(Written by the owner of this blog)
INTRODUCTION
Providing a world-class education by having a knowledge-individual in a workforce is seen as an important ingredient in achieving the knowledge-based economy (KBE) (Gonzci, 1996; Wood, 2003 is cited Becker). This is the reason why the new economic agenda, known as economic rationalism injected to higher education system a market style environment with culture of enterprise and excellence (Chappel, 1998 is cited Pusey & Marginson; Taylor, 1999; Wood, 2003).
According to Wheelahan (2007) because of this pressure, Competency-based training (CBT) is incorporated to vocational education and training (VET) in 1980s and 1990s with a mission to produce an economic functioning individual through practical learning in a real-life context. In a competency-based training, a competent performance is measured by a specific skills and outcome (Cunningham, n.d.).
The objective of this paper is to reflect the writer’s experience undertaking VET course under the CBT approach. She finds VET fall short in providing her useful knowledge to survive this contemporary complex world. After spending money, time and effort she is still part of the 52 percent VET graduates who do not actively participate in Australia’s economic activity because they are either unemployed, underemployed or outside the paid workforce (NCEVR, 2010).
Because of this, the writer argues that CBT is ineffective approach in producing a knowledge-individual for a knowledge-nation. This assumption can be attributed to the atomistic and mediocre nature of CBT that leads to its incongruity to the very nature of KBE.
The first part of this paper will discuss CBT as an atomistic approach to learning. The second part will tackle the mediocre nature of CBT. Then the third part will tackle the contradictions between CBT and KBE. And finally, this essay will analyse how the University of Wollongong’s Faculty of Education might respond effectively to this challenges.
Competency-based training is atomistic
According to Gonczi (1996), presenting knowledge in a practical approach using key competencies is a deconstruction of the reality within the “real world” (Gonczi, 1996). CBT’s mission to offer learning in a “real-world” context is no doubt a good intention. But it doesn’t reflect the reality because the reality is that the “real world” is a “complex world” requiring intricate skills.
This is in accordance with Cornford (1995) analysis, saying that CBT is lacking in learning theory and background literature. Wheelahan and Gavin (2005 is cited Bhaskar 1998) supported this claim stating that:
This is a very fragmented, atomistic and instrumental view of knowledge… Knowledge is not and cannot be always about prediction of outcomes… and this certainly does not describe the world of work or any aspect of the social world. Knowledge is about understanding (p. 9).
Edwards and Usher (1994 in Mckay 2003) share the same view, stressing that CBT controlled the knowledge and understanding of the learner because its framework is narrowly prescriptive to learning.
Another missing link to the CBT, according to Strachan (1998 in Sunderland and Graham 2008) is the emotional aspect of learning that stems to its economic nature. He added that: “the rational in economic rationalism comes from the philosophy where it means guided by reason as opposed to emotions (p. 62)”.
Australia is a very multicultural workforce wherein different nationalities from different countries are pitching in to its economic activity. Being assessed as just ‘competent’ at the end of the training is a vague measurement of the writer’s readiness. The writer needs a detailed feedback of competency — proficient to some extent and level.
According to National Centre for Vocational Education, CBT has been successful in teaching procedural knowledge and routine problem-solving skills (Murray, 2009 is cited NCVE). If CBT’s purpose is to educate in a real-life context it should not be routinary because real life is a social life that needs spontaneous involvement (Ostrow, 1996).
Competency-based training: A culture of Mediocrity
Australia has led to a narrow, reproductive form of education because of the competency-based training in the vocational sector, according to educators. This form of training may look efficient in the short term, but it would lead to stagnation in the longer term through lack of diversity and change (McKay, 2003).
On the other hand, Wallace (1996 is cited Porter) and Usher, Bryant and Johnston (1997 in McKay 2003) both agreed that CBT could lead to stagnation of the learner’s ability to climb the ladder of success. It is due to the fact that achieving success requires holistic development of competence and expertise.
