Skills anticipation systems and their role in informing National qualifications competencies in vocational education

Notes taken at the webinar hosted by NCVER on 'skills anticipation' and presented by Phil Loveder, the Executive Manager for Inform and Engage.

As customary, began with an acknowledgement of country. The present provides an overview of research into new qualifications and competencies - part of the Bridging Innovation and Learning in TVET with UNESCO. see www.unevoc.org/bilt/The+BILT+Approach for information on the wider project.

Reiterated VET's role and the need to respond - as it is closest to the labour market, playing a key role in provision of skilled labour and the need to respond to current and future economic challenges.

Changing economy drives NQCs - accelerating digital technologies, new demands in sustainability environmental protection and increased processes with migration.

BILT framework focuses on Identification, Integration, and Implementation. Also on Macro (governances), meso (advocacy - stakeholders) and micro (delivery, innovative solutions etc.) levels. (the 3 Is and 3Ms). 

Identification involves understanding labour supply and demand - for current and future skills in the labour market, has to occur across all the 3Ms. Range of approaches may be used to understand skills from prospective studies to shareholder consultation and analysis of skills and carerrs information. Skills anticipation and labour market information 'observatories'. It is a strategic and systematic process.

Important to provide insights into skills need, form the basis for new qualifications, inform updates of licencing, identify extent of new occupations and to provide policymakers and industry with evidence to assure training solutions.

Skill anticipation systems involve data collection, analysis, forecasting, recommendations and then monitoring and updating.

Examples of skill anticipation systems include skills observatories, skills and employment data modelling, stakeholder engagement and employer surveys, job vacancy analysis, leveraging jobs and careers databases etc. Skill observatories across Europe (LMIS), Australia )LMIP / LMI), Brazil (SENAI), USA (O-Net).

A range of modelling and forecasting approaches used to make sense of all the various streams of data. Shared example at macro/meso/micro level data-sources from Australia. 

Example of projects include cross-sectoral projects focusing on new competencies (e.g. cybersecurity, supply chains, digital skills). Job and careers databases are useful to provide information on emerging skills needs. Consultations with employers and business membership organisations (EMBOs) important. 'Early detection' systems through monitoring of VET and occupational related trends and indicators (e.g. Germany) which help identify changes in technologies, ways of working, social trends.

Summarised the many challenges including data quality, availability, consistency, effects from unexpected 'shocks' (e.g. pandemic), better at assessing current rather than future, and challenges in translating analysis into policy and practice.

Detailed the need for integration of 4 approaches - cross cutting (e.g. Singapore Skills framework), sectoral (Basque TKNIKA), occupational (Finlnd and other European countries) and additional modular (Netherlands, Finland).

Implementation includes establishing frame conditions and buy-in by establishing confidence in NQCs by industry, learners and the community. Practitioners also require support to implement (toolboxes, processes etc.). Acceptance and assurance and clear indications of structural support are also important. 

Final thoughts include ensuring VET is 'future ready and this requires continual evaluation of labour market data. Organising and dissemination of information and data to assist training and curriculum renewal is essential. Supportive environment for NQC requires resourcing and support. 

Q & A followed.

Good summary of the process for establishing a data-based process for working out key competencies going forward.  

Assessment in the age of AI - NZQA symposium - notes

 The New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) convened a symposium on the implications of AI on assessments. The main event held at Te Papa with online attendance by many. The event is also supported by the Ministry of Education, Universities NZ and the NZ Assessment Institute, NZ Council for Educational research, Post Primary Teachers Union, Tertiary Education Union and Network for Learning. 

Notes from the online /streamed sessions follow:

The day begins with mihi whakatua, and introduction. Lee Kershaw Karaitiana MCs along with offering the karakia and welcomes. 

