Mondello, Anthony - Online Education - Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, Australian Government

Related consultation: Submissions - Skills Reform: Improving industry engagement and reforming qualifications in Vocational Education and Training discussion paper
Submission received: 13 December 2020

Does the role of industry need to be strengthened or expanded across the VET system? Why/why not? What does industry engagement mean to you? How can industry be encouraged to connect with and use the VET system? What does this look like? Are there any roles for industry in the VET system that are not covered or outlined in the case for change?

Response:

Industry Engagement for me is multi -factorial and includes:
- hiring assessors with the right industry (not only academic) background
- having an official feedback mechanism where I am listening to their input and adapting materials and education accordingly. We do this through annual appraisals but also an open culture and zero layers of bureaucracy
- reviewing student feedback. We do that by reviewing every single feedback survey and testimonial left by students. We create bi-annual summaries for us to work through opportunities highlighted by students.
- I feel we need to work more on post-graduation, although through socials, remain in contact with students in industry, but feel we could do this more systematically.
- I feel industry bodies should be spending more time in communicating with our students and our organisation. I have never heard from any industry body and feel there needs to be more collaboration at this level.

Are you aware of the current industry-leadership arrangements led by the Australian Industry and Skills Commission?

Response:

Yes

How effective are the current industry engagement arrangements in VET in meeting your needs? What works well and what could be improved? How could it be improved? How well are you (or your organisation) represented by these arrangements? How well do current arrangements allow collaboration across industry sectors on common workforce and skills needs?

Response:

I think the recent proposed changes to the Diploma of Photography and Screen and Media were handled badly.

To try and make Cert 4 a prerequisite for Diploma entrants, is discriminatory and fail the common sense rule of creating seamless pathways for students.

There needs to be more work done in collaboration with RTOs and more importantly students.

I feel the industry bodies simply thrust changes down with little regard for impact in the sector.

What can be done to drive greater collaboration across industries to broaden career pathways for VET graduates and maximise the workforce available to employers? How can workers be equipped with skills that can be applied across different jobs? How can industry support this through the VET system? How can we break down silos and improve collaboration across industry groups?

Response:

I suggest industry bodies be matched up to RTOs and zoom collaborative sessions be introduced.

Same with students.

It is like anything in life, the key to anything is good communication. Not the war and peace research paper style of communication, but simply sitting with invested parties and discussing the problems and opportunities, so we can move forward in alignment across industries.

Are qualifications fit-for-purpose in meeting the needs of industry and learners now and into the future? Why/why not? Are the different needs of industry and learners effectively considered in designing qualifications in the current system? What works well and why? Are there issues or challenges with the way qualifications are currently designed? What are they and what could be done to address these?

Response:

I think the complex nature of qualifications and antiquated monitoring systems (eg AVETMISS etc) needs to be simplified and improved.

In the digital age, so much efficiency I think can be created across all elements of compliance.

Around qualifications, I think more consultation with RTOs before making any change to UOCs, should be mandated, as some of the recent changes I have observed have not made sense and feels like it is making changes for the sake of making a change.

I also believe the changing of qualifications every few years is antiquated and the issues with superseding and training out are cumbersome. Quals and UOCs should be updated annually without any superseding unless a qualification will be dropped. This would allow providers to continuously improve and allow students a more updated and seamless journey and not interrupted with teaching out periods and impost of RPL etc when a qual is replaced. Makes no sense to a student and makes life really hard for a provider.

Are there any further issues in relation to improving industry engagement in the VET sector that you would like to provide feedback on?

Response:

I feel that more surveying of student outcomes throughout student journies and even after employment, done objectively by a third party is the most important change the sector could introduce.

At the end of the day we are all here to improve the lives of students, compliance activity should start with this.

Collaboration with RTOs is important and a constant evolution of qualifications is required, not this stop and start approach that I think is causing too much friction for students and providers.