Transcript of VET partnerships powering a dynamic workforce

Vocational Voices: Season 9, Episode 2

VET partnerships powering a dynamic workforce

Brett Woods (00:04)

This is the difficult part when we're trying to generate significant change in this space. You know, I think we've made the justice arguments, we've made the rights arguments, but what we need is the whole of industry, we need government, we need a real urgency here. My fear is, you're entirely right, that perhaps it's an impoverished motivation.

That hurts my heart a little bit, but I think the situation is so urgent that we need to speak the language that will get the resources.

Steve Davis (00:32)

Hello, and welcome to Vocational Voices, the official podcast of the National Centre for Vocational Education Research, or NCVER for short.

I'm Steve Davis, and today's episode recaps some of the major themes covered at the 33rd National VET Research Conference, No Frills, which was co hosted with North Metropolitan TAFE in Perth, Western Australia, from Wednesday the 10th to Friday the 12th of July, 2024.
More information, papers and presentations from No Frills 2024 will remain available on the NCVER website. That's ncver.edu.au.

Joining us first on this special episode of Vocational Voices is Professor Thomas Deissinger from the University of Konstanz, an expert in vocational training policy and comparative VET research.

In this interview, Professor Deissinger will share insights from the Erasmus+ project PAGOSTE, focusing on its efforts to enhance vocational teacher education in Ukraine amidst significant challenges and explore its implications for global VET systems.

Professor Deissinger, welcome.

Thomas Deissinger (01:54)

Welcome to you. I'm glad to join this session. Ja.

Steve Davis (01:58)

Good. I should use my token German and say Guten Morgen.

Thomas Deissinger (02:02)

Guten Morgen.

Steve Davis (02:04)

Could you start by outlining the primary challenges that the PAGOSTE project aimed to address in Ukrainian vocational teacher education.

Thomas Deissinger (02:16)

The main objective was actually to deal with the value of VET in the Ukrainian society and especially with VET teacher education because it seems to be a very unattractive profession for many young people.

And although they study it, it's not quite automatic that they join the profession later on. So it's a value problem, a problem of acceptance, and also a quality problem, of course. And that's why we talked about partnerships in this context. Ja, or dealt with partnerships.

Steve Davis (02:49)

Yes, and we'll come to that a little later. You've had extensive experience with VET systems in different countries. How does the school based VET system in Ukraine compare with systems that you've studied in other countries like Australia?

Thomas Deissinger (03:03)

I think on the one hand, it is more homogeneous than in many other, especially English speaking countries, because it's a state controlled system. So everything comes from the government in Kiev, all the directives and regulations. But it's school based of course. So it's a bit comparable to the TAFE system in Australia or to our system in Germany, but it's not a dual system actually, which we have in Germany. So it's quite a state controlled school based system, very theoretical and academic, actually. So most teachers actually have an academic background from the universities.

Steve Davis (03:46)

As opposed to industry practical background.

Thomas Deissinger (03:51)

Yes, yes. There's some, there's some teachers as well that come from industry side. Accesses to the profession, of course, but most teachers come from universities. So they study economics, for example, business administration, and then they become teachers in business in the business field.

Steve Davis (04:10)

In your presentation at No Frills 2024 you mentioned mechanisms of cooperation developed between universities, vocational schools, and employers. Could you elaborate on some of these mechanisms and their potential applicability in other VET systems?

Thomas Deissinger (04:29)

Yeah. Well, the most Central focus of our project was actually to establish these partnerships, mechanisms with which are determined by a partnership, a partnership mentality between universities, schools, and industry.

Mostly the first link was important for us, so that link between universities and vocational schools, so that vocational schools know what universities are doing, and universities know what vocational schools are doing. So there's a big gap of understanding between these two institutional systems, and especially when it comes to applying the knowledge from university to the classroom in vocational education.
So that was the main focus, but also to establish partnerships between universities and industry. Because industry is the field where these young people who are trained in vocational schools are later on employed. So that's a natural link as well, which needs to be looked at and especially improved, which is very weak in the Ukrainian system.

Steve Davis (05:42)

There were disruptions, of course, caused by COVID 19 plus the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. How did those factors shape the outcome of the PAGOSTE project that you were involved in?

Thomas Deissinger (05:56)

Well, both factors shaped the procedures and the outcomes of the project in a very dramatic way, because we originally planned to travel to our partner universities in Odessa, Kyiv and Kharkiv. So to visit vocational schools and hold workshops there and so on.
So to be in a close contact with the institutions in Ukraine, but we couldn't do that. Because COVID started in spring 2020, and we started a project in January 2020, so there was no chance to travel over a long period of four years. We even got an extension of one year by the European Union because of the dramatic circumstances, and the war was even more dramatic, of course.

So only, it was only possible that our Ukrainian Colleagues traveled to Germany, Austria, and Italy, and the only thing we could do instead of traveling there is to offer staff trainings online. That was our major instrument, actually. Online sessions where we reached a lot of people over the whole country, actually, not just in the main city.

So we, at one stage, we had 400 participants in such an online training because it was online. So that was the advantage as against the disadvantage of the war and COVID.

Steve Davis (07:23)

Something you just said reminded me of an earlier comment where you mentioned teaching is not seen as an overly attractive vocation for students in Ukraine.

I haven't lived in a country that's been physically engaged in war. Does that cast any shadow as well on people's thinking about their future, because I imagine it's very different when you are so uncertain about the makeup of your country.

Thomas Deissinger (07:54)

Yes, we experience it not in a very direct way, actually, when we communicate it.

Everybody was very committed on the side of the Ukrainian partners. But at one stage we saw one of our colleagues standing in his garden near Kharkiv and trying to get a connection to us. And we knew that a couple of minutes before there had been a bomb alarm around the city that was in the early stage of the war, actually.

So we communicated this topic as well, and we just try to express our understanding and our support in this very difficult situation. But none of our partner universities was actually physically destroyed. But the cities, of course, all three cities were mainly affected by bomb attacks as well, especially Kharkiv.

At the moment, Kharkiv is one of the most shepherded places in the country actually.

Steve Davis (08:54)

What were some of the most successful outcomes of the project, despite those challenges? Are there any success stories or achievements you could share?

Thomas Deissinger (09:03)

We have a number of elements actually, that we can present as results in the project. Especially, there is a government policy document, which is a direct outcome of the project, where the government, the Ministry of Education in Kiev establishes sort of strong recommendations to universities and vocational schools to cooperate in a very close way to establish standards in vocational teacher education, which follow a specific pattern.

And also the universities, our partner universities have established different boards and commissions where they meet regularly and exchange views about vocational teacher education, either between the universities but also between universities and vocational schools. So there's something visible.

And also our partner in Kharkiv founded a vocational teacher association, which had not been in existence in Ukraine before the project. So our project actually triggered a specific kind of development in a very positive way.

It's not very visible and it's not as substantial as it could have been without the war, without the COVID pandemic. But it's something which we can show to the EU, our financial supporter, and also to our academic community, of course. But you don't know how long, how sustainable these effects will be.

That's an open issue, actually. That's a critical point.

Steve Davis (10:48)

Yes, and nobody has that crystal ball, do they?

Thomas Deissinger (10:51)

No, no, nobody.

Steve Davis (10:54)

While we're sort of positioned towards the future, how do you see the role of partnerships in VET evolving in the future, especially in terms of governance and that integration between educational institutions and industry?

Thomas Deissinger (11:10)

I think the link between the university system and the VET system is more established than the link between vocational schools and industry. So, that might be a problem in the future. We have a lot of local initiatives where industry, companies, and schools work together. But I think the main outcome of the project was actually between vocational schools and universities to establish this understanding, this mutual understanding, and also to make the profession more visible and more attractive.

But one of the big problems actually for sustainability is how can we attract young people to this profession by paying them well enough? That's a big problem. Teachers are not well paid in Ukraine, so they have more chances in industry. And I suspect when the war will be over, there will be a lot of chances when the economy is regrowing, hopefully, for people working outside the education system.

That's my expectation.

Steve Davis (12:16)

That really is a national strategic decision on the part of the government to work out.

Thomas Deissinger (12:21)

Oh, definitely.

Steve Davis (12:23)

One of the project's goal, the project's goal really was to bridge the gap between what is taught in universities and the actual needs of vocational schools. We're fascinated by this. What gaps did you actually identify, and how were they addressed?

Thomas Deissinger (12:41)

Well, one of the major problems was the theoretical understanding of what universities do on their side and what vocational schools do in the classroom. So it's just a theory practice gap, actually, which we also have in Germany and in other countries.

And that's the most difficult thing because a government regulation cannot substitute something which needs to be done at the grassroots of the system. So schools and companies and schools and universities need to cooperate in a very close manner in order to cope with this problem.

So this is one of the open issues. Will they really use the experiences of the project and will they use the regulation by the government, which has now come up, to improve the system? And indirectly improve the VET system, not just the VET teacher education system.

Steve Davis (13:36)

So they're in silos operating in parallel rather than

Thomas Deissinger (13:41)

Yes, in a way, in a way, yeah. But that's a problem in many countries. Especially when, especially in school based VET systems.

Steve Davis (13:50)

Some listeners will already be thinking about what this means for Australia. So, I'll ask you directly, I mean, what lessons from the PAGOSTE project could actually be relevant for VET stakeholders here, particularly those who want to reform the system, enhance the system?

Thomas Deissinger (14:06)

I don't think that the Australian system can learn so much from Ukraine because Ukraine is really a developing country in terms of VET and VET teacher education. I think your system is quite well established in Australia with the TAFE system, especially where there's a cooperation between colleges and industry.