DrSimon McCallum, Senior Lecturer in Software Engineering, Victoria University of Wellington opens with the first keynote on ‘the dawn of AI’. Begins with his pepeha (Māori introduction). Has been teaching game programming since 1999 and every year, there is something new and the students coming in change each year. Went through what is Generative AI - what are are Large Language Models (LLMs) which is the training of a machine to translate. Much of language relies on our experiences. Explained how word vectors work to help machines understand words and how these contribute to ChatGPT unravelling the nuances of language. Then explained how ChatGPT works to answer the prompts it is given and the importance of prompt engineering. Provided the principles of prompt engineering including how ChatGPT learns as the process of prompting continues. Currently, other AI platforms - ChatGPT 4 etc. has added guardrails and other 'agent-based' systems to try to provide more authentic outputs. Explained the many processing methods used to evaluate what the output will be. 4 is much more advanced and able to provide less stilted outputs, and the scholar plug in generates real citations - cost US$20 a month - so there is an equity issue. AutoGPT (cost $20 per complex problem) uses Python to create a plan with the ability to write code to solve the problem. Warning on privacy issues as AutoGPT able to make a plan with access to all the items in your (Google) account! Provided examples for AI image generation - Dall-E 2, stable fusion, Nvidia AI playground etc. Photo generation is now very blurry, given images can be 'enhanced', sometimes without our knowledge (Samsung phones often provide a better version of a photo you take!).

Note - AI understands language but not actual words. Assessments often draw on learners use of language as a way to assess critical thinking etc. However, now AI able to do similar, making it a challenge to how we assess students. Observation of groups of low capability students have high use of AI but then do not learn :( High ability students learning AI progress quickly though. Improving understanding is the key, not just using it to replace the work learners have to do. Posits that presently, ChatGPT able to complete assessments at Level 3 but Bard and Bing able to meet Level 7 to 9 in some areas. Argues that all work is now group work. Need to assess learners' contribution to the group :) 

Challenged us to think about how we prepare learners? AI can be used to 'augment' so the combined AI and human effort requires assessment. Suggests assessments as 'motivational' which are agentic, intrinsic, relevant and covert - works with small groups of highly motivated learner. Authentic assessments must connect task/time to assess complex reasoning/thought. How do we roll out a new approach to assessment, especially when the future in the world of AI is still unknown. Encouragement to use AI as a tutor, supporting personalised learning 24/7 able to translate concepts to different levels, attain customised explanations and form chains of thought. If AI now a co-author, then author statements require being clear as to who had done the work and justification of not using AI now required!! We need to be the 'rider' of AI. Suggests flipped exams (it is the prompts, not the answers), AI to triage the work and rethink of what authentic assessments will look like. Finished with some thoughts on what may happen into the future (pessimistic). Shifting from clever words to caring people, need to be aware of the apathy epidemic (people who no longer have to think!). 

 The keynote is followed by a short presentation by Dr. George Slim, consultant advisor to the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor who speaks on 'a science policy review'. Provided a Aotearoa science perspective on how AI has changed (increased/accelerated) research - biology (DNA, viruses etc etc). Panel being assembled to bring together a report as to how to address the many challenges presented. Resources also being provided to archive contemporary thinking as the technology moves on. Government is just beginning work on implications and response. Do we ban it (Italy), leave it to the market (US of A). NZ Privacy Commission has begun to work on guidelines and resources. Important understand and manage AI. 

 

After morning tea, online presentation  from Dr Lenka Ucnik, Assistant Director Higher Education Integrity Unit, Tertiary EducationQuality and Standards Agency (Australia) provides the Australian context. Provided context and background of TEQAS - does not regulate on vocational education though but for higher education. The key messaging on AI is that it is here to stay. Can be an assistive tool for students (especially for those with disabilities), research and teaching. The main premise is to implement risk analysis management to maintain academic integrity. AI affects academic integrity and there are discipline specific processes. Important to ensure learners/students attain the skills to work with AI (see learner guide). Encouraged participants to think beyond the immediate and evaluate /plan / strategise towards the future. There are opportunites but also important to mitigate risks! and the ongoing work required to ensure the integrity of education. What is the most important objective of education and how can the affordances from AI contribute. 

