Work in Progress
Vocational education and training providers in competitive training markets
Summary
- Item:
- 10370
- Title:
- Vocational education and training providers in competitive training markets
- Type:
- Managed research project
- Project no:
- NR6006
- Status:
- Finished
- Date commenced:
- 31 May 2006
- Contact:
- Fran Ferrier
- phone: +61 3 9905 2808
- email: fran.ferrier@education.monash.edu.au
Purpose
This study aims to establish:
* The extent to which thin markets are an issue in VET and successful ways of addressing them;
* The main ways in which fee-for-service delivery is provided alongside and in combination with publicly supported training and the consequences of these arrangements; and
* Sources and arrangements for the funding of training provider R&D activity, including the diversion of funding from training delivery.
Approach
Interviews and Case Studies
Research questions
What are the advantages and disadvantages of current VET funding models and what issues should be considered in reforming these arrangements in relation to:
1. THIN MARKETS
(a) What types of thin markets exist e.g. industry/occupational, geographical?
(b) What are the reasons for the existence of thin markets?
(c) What criteria do states and territory training agencies use to identify thin markets and for what purposes?
(d) What constraints do states face in dealing with thin markets?
(e) To what extent are the needs of rural or remote Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander communities considered by these agencies in identifying thin markets? What are the outcomes?
(f) What ways of dealing with thin markets appear most successful?
2. MIXING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS
(a) What are the main types and areas of fee-for service activities?
(b) Who are the main clients (individual and industry)?
(c) How are decisions made on fee levels?
(d) For what purposes are fee for service and public funding combined?
(e) To what extent is industry/enterprise own-purpose training provided to complement fee-for service training?
(f) What is the degree of subsidization in particular arrangements? Which clients, students and providers benefit from these arrangements and in what ways? Which are disadvantaged by these arrangements and how might this disadvantage be addressed in new funding models?
(g) What guidelines or policies are needed?
3. R&D
(a) What forms of R&D take place in the VET sector?
(b) What are the aims and objectives?
(c) What outcomes are sought eg for VET staff development, course development, learning resources?
(d) To what extent are VET providers engaged in R&D activity?
(e) How are these activities funded?
(f) What are the consequences for other VET activities of this funding?
(g) What is the balance between internal and external funding?
(h) What arrangements must be met for the receipt of this funding e.g. training delivery, other types of activities?
(i) To what extent does provider engagement in R&D involve partnerships with other organizations and how do these affect funding arrangements?
(j) What other forms might R&D take?
Methodology
The literature review will provide a succinct overview on thin markets, public private funding mixes, and R&D. It will identify: how thin markets are defined within VET policies and the challenges they create for policy makers and providers; the findings of previous studies of provider funding that have explored the mixes of public and private funding; and policies and funding for R&D within the VET system and the types of activities they support.
For each research question the research will be conducted in two stages:
i. The first stage will be structured interviews with state training authorities, DEST and major stakeholders, especially TDA and ACPET.
ii. The second stage will involve 11 case studies and interviews with selected providers. Case studies will primarily document provider experience in thin markets and public-private funding arrangements; but will also explore their engagement in R&D activities and associated funding arrangements.
Case study providers will include public and private providers; providers of different sizes; providers from both metropolitan and regional locations, and providers in 4 states: Victoria (3), Western Australia (2), New SouthWales (3) and Queensland (3)
In addition, further interviews will be conducted with representatives of five providers which are identified as having established R&D profiles. Interviews will explore funding sources and the types of activities they support.
Organisations
The Centre for the Economics of Education and Training (CEET) is a joint venture of Monash University - Faculty of Education and Faculty of Business and Economics - and the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). CEET reports to an Advisory Board comprising members of Monash University and ACER. It also seeks advice from a Vocational Education and Training (VET) Advisory Committee. CEET has undertaken research and dissemination activities for a range of bodies on the economy, education and training. The work is mainly in Australia but includes international studies. Further information can be viewed on the Monash University website www.education.monash.edu.au
Dumbrell Consulting Pty Ltd, established in February 1998, is a research consultancy specialising in the area of vocational education, training and the labour market. The principal of the company is Tom Dumbrell. Tom had 28 years' experience in Commonwealth and State government before establishing his consultancy. During this time Tom worked as a labour market analyst and policy adviser in the areas of employment and vocational education and training. In recent years the consultancy has undertaken a range of research and policy advisory projects in Australia, China, the Philippines and the Solomon Islands.