You have apprenticeships, at the moment, they're not so strong as they should be, maybe from our perspective. I would also always recommend focusing apprenticeships in the VET system. And you have many, many interesting approaches like VET in schools, which we don't have in Germany, for example, which helps to bridge the gap between theory and practice in a way, and which helps young people to get a vocational counselling and orientation at a very early stage of their school career.

I think that's one of the advantages of the Australian system, especially in Victoria, this VET in school system is very strong and very interesting, even for Germany, very interesting. I think.

Steve Davis (15:15)

If we pull back and just reflect globally, what are the key competencies that future VET educators need to develop as landscape changes rapidly over time? Are there some key competencies that you'd like to see?

Thomas Deissinger (15:32)

Well, definitely they should have a sound, solid, academic background in terms of their subjects they teach. And they should be pedagogues, not just experts in their profession. So they need to have a pedagogical didactical competence, which we in Germany try to establish by linking our students with schools at a very early stage when they study.

So this is a very important thing, which does not happen necessarily in Ukraine. That young people get in touch with schools, with what is going on in schools. That's a big problem. So I think this is very essential. You need to be an education person and you need to be an expert in your subject in your area, tech, technical, commercial, whatever, IT, it must not be one sided.

That's very important. If it's just one sided. It's not good for this partnership and governance and for the quality of that in the end.

Steve Davis (16:38)

Well, that is a taste of what you shared at No Frills. Professor Thomas Deissinger, thank you so much for being part of Vocational Voices.

Thomas Deissinger (16:46)

Thank you very much. I've really enjoyed talking to you. Thank you.

Steve Davis (16:51)

And if I remember my German correctly, I say, Auf Wiederhören!

Thomas Deissinger (16:55)

Auf Wiedersehen.

Steve Davis (16:56)

Auf Wiedersehen. Right. If it was on the phone, it would be Auf wiederhören.

Thomas Deissinger (17:00)

Auf Wiederhören would be on the phone, but we look at each other now, so you can say Auf Wiedersehen.

Steve Davis (17:10)

Next on this episode of Vocational Voices, we welcome Don Zoellner, a veteran in the field of vocational education from Charles Darwin University, who also serves on the National VET Regulator Advisory Council.

In this interview, Don will discuss the institutional logics that shape the status of VET in Australia, offering some novel insights that challenge traditional views and suggest some new directions for public policy.

Don, nice to chat with you again.

Don Zoellner (17:38)

Good morning, Steve.

Steve Davis (17:40)

Now your presentation at No Frills 2024 introduced the institutional logics perspective to the VET sector. Could you explain what this perspective entails and how it applies to VET?

Don Zoellner (17:53)

Institutional logics have emerged mainly from North America. It isn't a widely known technique in Australia as far as I can tell.
But what it does is it tries to explain how society operates by using a broad sweep of social science research, drawing it together, but it's kind of an alternative to the market explaining everything. And so in the absence of a theory of VET in Australia and the Anglophile country, or Anglophone country, sorry, generally I've decided to have a look at how this might apply to VET. And if you ask me the right question, I'll give you a 30 second overview of a very complex area and then we can come back and go into the details.

Steve Davis (18:44)

I'm up for it. Let's do that.

Don Zoellner (18:47)

Okay, so essentially the argument is there's seven institutions in society.

VET is run by three of them, I would argue. That is the state, the markets, and the professional occupations, each of which has their own logic. But they do share the use of status as a mechanism, rather than just a simple comparator. So status does some work, and it's used, the work it does, is that it's the basis for which very busy people and organisations allocate attention.

And so the argument will be that status is, or that VET suffers from a lack of attention from these very important institutions, which shape it rather than just as a simple comparator.

Steve Davis (19:40)

What a fascinating lens to look at this through. It takes me back to my early days treading the stage doing theatre because directors would always be about being aware of the status of the characters around you because that's how the attention flows, etc, that's where tension comes from.

And yes, you did note that VET suffers often from a perception of low status. Could we perhaps discuss some of the recent policy initiatives or some government actions that reflect these institutional logics at play in VET?

Don Zoellner (20:13)

A couple of more obvious plays about the three institutions that run VET.

So the former Minister O'Connor was very keen on returning to tripartitism. Well, the three institutions that make up the tripartite approach to VET, which of course dates back to the 1980s, are, you know, employer associations, that's the market more or less, employee associations, that's the professions, occupations, and the governments, the state. And so again, each of them has their own logic.

And so, when I looked at for example, some data to support this, which is always a seemingly good idea. I found that of the hundred submissions to the parliamentary inquiry into the perceptions of the status of VET, ninety-six of them actually came from one of those three institutions. Institutional logics and their logic was quite clear as to what they were pursuing.

Interesting, another interesting by product of that little look was that in fact 61 of the 100 submissions made no suggestion at all about how to improve the status of that. They were promoting what they did, i.e. they were trying to attract attention.

And so I carried this analysis through, so I looked at the appointments to the Ministerial Board of Jobs and Skills Australia. Virtually everyone comes from one of the three institutional orders that we're talking about, i.e. the state, the market, or the professions, the occupations, which is unsurprising because that was quite clearly stated policy.

Similarly, then it was carried out in New South Wales. They made a number of new appointments to there, I think it's called the TAFE board there or something like that. But again so if the people weren't representing, the new nominees weren't representing exactly the tripartite partners, they were representing lobby groups who are very powerful in influencing the three major institutions.

Steve Davis (22:25)

How does the institutional logics perspective help us understand some of the decision making processes that take place within VET institutions themselves?

Don Zoellner (22:36)

The logics have a number of components to them, which is probably a bit complex to go to in in a short interview. But essentially they approach things in a very predictable and consistent way. Which again is unsurprising in VET, I mean I'm one of the few people who argue that in fact there hasn't been much fundamental policy change in VET since the days of ANTA, so 30 years.

There's been lots of mechanical changes, lots of fiddling with processes and funding in that, but the basic policy parameters are still in place. And so one can see, for example, in the qualifications reform area, when it was proposed to get rid of units of competency, the pushback was immediate and intense.

And the Ministers came out, the Skills Ministers came out and made a very clear statement, that whatever qualifications are in VET in the future will still be built upon units of competency. So these fundamental building blocks that make sense to the three institutional orders are there. So for example, I would call that, or the literature would call that the source of legitimacy and also the basis of strategy.

Those are a couple of the things that are there. But the key thing is that these three partners have very predictable positions that don't change very much because it's the logic of their institutions, but also of their people. So you can change the people in them. But they still come out with the same way of viewing the world.

Steve Davis (24:19)

Just picking up on that, what are some of the most entrenched misconceptions about VET that just get perpetuated by these institutional logics?

Don Zoellner (24:30)

Simon Marginson indicated that when we discuss higher education, we ignore the fact that universities, their sole, well not their sole role, but their major role in society, other than passing on technical knowledge in the professions, is to confer status.

Trying to compare vet with higher ed, Marginson would argue, and I would agree, based on this new way or different way of looking at things is that it's a useless argument. Why do we have it? They're set up to do different things. But status is what universities do. And so even inside the university sector, in Australia, I mean in the UK you have the Russell Group, here in Australia we have the Group of Eight.
And even in the Group of Eight, in fact, there's a sedimentation of who's who, and so I note that in Adelaide it's feeling, the feeling was that that university or that a new university arrangement was required to get back up to the top of the status granting pile with that. So that would be certainly one impact of it.

The other is in the one that I finished the presentation with at No Frills. Was if you look at New South Wales, they listed during the pandemic, in the lockdowns, a list of 77 occupations that needed, were allowed out of quarantine, because they were required to keep society operating. Of the 77, only three required a higher education qualification.

All the rest of those jobs that keep society and the economy running require a VET qualification.

Steve Davis (26:22)

They were the essential workers.

Don Zoellner (26:25)

Exactly.

Steve Davis (26:26)

There's food for thought there. There's also something about this lens. I mean, once you see it, it's hard to unsee it. I think many of us listening to this are going to start seeing this as we look at the environment.

But let's actually gaze upward. If we were to reimagine public policy. What sort of things could enhance the status and value proposition of VET? Is that possible?

Don Zoellner (26:51)

It is. I mean, the, again, the institutional logics perspective suggests that one needs to find a way in which you can genuinely attract more attention. That requires more than targeting just senior bureaucrats and Ministers.

It's much more about why is this important? What is the value proposition? And so, what we tend to do, and like I said, in the submissions to the status of VET, the majority of submissions didn't actually address the issue. They don't know what to do. All they were doing was clamouring for attention.

Well, the message needs to be much more honed. And I think that, I mean, this argument has been had before, of course, is that some people look fondly back to the days of ANTA. Saying that here was a national voice advocating for the sector. Am I advocating for ANTA? Well, I don't think so, but finding somewhere, if we really want to, to have a unified voice that represents the sector.

You know, there's a variety of mechanisms that brains smarter than me will come up with, but some way to advocate for the sector.

Steve Davis (28:08)

It's interesting that you mention it. We need to get past just putting this in front of the minister and bureaucrats because in many ways, if we are going to have status that has cleft, a heft rather, in society, it needs to pass the pub test. It needs to be something that, the world understands, and if I mention the world, let's look at the world. Has any nation, anywhere, been able to reposition their vocational education sectors tapping into this approach?

Don Zoellner (28:39)

Oh, I wouldn't have thought so, because I can't, I wasn't able to find where this particular perspective had been applied into the VET sector, so this is, you know, a fairly unique proposition.

In fact my German colleagues are suggesting that VET's actually losing status, for example, in Germany. You know, it's become a fairly significant policy issue there, which is, you know of course, here held up as you know, the superstar of the space. So no, I think this is really just inviting people to have a different way of having a look at what we're doing in the space.