 

Professor Cath Ellis from the University of New South Wales then presents on ‘the link between cheating and assessment’. Shared an observation from a student, generating a presentation using ChatGPT and attaining a good mark. Currently, learning is assessed with an artefact/performance - a proxy. Learning is embodied :) Assessments pitched at being 'just good enough'. At the moment, ChatGPT moved from producing work which as from just enough to good. What needs to be done and who does it now?  'Cheating is contextual and socially constructed' - example of ebook for commuting (good) but in the Tour D France (bad). There is a plethora of sites which allow support essay writing. 

We still need to ensure the authenticity of assessments, whose work is it when AI is available. We need to focus on finding evidence that learning has occurred, not why cheating has occurred. Do we need to assess some things many times?? Education's role is really about making sure our learners are able to weed out 'hallucinations' generated by AI. Conceptual frameworks on academic integrity and assessment security needs to be discussed. We need to champion those learners who are able to work and willing; and not criminalise students who are unable or unwilling. Bulk of energy needs to be in championing, not so much in criminalising. Encourage to focus on metacognitive rather than with content. Call for placing importance on critical AI studies. Check critical AI. 

 

Following on is ProfessorMargaret Bearman, Centre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning, Deakin University (Australia) who presents on ‘generative AI – the issues right here, right now’. Presented on the short term implications and moved on to future. Defined assessments as both graded and non-graded, not necessarily marked by teachers. Assessments should not only assure learning but also promote learning. Educational institutions response to AI can be ignore, ban, invigilate, embrace, design around or rethink. Uncertainties around Ai include legal, ethical, and access. 

 Design around is probably the best option for the moment. Shared possibilities through ways of making knowledge requirements more specific - knowing your students, specifically requiring the assessment task to reference something that happened in class, designing more authentic assessments. Design to cheat proof assessments. Invigilation is costly, stressful, tests capabilities unrelated to task, narrow band capabilities and cheating still goes on. Rethinking invigilation may be one option - move towards oral, assessment of learning outcomes across tasks, invigilate only the common sorts of knowledge/skills. Need to rethink the curriculum to account for AI. 

Then Associate Professor Jason Stephens from the University of Auckland on 'achieving academic integrity in academia: the aspirations and its obstacles'. Covered what does it mean to achieve with integrity and why it is important, the obstacles to achieving integrity. Being honest is not (always) easy! students need help (somethings a lot) to achieve with integrity. Educators are obligated to design environments that mitigate dishonesty. Defined achievement of integrity as being hones and having strong moral principles and the state of being whole and not divided. Shared model of moral functioning in academia. Survey across 7 institutions in 2022 (before ChatGPT) reveals 15.1% of students use AI. Obstacles to achieving integrity include thinking as being costly, modern society moves fast and has high expectations, a culture of cheating is sometimes seen to be supported, through contagion effects and 'the power of the situation'. Harmful for well-being when students afforded opportunities for cheat, so important to maintain academic integrity. 

A local school based perspective is presented by Claire Amos, Principal | Tumuaki, Albany Senior High School and Kit Willett from Selwyn College. Claire briefly went through context of the school which has a well-established, well-embedded innovative curriculum model - tutorial, specialist subjects and impact projects. Approach to AI is to embrace its potential, rethink assessments. Use AI to reduce workload, support UDL and support learner agency and self-direction. Working through addressing ethical issues, teaching critical thinking and addressing plagiarisms. Shared examples of how teachers used AI - maths to generate practice tasks, photography to look for connotation and denotations in images, create quick worksheets etc. Also shared how students use AI - support design learning approaches and spending time to discuss how to use AI for good and not for cheating but as a coach :) Shared concerns of increase in more additions into a busy curriculum, the compounding of digital equity, and the need to support students to use AI in a critical manner. Summarised reflections - for example, what happens when we do not assess/rank/grade students?

Kit shared that there has been more plagiarism this semester than across the last few years. Students were briefed about the consequences but many still did not take the advise. Kit works in a school with more traditional approaches including using invigilated assessments. Shared challenges a teacher has to undertake to meet NZQA requirements. A more traditional approach! Shared how teachers could use AI to help lower their workload as well. 

