|
Australia's vocational education and training (VET) system is
characterised as being industry-led, with the content of courses based
on the skills and competences specified by industry. VET courses have
been packaged up into industry training packages developed by industry,
with the aim of meeting the needs of an industry or a group of industries.
This approach sits well with a view of VET as being about acquiring
specific skills to be used in work. By contrast, we think of school
and university education as having broader purposes, and often being
ends in their own right. While university graduates tend to do well
in the labour market, many have degrees which are generic in nature.
Is
vocational education and training as narrowly vocational as the standard
description seems to imply? Is VET vocational? The relevance of training
to the occupations of vocational education and training graduates
aims to throw some light on this question through a comparison of what
VET
graduates study and the jobs they get. To do this it uses data from
the Student Outcomes Survey. For those graduates whose destination
occupation differs from the intended occupation (obtained by assigning
an occupation
to each course), the study investigates the skill level of the destination
occupation and the extent to which the graduates view their training
as being relevant. The idea is to distinguish between training that
is generic (in the sense of being relevant to a wide range of destination
occupations) and training that is wasted. (Physicists driving taxis
is the popular example.)
Key messages
- The match between what people study and the jobs they get is high
for the technicians and trades group of occupations, but relatively
low for most other courses.
- Most of the mismatch between intended
and destination occupations
reflects the generic aspect of vocational education and
training. Graduates mostly report their training as relevant to
their
job, despite not ending
up in the 'matched' occupation.
- There is some skills wastage,
however, with graduates reporting that their training is not relevant
to the occupation in which
they find
themselves. The two courses with the highest skills wastage
are those for arts and media professionals and sports
and personal service workers.
The study has three main implications.
First, in thinking about the role of the VET system in addressing
the needs
of the labour market,
it needs to be kept in mind that, with the exception
of the trades, there is no neat match between courses and the occupations
in which most
people end up working. Second, those developing training
packages
need to be aware that many graduates will not work in
their 'intended' occupation.
Finally, potential students need to be realistic about
the likely occupation that a particular course will lead to.
Tom Karmel
Managing Director, NCVER
|