Changing work: Changing roles for vocational education and training teachers and trainers

In light of the many changes that have occurred in the Australian vocational education and training (VET) system over the last decade or more, this study set out to gain insights into the ways in which these changes have influenced the construction of VET practitioners' identity at work. The study undertook a series of interviews with 28 VET practitioners working in a variety of sites, including technical and further education (TAFE), adult and community education (ACE), private colleges, industry and schools, and analysed the ways in which they constructed their roles at work.

Research questions

This research aims to find answers to the following key questions.

• How do different groups of VET practitioners conceptualise their role in vocational education and training?
• What site-specific cultural norms influence the construction of these roles?
• Are there shared norms, values and modes of conduct common to all groups of VET practitioners?
• What site-specific factors hinder the creation of a common culture shared by VET practitioners?

Methodology

The methodology used in this research consists of an analysis of selected literature relating to VET system change and what this literature says about the changing nature of VET work. It also draws on a wider body of literature relating to economic reform and labour market change. This initial analysis provides the context for subsequent empirical data analysis.

The second phase of the research involves the collection and analysis of interview data from 28 VET practitioners working in a range of VET sites throughout Australia.

The major themes that emerged from this analysis included:

• talk of change
• commercialisation
• administrative work
• educational identity
• industry identity

The results of this analysis were also used to produce a short career biography of each participant. The data were then used to inform the major research questions posed by this study; in particular, it was used to identify the points of commonality and difference between VET practitioners working in different sites of practice. It also indicated the tensions that surround contemporary practice in vocational education and training, specifically attempting to identify the ways in which cultural differences in the various sites where VET practitioners work influences their understanding of their role in education and training.

However, it should be acknowledged that the comments of 28 practitioners cannot be extrapolated to make generalisations about the entire vocational education and training workforce. This small number of respondents is obviously a limitation of the study.

Major findings

The interviews reveal working lives that are highly varied, with the vast majority of respondents experiencing two or more career changes. The interviews also suggest that the most common entry into vocational education and training is through part-time teaching in TAFE.

The competitive VET market has invoked new roles for these VET practitioners that are not only additional to the traditional 'teaching' role but are also substantially different in terms of focus, purpose and practice. Moreover, examples of these new roles can be found in all of the sites investigated in this research. The competitive market has also encouraged the emergence of new VET practitioners who operate as VET consultants and who earn their living by entering into commercial contracts with particular organisations and enterprises.

Public sector practitioners involved in commercially focussed activities speak of having to negotiate their way through often contradictory structures and modes of practice inherent in public sector operations. At the same time, their colleagues who are less involved in commercial VET activities are confronted with new business discourses which contradict their understanding of vocational education and training as both a broad educational activity and a public good.

'Teaching' remains significant in the working life of many of the VET practitioners interviewed across these contemporary VET sites. Many public sector VET practitioners continue to use educational discourses. They speak of 'teachers', 'students' and 'classrooms'. They celebrate the personal, social and intellectual development of learners. They emphasise broad educational outcomes as well as more specific academic and vocational outcomes and continue to speak of issues of access, equity and social responsibility.

This does not imply that the private VET sector practitioners interviewed are devoid of these characteristics, rather practitioners in these sites construct them differently using the discourses of business rather than the discourses of 'public good'. These educational communities speak of increasing 'customer satisfaction' and to 'add-value' to the educational experience of 'clients'. Moreover, the 'outcomes' of this engagement are constructed more in terms of 'individual advancement' than 'social good'.

The educational identity of VET practitioners remains strong for the majority of respondents involved in this study. This may partly be explained by their professional training; it may be because most of the VET sites investigated are socially configured as educational institutions; it may be because most of these practitioners 'talk' of deriving great professional satisfaction from their interactions with learners in the learning process. Either way, this study provides evidence that the majority of VET practitioners, irrespective of site, share a view of their work that places great importance on the teachinglearning relationship and the educational norms, values and modes of conduct that underpin this relationship.