 

Panels and forum occur after lunch.

 The first with perspectives on AI, convened by A. P. Jason Stephens,student association representative (four high school ākonga and two university ākonga), Claire Amos and Kit Willett. All acknowledged knowledge of AI, usually comes up more when assessments are handed out. Did not report on conversations with teachers as to how AI should be/or not used. High school students are cognisant of AI capabilities and will use it as a resource but know of others who use it to plagiarise. Student association representatives from higher education wanted better utilisation of AI to support equity in education and fairness with regards to invigilated assessments. Image-based disciplines need to really work on how to assess when there is so much available. AI use in creativity needs to be clarified - is AI augmenting or doing all the work? 

Banning AI will only make 'forbidden fruit' more attractive. People who want to cheat, will do it. Inequities are acerbated as students able to afford AI still advantaged. 

Good points brought up by all the ākonga. They are pragmatic. AI can support learning, however assessments are still a grey area. Interesting discussion ensued around what is learning, the role of technology in supporting learning, and assessment philosophies. Call to look at updating an archaic education and assessment system to reflect the technology affordances and what is the present and future social /work / industry environments. 

The second is the AI forum with the Aotearoa NZ perspective with Gabriela Mazorra de Cos as convenor and Professor Michael Witbrock and Dr. Karatiana Taiuru. Micheal overviewed 'Where are we going with AI?' As a country, we respond well to new developments. Summarised history of AI from 1940s and the current rapid improvement in its usability. Ran through pluses and minuses of AI. automate everything?? to free humans from mundane work. AI may be in the from of a organisational/consolidated form rather than as an individual form. Integration of natural and artificial intelligences with existing and new kinds of organisational intelligences need to be considered. Education will be about how to help learners become the best humans :) 

Karatiana covered 'how do we embed Kaupapa Māori ethics and culture from the outset?' Spoke about the opportunities to turn back effects of colonisation. Digital technologies and now AI confer affordances to support the revitalisation and increase in Te Reo and Mātauranga Māori. Argues all datum has Mātauranga Māori threaded through it, it is a taonga and must be used to empower Māori. AI is no exception. Still much to be done to ensure the integrity and ethics of how Mātauranga Māori is used. Important to plan towards the future to ensure ākonga are educated about Māori ethics. Also proposed the deployment of AI as personal learning assistants/tutors to assist with the shortage of Māori experts, but must be developed in association with Māori. 

Q & A ensued covering future possibilities as we are a small, generally well-educated country, to leverage off AI for the betterment of all. 

Then a provider response panel Associate Professor Jenny Poskitt from Massey University chaired by with Dr. Mark Nichols from the Open Polytechnic / Te Pūkenga, Kit Willett, Dr. Kevin Shedlock Victoria University and Sue Townsend from Le Cordon Bleu,  the Private Training representative. Mark posited that education is a way to treat ignorance and AI may enhance understanding. Both of these must be addressed with assessment. Four techniques, video practice, videoed randomised questions through interactive oral assessments, viva voce and then use of AI tutors. Video is now more commonplace and allow for interpersonal assessments. Interactive oral assessments are useful as one approach.

 Kevin argued that 'grey' aspects of life, where there are no 'correct' answers is something Māori find normal. The head of the fish can set the direction, but the tail and the body must also follow. Therefore, important to be collaborative when working with AI. 

Sue ran through context of Le Cordon Bleu. Impact of AI seems to be similar to schools and universities'. Three main areas, AI will impact on the types of work available; change inevitable for assessment practices and support facilitators to shift; flexibility and equity for learners have access. 

Kit(secondary school context)  reiterated that tamariki need skills going into the future. Spoke on personal growth, curiosity, intentionality and the challenges of assessing these. Rethinking assessments is a key - reducing assessments and ensuring they are more focused. 

Q & A followed. 

