McCurdy, Sam - Box Hill Institute

Response:

1.1.	What does industry engagement mean to you?
Box Hill Institute engages with industry through industry reference groups,  course advisory committees, practical work placement agreements and industry incursions. Industry sponsor activities, awards and equipment as well as contributing to course reviews & assessment validation. Industry consultation ensures our training delivery and assessment is relevant to the needs of employers and produces graduates that are work ready. However, many employers are too busy to engage with individual RTOs. 
Industry could increase its’ role in the review and development of national training package courses and commercial skill sets. This might include the central development of learner resources and assessment tools to share with all RTOs. 

1.2.	How can industry be encouraged to connect with and use the VET system? What does this look like?
Industry can be encouraged to connect with training providers by inviting employers and representatives from industry groups to participate in reference groups, meet students and support work placements with a view towards improving their recruitment pipeline. This might take the form of industry incursions, career days, workshops or practical placement agreements. In return industry representatives ensure training relevance and provide direction for continuous improvement. Engagement with RTOs provides marketing & recruitment opportunities for industry as well as access to a readymade work force.

1.3.	Are there any roles for industry in the VET system that are not covered or outlined in the case for change?
Industry should be encouraged to support work placements with opportunities for job outcomes, contribute towards course reviews and shared resource development. Without such motivation many employers perceive consultation unnecessary and work placements not worth the trouble.
Involving industry in central resource development will reduce the variation in training delivery and assessment standards in the VET sector. Delivery and assessment resources should be developed in parallel with training package updates. Resources developed centrally avoid duplication of effort and reduce the cost of parallel development by individual RTOs. Sharing resources will also speed up continuous improvement and help RTOs implement updates sooner.

Response:

Yes

Response:

3.1.	What works well and what could be improved? How could it be improved?
The Australian Industry and Skills Committee (AISC) and the associated Industry Reference Committees (IRCs) review and update training package courses every 4 years or when new technology is introduced. While this process can be slow, it does ensure industry are consulted in course updates. Areas for improvement include representation by National peak bodies and / or by employers from at least three (3) different states. IRCs dominated by one state or employer group are not always representative of what the sector needs or wants. Industry voices must be current and representative of the sector.

3.2.	How well are you (or your organisation) represented by these arrangements?
Box Hill Institute hosts industry reference groups and participates in provider networks. VET teachers are encouraged to maintain their currency and attend industry events, work-shops and conferences. Senior teachers also contribute feedback towards relevant training package updates. The Institute has developed shared resources for use by all RTOs in the delivery of Cyber Security, BIM and Agritourism. BHI works closely with the Department of Education and Training Victoria and industry on many projects.

3.3.	How well do current arrangements allow collaboration across industry sectors on common workforce and skills needs?
Current arrangements are sector specific. There is little collaboration across industry sectors. However, many industries have relationships with multiple RTOs which encourages collaboration across relevant sectors.
Centralised resource development would reduce the duplication of effort that occurs when each industry and RTO produces their own learner resources and assessment tools. This occurs in some industry sectors more than others. The current arrangement does not support timely implementation of course updates. Isolated resource development by multiple industries and RTOs is inefficient and expensive.

Response:

4.1.	How can workers be equipped with skills that can be applied across different jobs? How can industry support this through the VET system?
Generic units that reduce the need for specific variations in different qualifications will broaden opportunities for students and the skill base for new graduates. Industry reference committees should be guided by AISC to avoid duplication of effort when suitable units are available to import into new and future courses. 

4.2.	How can we break down silos and improve collaboration across industry groups?
Silos can be avoided by including broad skills in qualifications. Communication, digital literacy, teamwork and customer service are good examples of generic skills that are transferable between many sectors. Narrow variations of such units should be avoided by guiding course reviews and standardising updates with a view towards efficiencies.

Response:

5.1.	Are the different needs of industry and learners effectively considered in designing qualifications in the current system? What works well and why?
Yes, the different needs of industry and learners are considered in qualification design.
Employer needs should direct learning outcomes.  Consultation ensures graduates learn the knowledge and practice the skills required in the workplace. This ensures graduates are best equipped to find employment.

5.2.	Are there issues or challenges with the way qualifications are currently designed? What are they and what could be done to address these?
Many qualifications contain units that have been over contextualised by industry. Broad units that achieve the same outcomes will reduce the need for multiple versions with minor difference. Clever course and unit design should consider such variation without the need for narrow specialisation. Prescriptive assessment criteria should be avoided to make units and courses more flexible and responsive to changing industry needs. Overlap between units should be avoided and courses updated at least every 4 years or sooner when new technologies, equipment, systems or processes are introduced in industry. Courses with no enrolments should be removed from training packages. 

Response:

Government should encourage industry engagement in the VET sector by promoting opportunities for work placements, apprentices, performing incursions and participation in industry reference groups, etc ... 
Industry consultation is also necessary to direct course reviews and inform assessment validation with a view towards continuous improvement. Without such encouragement many RTOs struggle to find sufficient work placements and employers willing to provide feedback on relevant training delivery and assessment.