CBT on the other hand is too fragmented and superficial approach to learning that gives little attention to understanding (Bradford, 2001; Harris et al, 1995 is cited Hager, 1992 et al).
CBT’s generic skills and controlled outcome suppress the learner’s ability to reach her fullest potential (Gonczi, 1996; Wheelehan, 2003). CBT is locked into training for current industry trend and there is no preparation for analysis or improvement of the status quo. (Stevenson, 1993, p.98). Thus, not encouraging achievements and requiring learner to demonstrate specific outcome encourages mediocrity rather than excellence. (Harris et al, 1995 is cited McGill; McKay, 2004).
Competency-based training: Incompatible to Knowledge-based Economy
In modern Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) economies, “New Economy” is attainable through fuller recognition of the place of knowledge and technology (OECD, 1996; Sang, 2002). This view is expounded by Hwang and Gerami (2006) and Sang (2002)) saying that in KBE, knowledge is regarded as a central foundation in strengthening economic structure through technological development and skilling the labour force in the highest possible level.
Sang further explains that the best result of KBE can be achieved through the synergy of codified and uncodified knowledge (Sang 2002). Codified or explicit knowledge is identified by Sanchez (2000) as an articulating knowledge while uncodified also known as tacit is an informal knowledge that require shared activities.
The Know-how and know-why are codified knowledge while the know-what and know-who are uncodified knowledge (OECD, 2006; Sanchez, 2000; Sang, 2002). For this reason, providing a world-class education through research and development (R&D) sees as an important ingredient in achieving the KBE (Gonzci, 1996; Wood, 2003 is cited Becker).
Even though CBT is the frontier of vocational training in propagating the culture of excellence, it is incongruent to KBE in so many ways. CBT is defined by Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (2009 in Guthrie) defined CBT as:
…training that places primary emphasis on what a person can do as a result of the training (the outcome), and as such represents a shift away from an emphasis on the process involved in training (the inputs). It is concerned with training to industry specific standards rather than an individual’s achievement relative to others in the group (p.5).
First, transforming VET into market style environment is different from creating a learning market. McKay (2004) describes the market style environment in vocational education as an education in “convenience store”. The learner is “… just a customer purchasing a bite-sized modularised and pre-packaged learning material. (McKay, 2004 p. 206)”
In comparison, the OECD refers to learning market as the knowledge market wherein provider and user are exchanging information and knowledge (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Hjelmervik, 2001; Simard 2000; Steward, 1996). Learning market encourages free sharing of limitless information, wherein the border between the provider and the user is disappearing (Wood, 2003).
Second contrasting point is that the top priority of VET is to respond to the needs of the industry. Making education as a secondary concern (Wheelahan, 2007 is cited Gooze). This is contrary to the view that the first-class education is the cutting edge in KBE (Wood, 2003 is cited Becker).
Another distinction is that CBT relates to specific skill profile of an industry rather than information economy (Wikipedia; Wood, 2003). In KBE, knowledge is the primary raw material and source of economically valuable information. Even in the field of customer service, in-depth knowledge plays a vital role in increasing productivity improvement (CRRI) and Centre for Research & Learning in Regional Australia (CRLRA) (2000) .
In addition, CBT’s point of view in producing a highly-skilled individual is different to OECD’s definition. For CBT, producing a highly-skilled individual is through training focusing on competency in occupational skills whereas OECD’s highly-skilled individual is someone who is a knowledge-person; and able to participate in research and innovation (Chappel, 1998 is cited Pusey & Marginson; Taylor, 1999; Wood, 2003). Therefore, a highly-skilled individual is a knowledge-individual.
Again, know-how, know-who, know-what and know-why is the fundamental knowledge in KBE (OECD, 1996; Sang 2002). This is also the finding in the 4th Knowledge Cities of the World Summit, stating that the marriage of theoretical and practical knowledge matures the knowledge-based development (KCWS, 2011). On the other hand, CBT is focusing in real-world context with practical training, practical relevance, practical activities and practical assessment disregarding the benefit of theoretical foundation (Tippelt & Maximilian, 2003; KWS, 2011).
