Vocational education and training in Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany

• In Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany, training policies are increasingly based on similar general principles. However, in the main, implementation of these principles remains specific to each country.

• Arrangements in Australia stand out in terms of ease of movement and flexibility between the vocational and higher education sectors. Australia provides a good example of a lifelong learning system in action. However, international practices in relation to harmonisation and credit transfer frameworks have important lessons for improving portability of qualifications across Australian state and territory jurisdictions.

• Apprenticeship pathways associated with formal contracts of training and industry involvement in the development, delivery and assessment of competence continue to be key features for training, especially in the traditional trades in all three countries, and for other recognised occupations in Germany. In Australia and the United Kingdom they are increasingly being applied to occupations with no formal history of apprenticeship.

• Moves to establish consistency between countries and even states to facilitate student mobility and credit transfer may not require wholesale re-alignment of country and state-specific approaches to the provision of education and training. The challenge is to develop relationships between education and training systems so that they have clear and open communication. In this way, qualifications and credits can be more easily transported across education and training sectors and within and between education and training systems.

This study is concerned with education and training in Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom. It compares vocational education and training (VET) in the three countries, with a view to providing information for consideration by policy-makers.

The initial focus on industry involvement in vocational education and training (VET) highlights how all three systems, which are dedicated to improving relevant workforce skills and providing industry-relevant training for young people, have looked to increasing the involvement of industry in training. We also highlight the importance of apprenticeship pathways, especially for Australia and Germany, and note a focus on restoring such pathways in the United Kingdom. The introduction of assessment-only pathways to qualifications, observed in the United Kingdom and Australia, and the importance of institutional pathways to vocational qualifications are also explored. Subsequently, we look at the similarities observed in approaches to quality assurance and at the effect of European harmonisation (such that systems across countries are compatible) policies on the transfer of students and credits between institutions.

In comparing these countries, we argue that there are more similarities than there are differences. The convergence of approach is, however, much more evident in the conceptual underpinnings of training policies, rather than in their practical implementation. Nevertheless, moves to 'harmonise' European education and training may also mean increasing convergence of practice.

Industry skills councils in Australia, sector skills councils in the United Kingdom, and unions and chambers of commerce and industry (also known as the social partners) in Germany represent the formal voice of industry in post-compulsory training. Industry is responsible for identifying national competency standards in Australia, occupational standards in the United Kingdom and occupational profiles in Germany. These standards then establish guidance for the delivery of training and the awarding of qualifications. A particularly Australian approach, however, is the introduction of national industry or enterprise-specific training packages. Devised to allow employers to have more choice, these training packages enable the individual customisation of training programs. Industry in all of the countries being examined is also responsible for providing labour market intelligence to government. The extent to which this practice has been successful has still to be evaluated.

The testing of a candidate's knowledge, understanding and performance of workplace competence through practical observation and provision of evidence of prior learning is another particular feature of the United Kingdom and Australian systems. This allows existing workers and other individuals to acquire national vocational qualifications without having to attend a specific training course. The value of these pathways will depend on the extent to which they are respected by employers through higher levels of pay, regard and employment. Assessment-only pathways to qualifications are less evident in Germany.

The concept of a contract-based apprenticeship is a key strategy for developing occupational skills in Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom. However, it is far more commonly adopted in Germany where two in three students who move into further education will move into Germany's dual system.

Highly regulated by government and industry, such pathways are an important route to skilled work. Training is provided at the workplace through production activities and supplemented by regular attendance in off-the-job training delivered by registered training organisations in Australia, part-time vocational schools in Germany, and further education colleges and learning providers in the United Kingdom. Purely on-the-job arrangements have also been adopted in Australia. Arrangements are already in place in Australia and are soon to be implemented in the United Kingdom which enable young people to commence apprenticeships while completing their secondary education. In Germany highly structured training pathways to occupations are being modernised to enable training to be customised to changing industry needs. Although traditional approaches to training need to adjust to new technologies, shifts in the labour market and occupational profiles, the quest for broadening flexibility may also have to be evaluated in terms of its effectiveness in developing expertise. A particular feature of the German system is the provision of general education to students at the same time as occupation-specific training. All three countries have a focus on the development of employability skills.

The three countries examined are constantly looking to improve their stock of occupational skills through these apprenticeship pathways, and all are heavily dependent on employers volunteering to shoulder their part of the responsibility for increasing national skill stocks. In Germany the implementation of a training pact between employers and government has had some preliminary success in terms of increasing the number of training places on offer in 2004. However, this may also be explained by a desire among employers to avoid the proposed implementation of a training levy. In England a policy of entitlements attached to a modern apprenticeship for 16- and 17-yearolds who satisfy certain eligibility requirements has recently been introduced. However, all three countries continue to experience skill shortages, especially in the traditional trades. One reason for these shortages may have more related to what employers are prepared to pay for these skills (especially traditional trade skills), than the motivation of individuals to enter the trades.

Although there has been some talk of making the duration of training contracts more flexible, the concept of an absolute time that must be served continues to be utilised in Australia and Germany. Reforms of the modern apprenticeship system in the United Kingdom have introduced training contracts not associated with a predetermined duration.

Non-apprenticeship vocational pathways represent another route to accredited vocational qualifications and employment in Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom. In Australia these pathways have also been made available to secondary school students as they complete their secondary education. However, there continue to be concerns related to the rigour of these secondary school offerings and their parity with academic subjects.

It is clear that Australians are engaged in further education and training throughout their lifetimes to a greater extent than their German and United Kingdom counterparts. This is especially facilitated by flexible movement through the pathways across secondary, vocational and higher education sectors.

Quality assurance processes and frameworks are adopted in different ways across the different educational sectors and countries under review. However, the principles are similar. Standards have been established for the accreditation of agencies and providers, and the measuring and monitoring of performance against these standards by independent review and through self-assessment. Requiring institutions to be accountable for the quality of the outcomes continues to drive the quality assurance agenda. Nevertheless, a system of self-assessment combined with an inspectorate model of assuring the quality of teaching and learning is mainly observed in the United Kingdom and is being investigated in Germany.

There is a general move across vocational sectors in all three countries to ensure that students obtain adequate recognition for accredited training completed at an earlier time. This helps individuals to transport qualifications and credits across state and national borders. The challenge is to ensure that providers recognise suggested frameworks and give appropriate recognition.

A convergence of principles, and sometimes practice, is observed across Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany. However, arrangements in Australia tend to stand out in terms of ease of movement and flexibility between the vocational and higher education sectors. Australia provides a good example of a lifelong learning system in action.

However, international practices in relation to harmonisation and credit transfer frameworks have important lessons for improving portability of qualifications across Australian state and territory jurisdictions. European strategies like the certificate supplement, which describes the nature and content of studies undertaken and attached to diplomas and certificates, may also help to improve the transparency of training package qualifications and make it easier for employers, as well as universities, to understand the nature of the learning associated with the qualifications.

Although the flexibility associated with training packages can help employers to customise training to enterprise needs, there is also value in examining the frameworks and regulations associated with the German and United Kingdom systems in providing information to guide the structuring of programs of training. There are also benefits to be achieved by considering the recent approach to increasing apprenticeship places through increased collaboration with employers.

International convergence of education and training practices and principles has benefits for individuals and corporations hoping to transport skills, knowledge and qualifications to other states and countries. Although the concept of a European brand has been accepted in Germany and the United Kingdom, forces attempting to protect culturally specific approaches to delivery and certification continue to be influential in Germany.