And to give you an example Steve, to make this a bit more concrete. You know, we progressively over, say, the past, well, since about 2009 with the real introduction of markets and the withdrawal of many - particularly Victoria, South Australia, Queensland lesser extent New South Wales later - withdrawal of support for the public provider.

Communities just quietly accepted the closure of the local TAFE. Or the local branch of the TAFE, whatever that might have looked like. If you had closed the same number of primary schools in local communities, the uproar and the political heat would have been extraordinary. That everyone would have been paying attention.

I noticed last Sunday that Minister O'Connor, former Minister O'Connor, was interviewed on Insiders. Twenty minute interview. They didn't mention skills or training once, other than in his title.

Steve Davis (30:21)

It's sobering, isn't it? Especially when we want a sovereign Australia that's able to look after itself and maintain itself when the world's borders closed down.

Don Zoellner (30:30)

I think it's worth looking at. Now, of course, it's always easy for somebody should say that somebody should do something. But I think part of the strategies need to be instead of going to the ministers and the bureaucrats, it needs to be a much more direct line to the public to start demanding this, and I mean that might be through the media and certainly these podcasts and NCVER you know, are aware of that and help with that.

I think the incentives in terms of bureaucracy to have a single national system have not served this sector well. So, for example when Simon Walker gave his one of his farewell talks from NCVER's Managing Director role. He referred to what has happened to the adult and community education sector, or community education provider sector, over the past 20 years.

And they've lost 80 percent of government funding share. The institutional perspectives can explain this because they're run by a community perspective. Their institutional logic is of community. And it's not the same as the state and the professions and occupations and the market. And so they don't fit into the system as it's currently constructed.

So why would we expect 4,000 providers, nearly, serving multiple communities? And that's not geographic communities, but occupational communities and many other surfaces. Why would we expect them to all be the same? Why can't we tailor markets that fit the needs, or you have nonmarket interventions that are much more tailored to local needs or industry needs or a variety of places that require a certain kind of vocational training.

I think that's probably part of the secret of elevating it because we've treated everyone the same when demonstrably they never have been the same and never will be the same.

Steve Davis (32:33)

Don Zoellner, thank you for joining Vocational Voices.

Don Zoellner (32:36)

Thank you, Steve.

Steve Davis (32:41)

Our next guest on Vocational Voices is Emeritus Professor Erica Smith from Federation University, Australia. With a prolific career in VET research, Erica brings deep insights into the nuanced understanding of industry within vocational education and training, exploring how these perceptions affect the broader VET ecosystem. Erica, welcome.

Erica Smith (33:05)

Thank you.

Steve Davis (33:05)

Erica, your presentation at No Frills 2024 tackled the complex representation of industry in VET. Can you explain why understanding this concept is so crucial for the VET sector?

Erica Smith (33:20)

I think it is crucial because there's a perception that industry is the be all and end all of the purpose of VET and it's a very, very important goal of the VET system is to teach and train people so that they can do certain jobs within, within the economy.
Without a doubt, an important part of VET, if we didn't know what was needed in industry, then we wouldn't really know clearly what to teach and train people. However, it's really important to understand its meaning and also to, I guess, critique its meaning. Because it's a very slippery concept. It sounds simple, but it isn't.

And also there's the issue of do we think it is the be all and end all of the VET system to train people for industry? And certainly when I presented my paper at the conference, I asked people to put their hands up. Did they think it was the absolute the only thing that mattered in VET? And people basically said no, they didn't.

So there's more to VET than industry. Nevertheless, it's really important to understand it, and it's important to respect the role of industry in explaining to us what we need to teach our students.

Steve Davis (34:42)

What are some of the common misconceptions about industry and VET, and how do these impact the engagement between VET institutions and the industries they serve?

Erica Smith (34:51)

One issue is who speaks for industry. So there's a perception, I think, that's fairly common in the VET sector. And particularly at policy level particularly at Commonwealth level, but not only, that by talking to industry bodies we can find out what industry wants. But of course, industry bodies represents employers, and employers obviously can and do speak for workers, but there's other people that speak for workers, i.e. trade unions and individual workers, there's other people that speak for industry, i.e. individual employers.

So I think the biggest misconception is probably that we can find out what industry wants and do it. There's also a misconception about what is industry in the VET context because really when people talk about industry they mean the occupations and the sectors of the economy for which people are taught and trained within VET.

Okay, but that is not just industry. So some of our biggest groups of students are in child care, nursing, they're in business, which are not specifically industry. When we talk about industry all the time, we actually exclude those bits of the VET sector that don't train for what you might think of as industry, which is basically manufacturing and services.

So, teachers and trainers feel excluded. I know because I've taught many of them. There's also much activity in the VET sector that isn't based even around an occupation. So we think of foundation skills, we think of English as an additional language. And those teachers and trainers are certainly feeling excluded by the use of the word industry.

To the extent that in the programme which I used to run at Federation University, we stopped talking about industry and we started to talk about industry or disciplinaria, so as not to make teachers feel excluded. So those are some problematics around the term.

Steve Davis (37:06)

I wonder if you could just share some of the key findings from your research on how the different layers of industry engage with VET systems here in Australia and also internationally, if you have anything.

Erica Smith (37:18)

Yeah, sure. Internationally, people often talk about three levels of engagement, micro, meso, and macro, and some writing uses them in different ways, but basically the macro level is the national level. So here we're thinking about the conversations that governments have in things like the Jobs and Skills Summit, Jobs and Skills Councils, various consultations that governments have.

Then we talk about the micro level. I'm starting with the easy ones to define. So the micro level is the engagements that VET providers, RTOs have with local employers.

And then we talk about the meso level, which the way I like to think of it is the industry sectors. So, the way in which industry sectors organise their industry consultation arrangements but some people view that a bit differently. They view it as a sort of halfway house between macro and meso, but macro and micro, but I think meso is the best way. Meso meaning industry sectors is the best way to look at it.

So, that's all of those levels. You can see different structures set up for engagement between VET and industry, and I'm doing inverted commas here, but you can't represent those in audio, but different ways in which sectors of the economy, as that's like a long term for industry, engage with VET.

Of course, at the micro level, teachers, individual teachers and trainers are really important because they have their own relationships with local employers.

Steve Davis (39:04)

As we transition from analysing where things are, where they've come from, and we start looking towards the future, perhaps could you start by looking at the challenges and the opportunities you see in the way that industry partnerships are currently stretched structured in the VET sector? What are the challenges? What are the opportunities?

Erica Smith (39:25)

One of the major challenges that we have is that obviously the economy and society are changing and that impacts on people and how we educate them and prepare them for their role in society and the economy. So, things that are changing like I mean people trot out the usual things but they're true.

Artificial intelligence the gig economy and so on. I think the current structures we have are pretty much siloed by industry or by industry sector, however you decide to slice it up and that changes from time to time. So if you're dealing with those mega changes, then the current systems are probably not that good.

Now, at local level, that's perhaps not so important in that, for example, if a training provider and its teachers and trainers are working closely with local employers. They get it, they talk to the employers, they know what's going on, but when you talk about the, maybe the meso and the macro level, it gets a lot more complicated because, for example, gig economy, lots of people work in the gig economy, there's no Jobs and Skills Council for the gig economy.

Developments like green energy, there's some activity directed towards that at various levels. But still, the siloed nature of the system doesn't work for that. Opportunities, probably there are opportunities so I think the first thing we can do is, is recognise those problems. So we can think of a word for industry that doesn't just sound like heavy manufacturing.

If we thought of a better word, then it might raise the status of VET because some people may be put off it because they think it prepares people to work in certain types of workplaces which don't have high social esteem. So that's an opportunity we have to say, Okay, this word's not working. Let's find one.

I haven't found one. I offered a chocolate frog for a word of the conference, for a good word, to attendees at the conference presentation, but we didn't come up with a good one, but never mind.

Steve Davis (41:35)

Challenge accepted.

Erica Smith (41:38)

Yes, if there's anyone listening to this podcast who has a good word, love to hear it.

We can seek the direct voice of employers. I think because those peak bodies are not always representative. They have their own agendas, they do a great job, but we have to think about how do we find out what's their, what's going on with actual real employers. And workers. So we could encourage the direct voice of employers, we could encourage the direct voice of workers could be through trade unions, could be other ways.

If we had, say, a panel of people that we consulted from time to time who weren't just the industry peak bodies, I think we would find that we get maybe very different views and very different ideas. I think we could regularise also, although I've sort of said that the Jobs and Skills Council system is a bit rigid, which it is, and siloed, but nevertheless it's actually quite dysfunctional in that in different states the arrangements are really different and the siloing is done differently.

And that's not used really in a good way. You could imagine how it might be, but I think much better would be to regularise the system across the states and territories, aligning with the national system so that there could be more coherent conversations between people across Australia.

Steve Davis (43:06)

Conferences like No Frills also give us a chance to look over the horizon. If we look internationally, are there any models of industry engagement you came across that could actually be adapted for the Australian VET context?

Erica Smith (43:20)

These same problems that I've identified exist everywhere. There's a great quote from Alison Wolfe, an English commentator, and this is actually from 20 years ago, but when I re-looked at this for the project, it really struck me.

So she says, there is very little to suggest that business knows best about what the education system should provide. Certainly not if by business we mean its official representatives. That's a bit harsh and a bit blunt, but I think it's probably true. First of all, do the representatives represent business? As she says, it is convenient for, in her case, the British government to say, we've consulted with industry, but they don't necessarily, and also they don't know the business of education.

