April, Sydney.

Smith, E. (1999) How competency-based train ing has changed the role of teacher s in thevocational education and t ra ining sec tor in Australia, Asia-Pacific Journal of TeacherEducation, 27(1), 61-75.Smith, E., Lowrie, T., Hill, D. , Bush, A., & Lobegeier, J. (1997) Making a difference? Howcompetency-based training has changed teaching and learning (Wagga Wagga, Charles SturtUniversity).

Smith, E" Pickersgi ll, R" Smith, A. & Rushbrook, P. (forthcoming) Enterprises' commitment tonationally recognized training,

a rich tapestry - changing views

Documents