Although Australia’s standard of living is a determinant of becoming a knowledge-based nation, it is certainly not the only factor. This only implies that knowledge, skills and competence must be integrated to produce a highly-skilled individual who can participate in research and innovation. Again, combination of codified and uncodified knowledge is important in achieving a knowledge-based economy.
Triangulation of progressivism and liberalism: A call for new vocationalism
The advocates of CBT claim that competency-based training’s refuge is that this is the building block of Australia’s policy on lifelong learning (Swalger, 1994). Lifelong learning is defined by the Department of Education Training and Workplace Relations as:
The…policy agenda is built on assumptions about the importance of skills in the new economy. Almost all industrial sectors are increasingly ‘knowledge-based’ and economic returns are obtained from a range of ‘intangible’ inputs, one of which is workers’ skills. Participation in education and training is increasing and economic rewards are flowing to people with high skills (Section 2.1).
With this definition of lifelong learning, it looks like that purpose of CBT is just to alleviate unemployment, enhance employability skills of the young people by skill and upskilling. Then lifelong learning in Australian context is not functional anymore because the issue now is not about skilling and upskilling—it is about producing a knowledge-worker who is cognitively, manually and attitudinally capable (CRRI & CRLRA, 2000). If CBT is the building block for lifelong learning therefore CBT is now obsolete.
Of course it is undeniable that CBT being a progressivism advocate has strengths of its own because a student learns through practicality—a quick way of getting a qualification and employability skills (Blake et al, 2001;Hodkinson, 1991). CBT is the vocational schools’ weapon in opposition to the liberal education. In vocational education, according to Hodkins (1991), knowing how is more important than knowing what.
In a complex world of globalisation the competition is fierce that requires strong will, guts and knowledge foundation (China’s National Defense, 2010). Companies judge the applicant according to what she knows to gauge how she knows. Seeking for an employment with just the practical skills is no different in going in a battle without ammunition.
That is why the writer suggests that liberal education must be included in the VET’s curriculum because globalisation brought complexity, diversity and rapid change. Through an in-depth study, liberal approach to education prepares an individual to the wider world of complexity (Association of American Colleges and Universities).
This point of view is not suggesting the elimination of progressivism because it is the core foundation of vocational education. What the writer merely suggests, is that the triangulation of the progressivism and liberalism of education that will lead to the formation of new vocationalism. Alliance of progressivism and liberalism is needed to combat the challenges of the complexity of this globalised world. This idea, also encourages University of Wollongong Faculty of Education to conduct research based on this idea and create a new vocational curriculum for the VET sector in Australia.
Conclusion
In an analysis on The Knowledge-Based Economy: Implications for Vocational Education and Training: A Review of the Literature, the Centre for Regional Research & Innovation (CRRI) and Centre for Research & Learning in Regional Australia (CRLRA) (2000) suggest that modifying the present policy is fundamental because “…formation of a new generation of knowledge workers cannot be achieved simply by established educational and training structures, institutions and programs… (p.34)”.
The writer shares the same view that if VET is really committed in assisting Australia on its quest to be a knowledge-based economy, it is about time that CBT will undergo a major re-engineering that is appropriate to the needs in 21st Century.
The focus of CBT still underlies on skilling the individual. Skilling an individual in a country where there is a skill-shortage like Australia probably has been proved to be an effective approach 20 years ago. But the reality two decades ago is not the reality now. Because the reality is from that time on—the world changes in a drastic manner wherein being skilled is not enough.
Even being highly skilled in order to compete more effectively is not the issue anymore. An individual must obtain a more complex range of cognitive, social, emotional and behavioural resources as what the business enterprise needs. In this demanding world, jobs require not just manual or cognitive intelligence, the larger issues underlie in the attitude.