These problems, as I said, exist worldwide. In some countries, the industry skills councils or their equivalents have a wider role, for instance, in being taught, liaising much more closely with the VET sector rather than just listening to industry and passing ideas on.
So I think that would be a good practice to institute. One thing that we found during our research was the International Labour Organisation sort of standards. I can't remember the word they use, but it's like standards for industry skills councils. So the ILO is an agency of the United Nations. And they're very active in the VET space.

So they sort of came up with these standards and I guess development for application in countries that were still developing their skills council systems but one thing that we did in our project was to compare their standards with the Australian system and it was a little bit deficient in some areas.

So I think we could look at international standards like that and think about what we could do to improve the way in which industry engages with VET.

Steve Davis (45:15)

Emeritus Professor Erica Smith, thank you so much for being on Vocational Voices.

Erica Smith (45:20)

Thank you.

Steve Davis (45:24)

Next on Vocational Voices is Sam Harrison from Melbourne Polytechnic, a seasoned VET professional celebrated for her work in online teaching and learning design. Today, Sam will discuss Melbourne Polytechnic's cutting edge approach to supporting inclusivity and disadvantaged learners revealing how their team teaching model is transforming educational outcomes.

Sam, welcome to Vocational Voices.

Sam Harrison (45:51)

Thank you for having me, Steve.

Steve Davis (45:52)

Could you describe the specific challenges that disadvantaged learners face in VET and how Melbourne's Polytechnics approach addresses these challenges?

Sam Harrison (46:02)

When I look at our student cohort, our student cohort is extremely diverse. So we have people that are really diverse age ranges. So anything from a school leaver through to somebody who's closer to retirement. But we have a lot of people who've had not great experiences in their secondary education. We've also had people for whom university is not really the right fit for them, that more independent model, and they just need a little bit more support.

And often people, because of those issues, sometimes also have literacy issues, we don't do a lot of numeracy, I'm very pleased to report. So, but literacy issues  and also because of that negative experience sometimes that they've had with education, there's a bit of trepidation about engaging and coming back and a bit of fear underpinning that.

Concern that they won't be able to do it. So what we do is address some of those key issues. We also have a high migrant cohort. So often people for whom English is not their first language. So sometimes they struggle with the language that we use in community services, which is the field that I teach in.

Steve Davis (47:18)

Now, in your presentation at No Frills 2024, you highlighted the, well, the innovative team teaching model that you use at Melbourne Polytechnic. How does the model work and what are the benefits for students and educators?

Sam Harrison (47:32)

Great question, Steve. So, the model works in a way where, I've worked with the same learning skills teacher for many, many years.
So my role is to be the content expert. So I deliver the content. What my learning skills teacher, her name is Karen, what she usually does, she takes, as I'm talking and, you know, gabbing on about, you know, whatever I'm talking about, she teaches the students how to take notes. So how to crystallise ideas into a written format.

So she puts notes in the chat section, so they understand how to capture really key ideas. When we do breakout rooms, she moves through those rooms and gets a sense of who might not be understanding the key concepts identifying who might need additional assistance. It's also an opportunity for her to speak in really small groups with a collection of students to find out if they are having any issues with the content.

And creating that connection so when someone needs help, it's not a daunting thing to say, “Hey Karen, can I meet you after class today? I want to talk about this thing.” Or emailing her and saying, “Hey Karen, can I get a hand with this? Or I'm not really sure about what I'm doing with this assessment.”

It really, it kind of shrinks that gap between the daunting prospect of asking for help with a lot of people struggle with that. It's literally just kind of going, “Hey, Karen, can I get a hand?” So it makes that work or that opportunity more available to students. It's less daunting. And also if they need assistance and ask me, then obviously I'm going to direct them to Karen. They know Karen. Very, very straightforward process. So asking for assistance isn't a big deal.

Steve Davis (49:19)

As you were talking, I was having a vision, almost like a guardian like character that is ever present and just watching to make sure that no one's hiding, but neither is anyone slipping through any cracks.

Sam Harrison (49:32)

That's right, and it's also celebrating not just the people who struggle, but also acknowledging the people who do really well, who are really, so it's about making sure everyone feels part of that school community group. So that the people who need help, it's their help, but it's also Karen and I acknowledging the people who do really well, so making sure everyone feels like they're participating in an active way.

Steve Davis (49:58)

Inclusivity is a core theme of your work. How do you make sure that that approach is integrated throughout the VET programs at Melbourne Polytechnic?

Sam Harrison (50:08)

Yeah, inclusion is obviously something very important to us. With regard to the use of a co teaching model, the co teaching model is available to any teacher in any subject.

So, if you've got, and we usually use it wherever there is complex ideas or material, so that anyone who needs assistance wrestling with that, that assistance is available. So, anyone can use it. And to be honest, these days, there's a lot of, it's actually very, very competitive because we only get 100 hours per class group per year, so we have to allocate it according to need.

But it's very, very highly competitive to get a learning skills teacher in your classroom. So that's actually something that's shifted a bit, but inclusion for us is about making sure that everyone feels part of our school community and making sure that they feel like they're part of that class group. That they can have that, you know, so that they've got the skills to participate in an active way. So that we don't have people who feel really alienated or left out because they're not understanding something or they've had a really difficult time before in school.

So it's about making sure that they feel part of that and really, I guess, recognising that human rights element of education, where everybody has the right to be part of a school community, irrespective of their personal circumstances. So making sure that that is enacted in what we do.

Steve Davis (51:43)

Right at the beginning of our chat, you made a little offhand comment about numeracy. And in your talk, you mentioned a collaborative approach between language and numeracy specialists and VET teachers. Can you just take us through this collaboration?
How does it enhance the learning experience?

Sam Harrison (51:59)

So what I do is I, you know, go a blah blah blah and talk about all of the stuff I'm going to talk about. One of the places or the subjects where I use a learning schools teacher is sociology. And if I say to a student at the very beginning of that subject, by the end of this subject, you will be able to do a, a Marxist policy analysis and then tell me affected cohorts. If I said that to a student they would probably not come back to my class.

But through that co teaching approach, by the end of that subject, I can assure you every single student who comes through, and it's not just, you know, they might do a functionalist analysis of a particular social policy, be able to provide me with data, talk to me about the development of that policy, who got a voice in the policy debate, the reasons why they got a voice, and deconstruct that for me.
That's what the co teaching approach enables us to do, to be able to have people who, you know, 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago were alienated from education, who did not feel that education was for them. To then be able to come and do that, to me, is one of the many gifts of that co teaching and that inclusive approach, that ability for them to be able to engage with that in that way.

Is an absolutely outstanding outcome.

Steve Davis (53:33)

I'm picking up a great sense of, a very diff well, it may not be as different, I could just be out of the loop, but a very different paradigm to how I've always thought of education, which is thinning out the herd, versus this, where you're actually trying to urge everyone on to success.

Sam Harrison (53:51)

We are the shepherds of the herd, so we don't want to lose anyone from our flock. And we have that, and I would describe it as a really wraparound approach, where if any part of what we're doing, you struggle with, we will, and it's not just content in the classroom, it's, if you don't hand your assessment in on time. That suggests to me that there may be a couple of things.

You're not understanding the content, but it also might be you need assistance with time management. And so what I'll do is I'll organise for you to see Karen to have a conversation about time management. Because there's all of those embedded skill sets where it's not just literacy and numeracy, it's digital tech.

You know, did you actually understand how to upload it? Do you need assistance with the digital element of what we're doing? Is it because you weren't sure how to find it in the learning management system? Do we need some skill development around that? Is it because you had too many things on and you couldn't manage your time and you need some help developing time management skills?
So it is not just literacy and numeracy, it's a really holistic approach to every student's learning and the skills that they need to make that happen.

Steve Davis (55:04)

Now we've been covering the concepts here. I just wonder, is there a story or two that you can recall where there's been a success story for a student or a cohort?

Sam Harrison (55:15)

Yeah, I would say I had a student, and this is probably about, six, seven, eight years ago. She left school when she was very young to work in her family's business. She was a migrant, so left school very, very early to work in her family's business. Was not particularly literate and really struggled with sentence structure, paragraphing, and how to take a concept and distill it down into a written format.
So that was the beginning, very beginning, so of the two year, ours is a two year course. So really struggled with that stuff, worked intensively for the whole two years and by the end of that course, the end of that qualification, she was able to distill ideas and synthesise them into simple sentences, able to form a sentence, structure that into a paragraph, but then also be able to apply that as a skill set in a work environment, doing something like writing a case plan or writing a case note.

So, a really extraordinary journey and a real testament to the skills that that our learning schools teachers help our students develop.

Steve Davis (56:29)

Not just life changing for her, but economy changing for the society at large, I would have thought, to tap this potential that would have been lost to us.

Sam Harrison (56:40)

Yeah, it's transformative and you know, that's the beauty of vocational education. It takes people and skills them and then puts them into the labour market and then they're working and then that shifts everything for their family, that shifts things for society, for the community and for the economy. It's just, that's why, you know, VET is such a very fantastic and amazing place to work because you see that transformation.

Steve Davis (57:09)

If people want to get into the weeds, what are some of the key research findings that have guided this evolution of the teaching methods you use?

Sam Harrison (57:17)

There's actually not a lot of research and the research is actually quite old. However, we obviously do data collection internally and we know that the retention rate for a class that has a learning skills teacher increases by about 30%.

So the outcomes are extraordinary. I don't know why anyone would not use a learning skills teacher to get that outcome.

Steve Davis (57:46)

I'm glad you say that. There must be some barriers though. What sort of barriers have you encountered as you've tried to bring this model to fruition?