The workshop closes with a panel on ‘reflections’ with AP Poskitt and Dr. Grant Kinkum, CE of NZQA. Jenny summed up the day's discussions with the rise of AI and its many implications. Education which engages is truly a great experience. Rethinking, redesigning are required to leverage off AI to address equity, inclusion. Human being requires reciprocity, empathy and relationships. Ethical challenges are posed by Ai and to move forward, dialogue is required to create new ways of doing. 

Grant thanked presenters and participants and encouraged the conversations to continue. A whole of education required to reap the advantages of AI and meet the challenges. Collaborative work between ākonga and kaiako and the system at large required. Summarised the important themes across the day. Learning content, skills etc. less important than ensuring our ākonga attain the cognitive, evaluative and critical thinking to be agile/flexible as AI continues to evolve. The purpose of education is just as important as assessment design. Encouraged ongoing work as we move through into the future. 

Lee closes the symposium with karakia. 

APAC TVET 2022 - panel on microcredentials plus Leesa Wheelahan - critique and NZQA interim report on microcredentials

Three items on microcredentials. The first with various international perspectives on microcredentials, the second, some critique on microcredentials and link to NZQA report on work to date on microcredentials.

A panel from the recent APAC TVET forum discusses micro-credentials. The panel includes Lagaaia Lealiifano Easter Manila-Silipa, director of the Australian Pacific Training Coalition, Frances Valentine, founder of the Mind Lab in NZ, Jenny Dodd, Chief Executive officer of TAFE Autralia, and Li Yunmei, vice president of Tianjin Light Industry Vocational Technical College. Stuart Martin, the micro-credentials specialist from Skills Consulting Group moderates.

Jenny Dodd begins with an overview of the Australian context. Microcredentials are not new in the VET landscape, although other terms used to described it but is new to the university sector. 

Frances Valentine then provides the NZ context. NZ being an early adopter (see below for more details), used across all levels and allows for 'stacking' even at post-graduate qualifications. 

Lealiifano Manila-Silipa then summaries the Pacific experiences. Relative new innovation but stressed the importance of the opportunities availed and details of how they are integrated into the larger qualification system. 

Li Yunmei provides the Chinese perspective. 

2) Leesa Wheelahan 

Leesa Wheelahan has been a constant critic of various pedagogical and curriculum structures imposed on VET across the world. In this video, she summarises the purpose of tertiary education as it evolved from elitist to mass and universal education. Microcredentials are mainly used to support the 'skills' focus on education and contribute towards the current precarity of work for a range of occupations, the placing of the onus of 'upskilling' on individuals who may have to continually do so at ongoing personal costs, with an endless cycle of study required to attain and maintain some forms of work. 

Two recent articles provide the argument and deeper discussion.

Wheelahan, L.  & Moodie, G. (2021). Analysing micro-credentials in higher education: a Bernsteinian analysis, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(2), 212-228, DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2021.1887358 

Wheelahan, L., & Moodie, G. (2021). Gig qualifications for the gig economy: micro-credentials and the ‘hungry mile’. Higher Education.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00742-3

3) NZQA updates

Two insight papers into the reasons for the provision of microcredentials and early results from the introduction of these into the Aotearoa NZ education system. The first summarises the rationale and background for the introduction and implementation of microcredentials within NZ; and the second provides a summary of the 'pilots' with examples from across the educational sectors. 

The ways microcredentials are introduced and the underpinning rationale for the adoption, development and ongoing progress of these, are generally not 'learner-focused' but based on meeting the rapid changes in economic and social needs. It is important to ensure microcredentials are not 'isolated' but are well integrated into national qualification systems. 'Stacking' must be availed to allow microcredentials to 'count', otherwise, the microcredentials become 'pick and mix' and do not perhaps lead to better outcomes, in the long term, for the learner. All accreditated learning draws on a finite amount of resources be it time, financial, or opportunity costs. Therefore, if they are to be useful, beyond the short term of attaining specialised skills and knowledge, they have to be an integral part of the qualification ecosystem. 

Simplifying NZ qualifications and credentials - information webinar

 Attended an information webinar this morning organised by NZQA on the topic – simplifying NZ qualifications and other credentials as a precursor to the consultation process.

