QUALIFICATION FRAMEWORK SHAKE-UP

The Government has released a proposal that would see the country’s 16 major polytechnics fall under the remit of a single national body – the ‘NZ Institute of Skills and Technology’ – rather than the 11 industry training organisations (ITOs) that currently oversee vocational education

The proposal — currently in its consultation period — suggests that ITOs be replaced with “industry skill bodies” led by employers, with the responsibility of checking that trainees are appropriately skilled. ITOs would no longer manage training.

One of the government’s aims is to provide polytechnics with an incentive to place students into work-based training and apprenticeships as soon as they are ready. The proposal states that the funding system should support more work-integrated learning that resembles apprenticeships.

Education providers will be tasked with the challenge of taking on the responsibility for approximately 140,000 trainees and apprentices, having to support work-based learners.

ITOS REACTION

Soon after the proposal was announced, BCITO chief executive Warwick Quinn acknowledged the suggested changes were “significant” and urged caution.

“There is no doubt that the Vocational Education Training System (VET) has experienced issues for a long time, which need addressing. We also believe there are some parts which are working very well. The key is to protect what works, while updating the areas which are failing to deliver,” said Quinn.

“We must be careful to not throw the baby out with the bathwater, and ensure we protect what is working well, particularly for high-need sectors such as building and construction.

“We believe there is an opportunity to reposition vocational-based qualifications as high-quality career pathways,” said Quinn.

Fi Kingsford, chief executive of Competenz, another prominent ITO, expressed concern in response to the proposal.

“In a time of critical skill shortages, the last thing we want is a reform that risks undermining workplace training and apprenticeship programmes.

“The role of ITOs is crucial and, with our direct line to thousands of employers, we understand the demand for trades better than anyone else,” said Kingsford.

SECTOR REJECTS REFORMS AT SUMMIT

On 5 March, BCITO held a sector summit to discuss the proposal with other stakeholders. It was revealed that two-thirds of attendees did not support the Government’s proposed reforms.

Quinn said attendees “made it clear that they value sector control of both the standard setting and delivery of training. While they appreciate the greater control of the standard setting under the proposals, they are concerned that control of the delivery is at risk.

“They value the relationships they have with their ITOs. Under the current system, our field staff build strong relationships with every individual employer and apprentice. This allows us to customise their learning.

“In construction, most people learn from mentoring and support. They don’t learn from books. This focus needs to be retained in any reforms, and the sector is sceptical how this will work in the new system.”

Quinn also said there was a shared concern that smaller trades will fall through the cracks of a single, large institution. The sector was also worried that advocacy work carried out by ITOs will be lost, causing a struggle to attract people into the sector.

“If we get this wrong, we risk losing a cohort of employers, and by default apprentices, which would set the sector back years. We cannot let this happen at a time when the sector faces significant skills shortages.

“The overarching question we will be asking ministers is how they can mitigate the risks identified in any sector reform,” says Quinn. “This is too important to get wrong.”

A recent finding by a global quantity surveyor showed that the New Zealand construction sector needs an extra 57,600 people to fuel demand over the next few years. The study also showed that only around 13,000 people are entering the industry annually, and within a workforce that is ageing rapidly.

WHY THE CHANGE?

The Cabinet paper detailing the proposal referred to unclear and overlapping organisational roles being identified as issues in the current scheme, and that education providers and ITOs were not sufficiently working with each other to deliver what trainees and employers need.

It also stated that the lack of a single vocational education funding system left providers and ITOs to compete against one another rather than collaborate, which “undermines efforts to deliver the mix of on-and off-job training most learners need”.