Sam Harrison (57:54)

I would say there are some teachers who are concerned about co-teaching because they think that another teacher is going to come in and take over their class and that's not how co-teaching works. So co teaching is me talking about content and then I've got somebody who is in many ways actually extrapolating that content.

So putting a link in about more information about a particular thing. So some people are concerned, you know, sometimes a bit of resistance about the co-teaching model itself because teachers don't understand how it works. Sometimes people think that the co teacher is there to observe them and correct them and report back to management.

Not how it works. Definitely not how it works. So some people don't understand how the model itself works and some teachers are a little bit resistant to that. And also people, managers, wonder what is the value of having two teachers in one classroom and I think probably for the bean counter types, that 30 percent retention rate speaks for itself.

And that's suddenly delivering outcomes for students, for the educational institution and as we said, for the community, for families and obviously for the economy.

Steve Davis (59:09)

You beat me to it with that last observation. Thank you. Just, just in closing, Sam, looking at the broader VET sector, what can other institutions, you think, learn from Melbourne Polytechnic's experience with inclusivity and disadvantaged learners?

Sam Harrison (59:24)

I would encourage any other educational institution to absolutely give the co teaching model a try. You've got to have the right fit of the right teacher, right subject, right qualification and right co-teacher. But when you get that mix right, the outcomes for students are extraordinary.

It is just, it's such a worthwhile model and, it demonstrates outcomes. So, and that is always what we are looking to do. To change and transform the lives of our students.

Steve Davis (59:57)

Sam Harrison, thanks for joining Vocational Voices.

Sam Harrison (59:59)

Absolute pleasure, Steve. Thank you.

Steve Davis (01:00:04)

We're now joined by Anissa Jones, an Indigenous academic specialist at the University of New South Wales, where she champions the incorporation of Aboriginal perspectives in the curriculum.

Anissa brings over two decades of educational experience to discuss the transformative approaches to embedding these perspectives within VET, ensuring they resonate authentically with the needs of Aboriginal communities. Anissa, welcome to Vocational Voices.

Anissa Jones (01:00:34)

Good to see you.

Steve Davis (01:00:36)

Could you share how your personal and professional journey has influenced your approach to integrating Aboriginal perspectives in VET?

Anissa Jones (01:00:45)

Yeah, well, as a child, I moved from Sydney, which is where I'm from, to Canberra. My stepfather worked in ATSIC. So I got exposed to quite a bit of ATSIC in the early 80s and 90s, and now I'm aging myself. And it was all about self determination from an early age. But I was also very aware of the lack of anything Aboriginal in this, even as a child, in a school system.

So, that started the journey. Professionally, I've been influenced even more so about the lack of seeing Aboriginal people in education, you know, be it teachers or support staff or even people in positions of power, for lack of a better word. And then that would then translate into a lack of how things are delivered in terms of perspectives.

And I wanted to find a way to address this and make it a day to day practice for all teachers in a way that's culturally safe and less stressful for non-Aboriginal teachers to deliver.

Steve Davis (01:01:47)

Now, your presentation at No Frills 2024 highlighted the adaptation of training package rules to include Aboriginal perspectives.
Can you explain what this involves and why you think it's so important?

Anissa Jones (01:02:01)

Basically it comes down to this, is that if we can't see us, we can't be us. And that's in a short little space of time. In my presentation, I actually went as far to say if you're in a room discussing Aboriginal education and there are no Aboriginal people present? Stop the meeting.

Even if it's with the CEO or the Managing Director of the RTO sitting at the table, just stop the meeting. I think this is where change needs to take place the most. And it highlights the problem in Aboriginal education that's been around since schooling began. That we are talked about, but not often included in the conversation in itself.

But if we don't feel culturally safe in our learning environments, we know, statistically, there's evidence to back it up, that it can have a detrimental effect. We need to indigenise our curriculum, which is the more positive spin on it, than decolonise, which has negative connotations, to ensure that we are seen and heard.

And what is missing, even more so in the VET space, is the, in the TAE itself, there is little to no focus on Aboriginal education. And it might be an agendum in the LLN unit, if you're looking at the 16, or if you're looking at the 2022, there's two LLN units, but it really highlights the deficit that we are seeing as Aboriginal students and teachers in the VET space.

Steve Davis (01:03:21)

Let's put some meat on the bone. Let's get some practical things into people's minds right now. But are there some specific examples of how VET programs have actually been tailored to meet the needs of Aboriginal communities effectively?

Anissa Jones (01:03:36)

Personally, one that I've delivered was about storytelling. And that was community stories, not just, you know traditional stories as people tend to say when we talk about storytelling.

It was with the Aunties out at Brungle Mission and they filmed a video about the history of the mission, but they also wrote a book about their personal stories. So it was done with the community, for the community, the launch happened in community, copies of all the books, et cetera, were given to them.

But it was more about making sure the knowledge that they were sharing was culturally safe. So, it stayed within that bubble of the community. So, any sort of copies of the book aren't had by anybody else. A great example though that I can share is the Australian Indigenous Leadership Centre, otherwise known as the AILC.

And they deliver Indigenous leadership to communities all around the country. So the courses are tailored to the specific communities that they're delivering to, but they also have teachers from that area who understand the underpinnings of the community itself what they need. They may live nearby or they may physically be in that area depending on where it's delivered.

But it is run by Aboriginal people, delivered by Aboriginal people, for Aboriginal people, so that cultural underpinnings are so majorly embedded in the delivery that it is a place of, an option of choice for Aboriginal people if they want to do leadership in an Aboriginal run RTO.

Steve Davis (01:05:11)

As you say that, it makes sense. It's just not something that necessarily springs to mind of those of us who aren't of Aboriginal background. Which then makes me think, what are some of the common misconceptions about Aboriginal perspectives in education and how do you address these in your work?

Anissa Jones (01:05:31)

There are some. So one of them is that, oh, we'll do a Moodle and we're now the experts because we've done the Moodle.
But on the other side of the spectrum is the fear of making a mistake. So let's not do it at all. Part of the problem with the uptake is that it's not a safe space for Aboriginal staff and non-Aboriginal staff to do this together effectively. It's a process that can actually take time and time for most RTOs equates to money.

So we end up with a small team putting something together to present at the end that causes issues with the Aboriginal staff, students and community to save money. Or we can include them, which I think should happen, at the start and work with them to ensure it's authentic, holistic and culturally relevant.

It's really about making true change and consistent change to our teaching practices for all students by engaging every stakeholder and working with them. Rather than doing it at the end, which is what we do tend to see a lot, and that also stems into the curriculum writing space.

Steve Davis (01:06:34)

It's so important, and in previous episodes of Vocational Voices this came out too, this factor of honouring the time that it takes to do this properly. Which is in stark contrast to everything in the mainstream, inverted commas, society with AI trying to speed everything up at the speed of light.

It's a real, well, to me, they're at opposite ends of the spectrum, and you don't get to suck the marrow out of something, see something deep when you're whizzing past so quickly.

Anissa Jones (01:07:11)

It can cause major issues in community trust. And once that trust is gone, you will never get it back. And I think if we start doing the right way and, and engage in community first and foremost, I think we will see definite changes being made.

Steve Davis (01:07:26)

Something you mentioned earlier about having local teachers, local people involved just reminded me of something else, a point you made at No Frills, which was the importance of not adopting a one size fits all approach. How do you ensure that educational programs are actually responsive and innovative while still being culturally appropriate?

Anissa Jones (01:07:48)

Co-design is a great starting point. So, you know, as it's listening to the community that you're delivering in you're seeking their feedback and you're getting their approval for content. But each community has their own way of doing things. And what may work in Western Sydney will not always work in Broken Hill as the community needs there are vastly different and you only have to look at access to transport and other resources required to see that.

And what happens in a city is that people tend to forget about what happens in the remote and regional spaces and what the expectation is. Oh, we'll do something online, that's great, but there might not be any internet service or one community group may not even have a computer. So how do we deliver online?

And I think you know, in my research, I've been doing a lot about this, about the Helmay said that it, that best in the curriculum must fit the cultural, linguistic and community context of the student. So, if we want to adapt a program, we have to adapt it to the needs of the student, not just for the needs of the bottom line.

And that can cause things to blow out financially at first, but when it's done the right way, and done the right way the first time, you're not having to go back and re-evaluate and fix the problems that have occurred by not engaging the community in the first place.

Steve Davis (01:09:11)

Just picking up on that, and also an earlier comment you made about if you're in a room discussing these issues and there's not actually an Aboriginal person there, stop the meeting. What challenges have you faced in efforts to foster culturally safe spaces within the VET sector, and how have you overcome them?

Anissa Jones (01:09:30)

There's been a few but I think personally it's been around ignorance of what Aboriginal people want and need from their provider of choice. Now, I say provider of choice, I’m not identifying any RTO in general here. But I think trying to navigate an inflexible system of what can only be described at times as paternalism has been confronting.

You know, there's research that suggests that we should be flexible in order to achieve success. But the rigidity of some of the decision makers who don't have that lived experience of being Aboriginal or even a VET trainer or teacher has been less than helpful.
And I think that causes bigger issues in the conversation. You know, we've got some things, we've got Aboriginal leadership groups in VET spaces that are occurring. And whilst that sounds like a great thing, you know, to have these Aboriginal leadership groups, what's important to note is that most of the time they don't contain Aboriginal teachers as members.

And you would think in a vocational education and training space, you would have the educational wing actually represented. So, I think you know, it's like me trying to teach plumbing. I am not a plumber by trade, I've got no idea how to do it. So I would tend to go to my area of expertise, which is educational practice.