The proposals seek to:

·         ensure that vocational qualifications support learner mobility and consistent skills for employers, whilst retaining flexibility for regional needs

·         simplify the credentials landscape so that it is easier for learners and employers to navigate

·         enable Workforce Development Councils to develop micro-credentials for providers to deliver. 

A summary of the intentions are available from this link and the details on this link

Notes taken at the webinar are below:

The presenter in Frannie Aston, Chief advisor at NZQA. The presentation covered the reform of vocational education (RoVE); overviewed the proposals and then provided a Q & A session.

Justine Auton introduced the session and provided the welcome along with how the session would run.

RoVE came about due to skill shortages, difficulties in getting to employers and learners in the revgions, challenges at ITPs. etc.

Summarised the key concepts, vision, progress on transition into RoVE. 

NZQA programmes of work being done to align to RoVE structure and systems. NZQA undertaking the simplifying qualifications, supporting establishment of WDCs, revieqing quality assurance and internal NZQA systems. Plus also deoing the review of NZQF.

Summarised the need to undertake qualification design. Improved greater consistency and simply range and design of vocaitional education 'products.

Two options for ensuring VET meets students needs. NZ quals as currently oulined or programmes and training packages remove and removed with national curriculum. 

Option A details laid out with WDCs developing skills and quals; training packages and tertiary education programmes - as currently outlined in the education and training act 2020. 

Option B simplifies the process with WDC develop and maintain qualifications including 'naitonal curriculum' and lead the development of 'national curriculum'. Option requires changes to Education and Training Act 2020. Would apply to all qualifications on the NQF to level 7. 

Defined national curriculum - meet intent of 'training packages', include skills standards' specified in the qualification and collaboratively developed. Option B will remove traning packages but components of qualification will be the same.

Impact of Option B better for learners for transferability; employers and industry will achieve greater consistency with involvement in design and review. WDCs lead but would not develop training packages, teaching institutions able to provide pedagogical support.

Compared options A and B abd their key advantages and disadvantages.

Q & A included whether skills standards assessments are competency or achievement based - still unclear.

Some content will be included in the process.

Regional needs may be met through microcredentials or some credits allow for local context to tbe recognised. 

Providers still responsible for development of teaching and learning resources. National curriculum to include core content, teaching and learning objectives etc.

WDC will need ITP collaboration to inform pedagogy and content inclusion.

Covered proposals 2 and 3. In proposal 2 training schemes would be replaced by microcredentials. Provided rationale and details of how this may work.

Proposal 3 enabling microcredentials to be developed by WDC. Technical issue in the Educatin and Training Act 2020 required to allow this to occur. 

In general, anything under 40 is microcredit but above that, a stand alone qualification. There is difference between skill standard (micro credential) and unit standard. At some stage, all training schemes will become microcredentials.Microcredentials must meet industry needs, therefore there should not be a large number of microcredentials. A badging system may be possible.

Continued with the timeline for the 'simplifyinf qualifications' process.Consultation close 16/6, collated across August and proposed amendments to ACT in mid 2022. Implementation likely only from 2023.

Principles of assessment and aromatawai - draft for consultation from nzqa

 NZQA has released draft principles for assessment and aromatawai for consultations. 

The consultation process closes at the end of May. The principles will cover all educational sectors / NZQA qualifications from school to tertiary. Consultation feedback will be used to develop the final guidance documents and develop contextualised resources.

Of note is the inclusion of aromatawai, the teaching, learning and assessment approaches based on Maori values, beliefs and aspirations. The six underpinning kaupapa are -  Rangatiratanga, Whanaungatanga, Manaakitanga, Pūkengatanga, Kaitiakitanga, Te Reo.

The five principles of assessment are that they are valid, reliable, informative (i.e. with an emphasis on the formative), equitable and authentic.

All in, good synergy between aromatawai and the usual assessment principles. Addition of equitable allows for more personalised assessments to be conducted. 

Micro-credentials - a critique

 There has been much hype about microcredentials. For example the NZ Qualifications Authority (NZQA) has worked at recognising these. 

