The unqualified failings of the Australian qualifications framework 

PhillipsKPA filed a research paper on the international context for the review of the Australian Qualifications Framework on Anzac Day, but the voc ed feds have only now got around to releasing it – probably because it took them that long to read the mass of detail on world-practise.

Hopefully they read the best-bits very slowly which are the scathing indictment (at least by PhillipsKPA’s understated standards) of the voced establishment’s inertia.

“Virtually all of the substantive comments made in submissions to the 2009 – 2011 AQF review are still at the forefront of respondents’ concerns in 2018. … The 2013 revised draft of the AQF, while addressing some concerns, does not appear to have dealt with the major issues that continue to create problems in interpretation and implementation of the AQF.  Further issues were also identified in the light of developments since 2012.”

And if there is one bit that officials should establish a working party to consider highlighting it is PhillipsKPA’s take on what the market wants;

Flexible and multi-directional pathways rather than simple hierarchical ones (as the AQF is perceived to be) are regarded as better suited to lifelong learning and rapid retraining to meet new technological challenges. Internationally, qualifications frameworks are being designed with a view to encouraging cross-sectoral collaboration and the engagement of employers and businesses in both designing and delivering ‘on-time’ and ‘in place’ learning experiences that can be recognised formally as part of a qualification.  While the AQF allows this possibility, the complexity of the regulatory and sectoral contexts within which it sits is perceived by many stakeholders to impede this level of responsiveness.”

Australian vocational education is in a mountain of a mess – and the mountain is Everest.


to get daily updates on what's happening in the world of Australian Higher Education