So I think that, you know, missing that out, but in order to overcome it, I think by staying true to the community that I'm from, where I live, where I work, who I've delivered to. And that the curriculum that I've been required to teach, I think staying true to that has really overcome it. It doesn't have to be prescriptive in the curriculum and the curriculum itself is a lot more flexible than people think.
And it's really important to remember that that's where reasonable adjustment really does provide a great solution. And people see reasonable adjustment as a way of supporting students who have learning needs, you know, additional needs or I've got ADHD, so do I get reasonable adjustment? EALD students can have a reasonable adjustment.

But we don't look at that from an Aboriginal perspective. And I think that's one way where we can be more successful is so that we give ourselves permission to adjust the curriculum to meet the needs of the individual student or community group, as opposed to just going, no, the curriculum says this, and that's what we need to do.

Steve Davis (01:11:59)

Your study, your research has been quite illuminating. What impact do you see your PhD research having on Aboriginal policy and perspectives in vocational education?

Anissa Jones (01:12:10)

Well, I think it'll be the first one that combines the two which is fantastic for me in one way. But I hope that it will see VET specific Aboriginal education policies written in States and Territories that really do influence the introduction and maintenance of Aboriginal perspectives. I think that is an area that is sorely lacking.

This is not to say that policies aren't currently being written or that they actually exist, but they need to be standalone documents. So in New South Wales, where I live at the moment, the education policy sits under the banner of the Department of Ed.

But that's not good enough. It doesn't actually address vocational education and training as an entity unto itself. It addresses it as a part of an education portfolio. But we know that VET is very different from teaching in schools. I know that firsthand, I've taught in both. So the focus, you know, in an education policy in the Department of Ed becomes VET in schools, which is a great program.

But it doesn't address the stand alone content that we need to have for VET in itself. It needs its own policy. So at the end of the day, I'm hoping that will happen. It should happen. I would love to see it happen. And hopefully in two years’ time, or three years’ time, it will be a definite there.

Steve Davis (01:13:33)

Anissa Jones, thank you for joining Vocational Voices.

Anissa Jones (01:13:35)

Thank you.

Steve Davis (01:13:40)

Next up, we have Miriam Forte from Wangatha CAPS, and CAPS stands for Christian Aboriginal Parent Directed School. Miriam's a grant writer and researcher dedicated to improving the lives of remote Indigenous communities through strategic research and development. Miriam joins us to discuss her ongoing research project, which is focused on creating sustainable and culturally appropriate employment pathways for remote Indigenous VET students.

Miriam, welcome to Vocational Voices.

Miriam Forte (01:14:11)

Thanks, Steve. I'm really honoured to be on the podcast.

Steve Davis (01:14:14)

Miriam, can you start by giving us an overview of the main objectives of your research project on those employment pathways for remote Indigenous VET students that you shared at the No Frills 2024 conference?

Miriam Forte (01:14:27)

So the main objectives of the research were threefold. Firstly, it was to find out what jobs are available to our graduating students from the Kimberley, the Pilbara and Goldfield Esperance regions, and what industry trends are affecting job availability for future planning purposes. Especially for planning a rebuild of our VET Skills Centre, according to industry demand, so that we are making sure that we're training students in areas of demand.

And secondly, it was to identify the barriers and enable employment engagement for this cohort, and in particular, factors that tend to be overlooked in some of the prior research. And thirdly, we wanted to do some of the background work for conducting a longitudinal study with our graduate students to have a deeper look at what is influencing their employment options and employment decisions.

Steve Davis (01:15:20)

We'll dive into that a little bit later, but let's start with the first of those. What are the current and future industry trends in remote areas of WA that you've identified as significant for Indigenous employment?

Miriam Forte 901:15:34)

What I found was that it was quite easy to find out what industries are growing and where the job opportunities are in various regions across WA.

That data is readily available from a number of sources. But the issue is that it's high level data, which is accurate for your cities, metropolitan areas, regional centres and the like. But when it comes to remote locations, that data is often no longer particularly accurate, so you need to add in other sources such as local council plans, local business strategic development plans, and then of course, really local level data, which is basically community consultation. Talking to people in communities, and researching highly localised opportunities such as what businesses are, you know, already existing in communities.

And one of the key findings from looking at this level of data is that when it comes to employment for remote Indigenous young people, some of them are interested in the jobs in the emerging industries, such as healthcare and social assistance, which is a growing industry in the Kimberley, but some of them are much more interested in jobs that have more of a cultural value.

Jobs in communities, such as caring for people, caring for country, caring for community, cultural roles. Jobs where they can be on their land, working in their communities and maintaining close links to family and country. And a lot of those jobs are volunteer roles at present, but there is a growing recognition from agencies like the National Indigenous Australians Agency and others.

But those jobs are actually really valuable and recognising that paying local people to do those roles is a great investment in community development. So we're starting to look at roles that are more along those lines to ensure that students have options of either going out of community or staying in community and doing roles right where they've grown up.

Steve Davis (01:17:30)

Now your research also explores both barriers and enablers of employment for these students. What are some of the key findings from this area of your research?

Miriam Forte (01:17:41)

I did a broad sweep of as many of the barriers and enablers I could find across the existing research and then combined that with the knowledge, experience and anecdotes from staff and students at our school.

And I found that there are a few different categories of barriers. One of them would be, like, your policy and policy barriers, a lot of government policy and programs that are just not necessarily suitable for remote communities. And another example might be your practical barriers, like, distance and transport to and from regional centres and you know, funding to sort of like pay for petrol or get into town for a job interview and that sort of thing.

And a couple of other categories like that, but what really piqued my interest was the category of cultural barriers because I think that that's something that is sort of overlooked in the existing research and plays a really significant role in the success or failure of employment programs.

I looked at things such as the barriers like cultural differences in the workplace, how people communicate. An example might be one that we see often is if students are sick or can't attend work that day, they don't necessarily have the communication skills to call their employer and say this is what's happening, or it might be for a cultural reason that they have to be away. But they may not have the ability to explain in depth why that cultural reason is so, so important you know, and it often is very important, it's a very strong cultural obligation. But learning how to explain that to an employer is difficult and there's a lot of miscommunication that happens in the workplace and that sort of thing.

But then there's also cultural barriers in the area of aspirations around work and work journey over a lifetime. They just have quite often a different picture of what a journey of employment looks like over a lifetime compared to a non-Indigenous person.

Steve Davis (01:20:01)

This actually raises the concept of some of the challenges faced by remote Indigenous graduates in securing stable employment. What are some of the effective strategies that have emerged from your research to address these?

Miriam Forte (01:20:14)

From what I've looked at in the research around effective strategies, especially the work of groups like the Cape York Institute and the case studies that are most successful in terms of employment engagement, they're not based on individuals, they're community wide. They involve whole families, whole communities and rather than tackling one barrier at a time through individual strategies, they look at the whole picture. They're community led and designed and then they bring in outside support and assistance when necessary to cover skill gaps or ideally, to train local people to cover skill gaps.

Because again, we're sort of working with deeply interconnected, interdependent communal orientated groups, not individuals with a Western worldview. So we have to think about employment strategy in communal ways and be led by communal and group outcomes, and led by communities themselves, not individual outcomes like we do in a sort of Western framework where employment support is provided to an individual.

I guess when it comes to graduates specifically and our graduates, there seems to be this unspoken expectation that these young people will obtain full time employment straight after schooling or go into full time training of some kind.  But that's not necessarily what all of them want.

So some of our young people have some very important cultural roles and cultural obligations as men and women in their home communities. Like very big responsibilities around caring for country, caring for people and cultural roles that are very important and don't necessarily allow for full time employment outside of community.

And so, some of the Cape York Institute research, I believe it was them, looked at how people tend to orbit around communities rather than leaving. They will step out for a little while to go and earn some money in a temporary job or a part-time role. And then that will be close by, or they'll fly back in for important cultural events and to meet their cultural obligations.

And so rather than having this concept of like expecting young people to move out of communities and get a job for economic gain there's more of a orbiting around communities.

Steve Davis (01:22:51)

Miriam, our previous guest, Anissa, talked a lot about co design. In what ways do you engage with remote Indigenous communities to ensure that solutions that are being developed are truly co-designed and culturally relevant?

Miriam Forte (01:23:09)

Yeah, so the school has many methods for engaging with remote communities. Wangatha CAPS recognises that community consultation is absolutely essential, and so we do regular community visits, we've always got staff going to communities with students when they fly home or picking them up for school.

We conduct regular parent surveys, community surveys, maintaining close relationships with community leaders, engaging whole families rather than just individual students. And also starting a student representative group at the school to run all of our ideas and plans through the students to get their feedback.

Constant feedback, basically, from students and families. And when it comes to the research that we're planning for a longitudinal study, that would be designed and led by an Indigenous researcher. That's something I would step down from. I'd not be leading that because I'm not Indigenous. And there's just something that comes from lived experience that non-Indigenous people don't have.
That would be definitely led by an Indigenous researcher.

Steve Davis (01:24:37)

I want to get to that longitudinal study in just a moment, but I can't go any further on Vocational Voices without asking what role RTOs can play in supporting the employment pathways that you're developing. Are there any specific partnerships or programs that you find particularly effective?

Miriam Forte (01:24:56)

Yeah, well we have been looking at partnering with employers directly to try and get some more direct pathways for students to go straight from school into employment. And we've also been looking a lot at examining cultural lens. So I'd say that is a really important thing for RTOs to do, is to learn about culture, especially about the culture of the communities that your students are coming from.
Learn about our own cultural lens and learn about their cultural lens and then look at ways that they interact. And be aware of our cultural lens when we're designing programs and goals and priorities in education and applying cultural theory to the design of that. And I guess always co creating resources and programs with local communities and never without consultation.