This paper  provides a critique of the emergence and adoption of micro-credentials in higher education. Many of the points made are also pertinent to VET and further education (FE).

The paper is available for download and should be compulsory reading for people who work in curriculum development, programme design etc. In particular, the application of micro-credentials to further 'vocationalise' HE is important to understand. 

Reform of Vocational Education (RoVE) - initial reactions and updates

 A flurry of news items from the various stakeholders on Thursday's announcement on RoVE. Overview at the official NZ government site.

Announced on Friday 2/8 the members of the establishment board for the new entity – provisionally named – NZ Technology and skills Institute. The board will be based in Christchurch. The board is made up of a range of industry, ITP / ITO board members and tertiary union representative.

The Tertiary Education union is positive, especially with one of the establishment board members being ex-TEU President, Dr. Sandra Grey. The focus is on maintaining staff and student consultation to the establishment of and transition into the new entity.

Students union back up the above. In all, signalling a shift away from the market driven neo-liberal policies and into a more consultative approach.

There is a more guarded response from main union representing Service andFood workers, flight attendants and related services and the engineering, printing and manufacturing industries. Tone still supportive.

ITPs responses have been positive with provisos. For example from Ara Institute of Canterbury CE - positive with proviso on the importance of how and who is appointed to the establishment board for the ‘one entity’ ITP and clarification on funding. Eastern Institute of Technology reflect similar views.

ITOs are more mellow as their organisations are the most affected by the reforms. Competenz provides overviews for their stakeholders and a statement from their CE - expressing disappointment but assuring their employers and apprentices / trainees of a planned transition.

Employers’ and manufacturers’ association supports with the need to ensure confidence is maintained in the capabilities of ITPs and the proposed Workforce Development Councils (WDC) – replacing ITOs – to deliver on promises for consultative partnerships.

So overall, no surprises. As always, the devil will be in the detail and how the transition pans out. On the ground, we will expect changes, not all positive but most will hopefully contribute to a more effective VET system for New Zealanders.

NZ qualifications framework - NZQA second round of consultation on review

The New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) began a review of the NZ Qualifications Framework (NZQF) late last year. The overall objective is to update the NZQF given the challenges posed by the 'future of work'. The intention is to ensure the NZQF is 'fit for purpose', flexible and adaptive to reflect future needs of learners, employers, communities and iwi.

In the first round of consultation, the NZQA sought perspectives on four high level proposals. These were:
 1: include a wider range of education products on the NZQF
 2: more explicitly embed transferable competencies into the NZQF (e.g. critical thinking, communication, collaboration and citizenship)
 3: address some long-standing technical issues in the NZQF
 4: make the NZQF easier to use and more relevant to all stakeholders. This includes ensuring that mātauranga Māori is reflected throughout the framework and that mātauranga Māori qualifications are recognised

Results from this first round of consultation have now been collated and a second round of consultation is underway. Submissions are called and close on the 9th of September.

The further consultation are to find out views on eight proposals:

1. Including a wider range of quality assured education products onto a broader qualifications and credentials framework
2. Embedding transferable competencies into the NZQF
3. Ensuring that vocational qualifications can be listed at higher levels of the NZQF
4. Addressing the level 7 Diploma issues
5. Addressing the level 8 Bachelor Honours Degree issues
6. Supporting the development of degree apprenticeships
7. Addressing other technical issues raised in the review
8. Making the NZQF easier to use and more relevant to all stakeholders.

The consultation paper, provides rationale and commentary on each of the proposals. Following on from this second consultation, the NZQA will undertake the technical design work on the architecture of the NZQF. These will then be circulated for another round of consulation.

The longer timeline is to ensure oucomes of various other reviews are aligned. Notably the Review of Vocational Education (RoVE), the review of the school exit qualifications for the National Certificates in Educational Attainment (NCEA) and Tomorrow's school (on school governance).

NZ educational reviews and reforms 2018/2019

Apart from the reform of VET in NZ (see previous blog for overview), there are other accompanying pieces of work being undertaken to align the entire NZ education system. Included are the review of the National Certificate in EducationalAttainment (NCEA), the Careers System Strategy and proposed changes to the NZQualifications Framework

In summary, as prefaced by the Minister of Education and the Ministry of Education, a once in a lifetime opportunity to review and realign NZ education to the needs of the future.

For eh review of school systems, there is a proposal to end to 'tomorrow's school' model, whereby each school is governed by a local board of trustees, to oveview and collaborative approaches through a number of hubs. The major premise is to try to ameliorate the effects on schools, of the resourcing of local board of trustees as schools with better human resource capabilities are able to forge ahead, but schools with socio-economic challenges struggle. Consultations are now being undertaken, with concerns that everything will grind to a halt due to political 'grandstanding'.

The NCEA review, is also in progress, with the main worries centred around assessment issues.

Which brings us to the review of the NZ Qualifications Authority.  Changes being proposed to allow qualifications to be more relevant and future focused.

Four Proposals: Submissions closed in December last year.

1) Wider range of education products including microcredentials, training schemes, assessment standards, international and regional qualifications, professional credentials.

2) More explicitly embed transferable competencies into the NZQF. Examples are critical thinking, communication, collaboration and citizenship.

3) Address some technical issues in the NZQF including update of the level descriptors – in capturing Level 8 ‘bachelor with honours’ , clarifyin Level 7 ) which currently includes Bachelor, grad dip and grad certs but grade dip is not research based and does not have degree status. Level 4 for qualified trades person but it is different on other frameworks e.g. Irish / Australian go up to level 6). Clarify degree apprenticeships at level 7.

4) Make NZQF easier to use and more relevant to all stakeholders.

So all in, a very busy time at the Ministry of Education with the many reviews being undertaken. It is good to see a concerted approach to align the many sectors of education into a more cohesive entity. With so much happening all at the same time, the implementation stage will become a major challenge as each sector undergoes significant change. All in, it will be an interesting time ahead.

Degree apprenticeships - overview

The New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) has begun a series of consultations which will lead to reviews of the NZ qualifications system. The first one is on microcredentials and I overviewed some of the definitions and implications on this blog a few weeks ago.

Another initiative may be the concept of degree apprenticeships i.e. a degree qualification completed primarily through workplace based learning. Degree apprenticeship is not a new concept but have undergone a recent revival, particularly in the United Kingdom. At the INAP conference in Washington DC late last year, there was a large contigent from Ireland, presenting on their first roll out of their degree apprenticeship, situated within the insurance industry context.

The revival of qualifications completed through a 'learn while you earn' system, is a response to the increased costs of degree qualification completions. Especially given there is evidence to suggest that the payback via completing a traditional apprenticeship in the trades / technology provides similar economic gains to degree completion - see this report for NZ perspective.

In NZ, the engineering industry, has had major challenges finding sufficiently skilled and qualified engineers, especially at the 'technician' level which supports engineers with technical support and expertise. A pilot study, undertaken by Massey University suggested good returns for both industry and individuals. Findings were also presented at last years NZ Vocational Education Research forum by Professor Jenny Poskitt.

The main advantages of situated, authentic learning apply for study whilst working. Many people complete degrees through part-time study which provides similar opportunities. However, workplace learning has always had inherent challenges. There is a large corpus of literature on how to ameliorate the issues and to support practice-based learning in busy workplaces. So, simply doing small tweaks to institute based / structured and designed learning curriculum, does not perhaps deliver the best opportunities for learners or to industry. There is a need for innovative design of learning to encourage the development of important 'soft' skills and most importantly, the skill to be able to learn/ relearn continually to keep pace with the rapid change many industries are experiencing.

Therefore, as always, important to look clearly at what is expected of a graduate who has been accredited a qualification. How can many of the graduate profile outcomes be met through 'naturally occurring evidence' of learning and how can rigour be assured, especially when it comes to 'knowledge' when workplaces each have their own, idiosyncratic 'learning curriculum' best suited to their own needs.