So I'd say, you know, from my perspective, one of the biggest things RTOs can do is learn about culture and be culturally aware in their practice. But partnerships with employers and partnerships with job services providers so that rather than releasing students back into communities once they're finished education, we're directly linking them with support services as well to provide the holistic support that they might need to move into employment.

Steve Davis (01:26:30)

I have mentioned, as you have, the longitudinal study that's being planned from 2025 to 2030. I'm curious, what are your expectations for tracking the employment pathways of these school leavers?

Miriam Forte (01:26:42)

Yeah, I'm very curious too. I've been doing the background research for this, but I won't be doing the study myself.

I guess our expectations are to find out some of the very local level factors that are affecting students’ ability to engage in employment, ability or willingness to engage in employment of various different kinds. I guess we'd be tracking employment engagement alongside wellbeing and health and all sorts of other factors that previous research shows affects their engagement, but looking for bits that have been missed as well.

Because there's just a lot that happens on a local level that we're not aware of. And we're looking for some of the keys that maybe have been missed before, in previous studies or in previous employment policy. Because, as you know, a lot of the closing gap outcomes around employment in remote areas have not been met. And that tells me that policy design in that area is missing some of the key factors.

So we're looking for that sort of thing because we want to see that gap closed on employment for the sake of young people's wellbeing. We know that young people in the Kimberley are particularly vulnerable and one of those factors is employment and, and vocation and having something meaningful to do with time and energy and we're looking for the missed factors and we're looking to improve their wellbeing and their whole life outcomes.

Steve Davis (01:28:29)

Wow. Fascinating. And look, just in closing, Miriam, how does your approach incorporate the cultural values and the expectations of remote Indigenous communities into the employment support structures?

Miriam Forte (01:28:42)

Firstly, I have to acknowledge that it's not really my approach, but something I've learnt from reading the work of other incredible researchers in the field, and especially from Indigenous scholars who walk in both worlds culturally. If I had time, I'd list them all.
To answer your question if you look at the history of employment support and employment programs for Australian First Peoples, you'll see a pattern of non-Indigenous people designing employment programs for Indigenous people and communities, which has never really worked for remote communities, because they are often operating on a vastly different set of values, worldviews, motivations, and the like.

And it's basically been a repeat of this terrible unsuitable policy sitting on top of communities, where policymakers design programs that are a poor cultural fit and wonder why they aren't working. And you know the reason they aren’t working is, in my opinion, because if you take the Western British colonialised approach to employment strategy, which is based in a individualist worldview and has been developed through the lens of what's called human capital theory, which assumes that people will put economic gain as a first priority.
If you take that sort of system and place it into a group of people who operate on a traditional Indigenous Collectivist worldview. You're going to find that it just doesn't operate as expected because the target group doesn't have the same set of values, goals, motivations, and aspirations as the program designers. And, this is why it's so important to design programs with communities, with communities, and ideally community led with community setting the goals and outcomes and strategies that they know will work using their deep knowledge of culture, place, people, and the unique conditions in each remote community.

Because they are all extremely unique and there's no one size fits all in the context of remote communities in Australia.

Steve Davis (01:30:41)

On that note, Miriam Forte, thank you so much for being part of Vocational Voices.

Miriam Forte 901:30:46)

Thanks, Steve. I've really enjoyed the opportunity to discuss the research.

Steve Davis (01:30:53)

Finally, in this episode of Vocational Voices, we're about to chat with Brett Woods, a research fellow at Victoria University's Institute of Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities. Brett's work explores transformative pedagogies in the construction trades to promote safety and inclusion for women, addressing deep seated gender inequalities within these male dominated fields.

Brett, welcome to Vocational Voices.

Brett Woods (01:31:21)

Thank you, Steve. It's a delight to have this conversation with you.

Steve Davis (01:31:24)

Let's start by describing the current landscape of gender inequality in the construction trades, and why it's become a focus of your research.

Brett Woods (01:31:33)

Steve, I think anyone listening to this podcast will know that this is a problem.

That we have gender injustice remains a central issue in the construction industry, but particularly also in our vocational education and training sector. And we can look at this through a number of different lenses. I like to look at it through a feminist lens and thinking about women's economic exclusion from the construction industry.

But we see that women continue to be underrepresented in traditionally male industries. Women have consistently comprised only two percent of all of our field based workers in the construction industry, and even when we have women employed in these settings, they're often in the lower paid, less secure roles.

And at the NCVER conference, we had the Commissioner for Jobs and Skills Australia talking about this through the lens of the skills shortage that we face. And in male dominated industries, like construction, we have a significant skills shortage. So we can view this through a gender justice lens, thinking about providing opportunities for women to participate in a highly paid sector, we can look at this through a lens of an economic kind of imperative to make sure that we have the right skills for Australia's future.

But we can also look at this through a safety lens because what we do know is that the construction industry is not a safe place for women and non-binary people. And that, in fact, the rates of sexual harassment and sexual assault and discrimination are pretty concerning and I think most people that have interacted in this sector would be equally concerned.

Where this research comes in is to think about, you know, this is an endemic problem. This has been a long sustained problem. What this research has been doing is thinking about understanding the context of construction apprentices training. So thinking about this at the VET and TAFE RTO level to think about what we could do to make this a place where women are included and safe.

Steve Davis (01:33:45)

I'm going to do something dangerous here because I know you love, I know you love going down a rabbit hole.

As you were talking before about the fact that, one lens of looking at this is the skill shortage lens. I'm reminded in my other parts of my job working with someone who's trying to get the agriculture industry to embrace women in tractors and having more roles in agriculture. Again, there are many ways of approaching it.

How would you feel if at the end of the day, it was purely the pragmatism of the skill shortage that got us to the end. Does the end justify the means, or would that still be an impoverished method to get to the end point that you're envisaging for us?

Brett Woods (01:34:38)

This is the difficult part when we're trying to generate significant change in this space. I think we've made the justice arguments, we've made the rights arguments. But what we need is the whole of industry. We need government. We need a real urgency here. My fear is you're entirely right. That perhaps it's an impoverished motivation. That hurts my heart a little bit, but I think the situation is so urgent that we need to speak the language that will get the resources and the mandate happening so that women are safe and included in this sector. But I think you're right. I think you've seen right through me there, Steve.

Steve Davis (01:35:21)

Well, as Leonard Cohen said, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in. Back to your research proper it uses gender transformative pedagogy. For our listeners, can you explain what this involves and how it differs from other approaches to gender inequality or gender equality?

Brett Woods (01:35:38)

So based on many people's wonderful contributions around the prevention of violence against women and the promotion of gender equality in the construction sector and beyond, what we know is that we cannot make these places safe and inclusive for women and non-binary folk just by running a couple of trainings. You know, the sort of, the risk management compliant approaches that many of our institutions or corporations take. Really what this needs is, we need to change the cultures and everyone has a part to play in those cultures.

And so a gender transformative approach is about ensuring that the way that all people perform, your gender, in those cultures, how we engage with one another, how we express ourselves, the kinds of ways that we interact with one another all need to change. But to do that, we have to be able to see that and to identify that.

And one of the things that we saw in our research is that these hyper aggressive masculine cultures, these sort of behaviours have become so normalised. One of the pieces that really struck me is how normalised it is for women to be othered in these spaces that, you know, our research participants just weren't able to  even see things that were so blatantly obvious.

One of the examples is we had some women apprentices and women teachers telling us that when they walk out onto the floor, when they're in the workshops, all they're confronted with everywhere, on walls, on pieces of wood, everywhere are drawings of penises.
And when we confronted men apprentices and teachers about this, one of the apprentices had called this, they said their experience of walking in was, they were surrounded by a, direct quote, a portfolio of penises.

And so we asked the men apprentices and men teachers, you know, like, Wow, what do you think that experience would be like if you were a woman walking into that space? Doesn't that tell you that this is not a space for them? And until we were exploring those, those participants had told us they'd never even noticed.

It's just so normalised that these are spaces for men that they can't see some of these things.

Steve Davis (01:38:00)

Brett, it's 2024 for crying out loud.

Brett Woods (01:38:04)

Steve, it is! It is indeed. We'll get to some good news, right? So I think that's just an example of, for me that was really indicative of the ways that the cultures of industry where women are othered, or from an academic lens, I would say women are oppressed, they're replicated in our training settings. So much so that men teachers and men apprentices cannot see or can't question, they can't explore, they can't see the way that women might be oppressed in those settings.

However, there were other things, particularly that men apprentices could see. So they were able to identify that the manner in which, there was sort of a culture of aggression towards one another, they could see that that was harmful and they could see that that was harmful not just to women who might be in those spaces, but many of our men apprentices also identified that these were cultures and settings that they themselves didn't feel comfortable with. That they themselves had to navigate. So really what's I guess positive, and again, we're playing that kind of impoverished method game, one of the key findings is these are spaces that are not safe for anyone.
So we should have done something about it when it wasn't safe for women, but hopefully now, this is not safe for anybody, the bullying, the hyper aggression, those sort of behaviours some of the men apprentices were absolutely able to name as problematic.

Steve Davis (01:39:40)

It's interesting how the introduction of the other was able to bring this on the agenda and allow it to be seen and talked about.

Brett Woods 901:39:49)

That's another rabbit hole. One of the real challenges in this space is that because this has been such an endemic problem, you know.  I'm fairly new to this space, having come from working in primarily in educational settings around gender justice, promotion of gender equality, coming over to construction, I've been really grateful to the generosity of people who've been doing wonderful work in this space for 10, 20, 30 years, right? So this is a long standing problem.

And I think part of the challenge that we face now is that it seems that there's not a hope for how we fix this. You know, one of the things that fascinated me when we spoke to people in industry, or we spoke to women apprentices, or women teachers, or even men apprentices and men teachers, is that they often explained what was going on and women's experiences in these settings as being based on some sort of generational divide.

The behaviours, often people can't see these as cultures and structures that are built into our systems and the ways that we work. But that these behaviours were really just reflective of people from a previous generation who've been off the tools for 30 years and they've been teaching and, essentially the only picture of hope that was offered really was we've just got to wait for them to die out.

It's really the piece. I mean, that's really problematic because we know that, in fact, our entire apprenticeship model means that apprentices coming through now are being enculturated into the behaviours, the attitudes, the cultures that are being upheld by these people, perhaps. I mean, I also find it ageist, which is an interesting, you know, again, sort of pondering and thinking that through.
But I think what we often do, and we see this across the board when we're thinking about the experience of women or women's oppression, is that we identify this as being the result of one or two rogue individuals. What we don't do very well is to identify that all of us are complicit, we're all participating in this, and in fact it's not one or two people's behaviours or attitudes, but it's the structures in our institutions that need to change.

So that's what we want to be focusing on in the VET sector, and we think there's a real opportunity to implement some transformative change that shifts cultures in TAFEs, so that women are safe and included in those spaces, and we know that that will create a better culture for all people that are in that space.

Steve Davis (01:42:25)

I want to look at some of the strategies being talked about in that context. However, just before we get there, to get this information, talking to men, women, and non binary individuals in the trades, that doesn't sound like it was a straightforward pathway. What are the challenges you had to overcome in getting this really grassroots, on the ground input?

Brett Woods (01:42:47)

I think that the principle challenge that we faced. I'm in higher ed, you know, I'm a university person and that's sort of that perception of coming into a TAFE, you know, there's this real sort of perceived divide. And also not being someone from a construction background.
So I think that was a core challenge in terms of how do we build trust? How do we build relationships? But I'm so grateful for people who were really generous in helping us understand some of those complexities and helping us understand actually how this is really similar to many places and play out. I think one of the things that really helped was my background is in law and sort of being around law firms and law schools.

And so to be able to talk to people and say, actually, we're not here to be anti-construction and we're here to explore and understand the experiences and the problems, but actually everything you're telling me, I've seen elsewhere too. So I think there's sort of a protective piece around, if and there's a protective piece around construction sector, so overcoming that.

I think, of course, anytime you're doing this work, there are further challenges. In these settings, because there are so few women, what we're asking of the few women that are there is quite a lot, right? There's a burden that's placed on them to participate and to share their experiences, and we want to really honour that.

I was blown away, not only by their willingness to share their experiences and help us think about what are the things that we could do to create change here. But I was also blown away by the things that they're already doing to try and create spaces where future women can come through in ways that they're championed and supported and that women can be retained.

What was fascinating to me. Steve I'm going on a tangent, but you know, this is delightful. We're having a great time. Sorry. What was fascinating to me is that all of the women apprentices that we spoke to had all come to their apprenticeships, had come to the trades from a previous career. So none of the women apprentices had come directly from school.

All of them had gone off and done other things and these were competent, capable, intelligent women. We had women who'd been nurses, we'd had women who'd gotten halfway through law degrees at uni and said, “What am I doing here?” you know, one participant said, “I'm creative. I want to use my hands. What am I doing sitting in these lecture halls?”

They'd all come from doing something else, made a really intentional decision, and they shared that you know, that was something that helped sustain them. So  the demographic of women apprentices coming through is quite different to the demographic of men apprentices coming through. But also what we heard from them though is that they felt a real expectation that they had to prove their right to be there, their role.

They felt like they had to work harder than everybody else, to not just tick off everything we needed to, but to actually excel to prove that they should belong. It's a huge burden to carry and it's a huge burden on women teachers because women teachers are often the ones who are asked to take on a whole lot of unpaid labour to essentially provide pastoral care to other women apprentices, whether they're in their trade or not. They themselves have to have to navigate these cultures. They have to navigate the same stereotypes, the same othering.

And just to circle back to the challenges, I think the other challenge in talking with men, I think generally about women's oppression in these spaces, is that they just can't see it. You can't see what you don't know. And so having to sort of adopt language that didn't result in backlash, didn't result in sort of those defensive responses that are common across any kind of violence prevention work. We see this all the time. Building sort of a shared language and a shared commitment.

That takes time. But we had many generous people who are really committed to changing this space. I'm really grateful.

Steve Davis (01:46:59)

It's like the blessing and the curse of the human brain being able to acclimatise to its environment. This is the curse side of it and just accepting and not being able to see what is there.

But I'm anxious now to look at some effective strategies that TAFE and other vocational training organisations might be able to implement to improve women's safety and inclusion. What are some you can put before us?

Brett Woods (01:47:25)

I think for me the most urgent message that we need to be continuing to communicate is that we can't just add women and stir.
So we can't just keep doing these sort of ideas where we have these special recruitment sessions for women or those sort of promotional pieces. My fear is that unless we are also doing something to shift cultures, all we're doing is we're sending women into spaces that are not safe.

So we need to be shifting the cultures in both in industry and also in our TAFEs so that we can invite more women in. That more women can be retained, you know, attracted in and then retained into the sector, but we need to do some really good cultural work. I think that there's probably two pieces for me out of this research that I think we need to add to what else is happening.

Again, this requires urgent sort of whole of sector. We need governments on board. We need employers on board. Unions are already on board. We need to get the TAFEs on board as well. Two sort of key pieces that might contribute to that. One is thinking about how we could do professional development for TAFE teachers.

And so how do we create spaces that we can help TAFE teachers in their roles to be able to see the ways that women might be disadvantaged or othered in their settings? How do we shift the language that's used in these spaces? How do we shift the ways that behaviours are challenged and counted?

How do we shift what's normalised as respectful ways of everyone communicating with one another? What we heard from some TAFE teachers was a real hunger to be able to do this, but they wanted the skills to be able to do that. So thinking about how we can build this kind of in, across all of our TAFEs.

The other piece that we were exploring was thinking about how we can embed some of this work in the existing training packages. And of course, our training packages are crowded. It's difficult, but each of the units across the trades, each of the training packages, will have a sort of, a working safely in plumbing or working safely in carpentry.

And so, one of the opportunities that really excites us is that when we're talking about the construction industry, we already have a whole safety lens, a whole safety language, frameworks that exist, that we think we could tap into. If we can help people understand and see that women's inclusion and safe cultures is a safety issue in the same way that carrying heavy loads is a safety issue.
Then there's such an opportunity in the construction sector to start embedding this kind of work in those spaces and giving particularly men apprentices, the skills to work with women safely in the future. I was blown away. The majority of the men apprentices who we spoke to told us they'd never worked with a woman.

They'd never worked with a woman on site. You know, they'd never had a woman in a classroom. They were also seeking help. Like, yeah, they were on board but wanted to know how they could do that in really helpful ways. I think looking for direction.
I think the other piece that's really, that we could also really be thinking about is the role of careers counsellors in schools in terms of thinking about pathways into VET. Again, none of the women apprentices or teachers that we spoke to had been encouraged by careers counsellors at schools to even consider a trade. All of them had told us that they'd been encouraged to go to university. So thinking about how we can shift the way that careers counsellors might, particularly with women, think about the alternatives, and think about where they may be really useful VET outcomes for women where it might align wonderfully.

How do we start shifting some of those narratives? There are some phenomenal organisations usually led by women who are in construction, who are doing great work to try and promote visibility. To try and create that visibility so that women can see that there are other women who are on the tools.

What we need to do alongside that, though, is shift the cultures so that when women do come in, it's safe for them and that they can excel.

Steve Davis (01:51:54)

In closing, teachers, training managers, they play an important role in fostering a more inclusive and safe learning environment. What is your message to them? What's your message to the people who guide and support them?

Brett Woods (01:52:10)

What was really clear to us is that teachers play such a core role in supporting apprentices to be successful. And to creating the cultures and the learning environments in which apprentices are developing their skills. We also heard that teachers wanted everyone to feel safe and to be successful but there's not often time for professional development or building skills.

For TAFE teachers, there's a huge opportunity and invitation, I think, to be seeking out training opportunities to help us all think about the ways that this is embedded in the way that we teach, in the way that we induct students, in the way that we manage our classroom settings. All of those pieces are creating opportunities to investigate those, to examine them, understand different perspectives, and really think intentionally about how we're doing that so that it's a space that's inclusive.

But I also want to name that this isn't on the role of teachers alone. I think that's an opportunity. They're so central to the experience. But this is really about managers and institutions taking a whole of institution approach of saying this is something we're taking seriously.
We're having strong leadership who prioritise this, who don't just sort of handball this down to a teacher who's already overwhelmed and has so many things on. So it's about our TAFE institution saying we're going to do this work. We're not just going to do the kind of compliance, risk mitigation work.

We're not just going to deliver a couple of trainings and tick that off, but to collectively say we're on a learning adventure together. We want this to be a place where everyone is safe, our teachers, our apprentices. We want everyone to be here in a way that they can be included and successful. So it's a journey that everyoned on, but I think the opportunity is for teachers that could have the biggest sort of bang for our buck, but I don't want to put the responsibility on teachers.

Steve Davis (01:54:20)

On that note Brett Woods, thank you so much for being part of Vocational Voices.

Brett Woods (01:54:25)

Steve, it's been an absolute delight.

Steve Davis (01:54:27)

Vocational Voices is produced by NCVER on behalf of the Australian Government and State and Territory Governments. With funding provided through the Australian Government Department of Employment and Workplace Relations.

For further information, please visit ncver.edu.au