This perspective is not different from that of Houghton and Sheeham (cited Oman 1996) saying that:
What flexible organisations need most from education systems is not so much investment in the production of skilled but narrowly defined specialists, or a lot of investment in vocational training; but much more investment in the production of people with broad-based problem solving skills and with the social and inter-personal communication skills required for teamwork, along with the skills and attitudes required for flexibility (p. 21).
Such that is the assumption of Drucker (1999 in CRRI and in CRLRA, 2000) stating that:
A widely held belief is that they will need the intellectual resources to be self-managing, to engage in continuous learning and to master new skills and behaviours in order to meet the ever changing needs of more dynamic product and labour markets (p. 5).
Suffice to say that the major determinant of the future of Australia’s prosperity depends on how vocational education and training tackle the challenges brought by the emergence of knowledge-based economy. Producing a knowledge-individual for a knowledge-economy is an intricate process involving broad cognitive, manual and attitudinal education wherein atomism and mediocrity have no space. Definitely CBT is not the solution for this because continuous use of CBT is synonymous to living in a deconstructed reality. And if that happens Australia will be left behind.
REFERENCE
Centre for Regional Research & Innovation (CRRI) University of Western Sydney &Centre for Research & Learning in Regional Australia (CRLRA). (2000). The Knowledge Based Economy: A Review of the Literature. Retrieved from http://trevorcairney.com.
Chappell, C. (1998). Changing TAFE in new times. University of Technology Australian Journal of Teacher. Education 23 (2) Retrieved from Australian Journal of Teacher Education.
Chappell, C. (1998). Teacher’s identities in new times faculty of education university of technology. (Master Thesis Abstract, University of Technology, Sydney). Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/cha98382.htm.
Considine, M., Simon, M., Sheehan, P. et. al. (2001). The comparative performance of Australia as a knowledge nation: Report to the Chifley Research Centre Considine. Chifley Research Centre. Retrieved from http://eprints.vu.edu.au/15895/1/15895.pdf.
Cornford, I. (1995, November). Competency-Based Training: An Assessment of Its Strengths and Weaknesses by NSW Vocational Teachers. Paper presented at the AARE 25th Annual Conference Hobart, Australia. Retrieved from Australian Association of Research Organisation.
Gonczi A and Hager P (2010), The Competency Model. In: Penelope Peterson, Eva Baker, Barry McGaw, (Editors), International Encyclopedia of Education. 8, pp. 403-410. Retried http://www.andrewgonczi.com.au.
Gonczi, A. (1996). Reconpetualising competency-based education and training: with particular reference for education for occupation in Australia Doctor of philosophy. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Technology, Australia). Retrieved from http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/2100/303/01
OECD (2004). Developing highly skilled workers Canada OECD. Retrived from OECD Canada.
Haygel, P. & Hyland, T. (2003). Vocational education and the training development strategies. In Blake, N. et. al. (Eds). The blackwell guide to the philosophy to the philosophy of education. pp.281-288. Retrieved from Google Book.
Hwang, J. & Gerami, M. (2006). Analyis of investment in knowledge inside OECD countries. International Journal of Human and Social Studies, 1 (2), 99-100. Retrieved from Waset Org.
Hodkinson, P. (1991). Liberal education and the new vocationalism: A progressivism partnership. Oxford Review of Education. 1 (17). Retrieved from National Library of Austrialia [03054985].
Hjelmervik, O. (2001, February). Innovation in the knowledge-based economy: A process model for knowledge creation and sharing. OECD High-level Forum on Knowledge Management. Copenhagen, Dennmark. Retrieved from OECD.
Kell, P. (1997). Across Borders and States of Globalising Education. Education Australia. 36. pp. 6-8. Retrieved from University of Wollongong Online Resources.
Quinn, T.J. (n.d.). The competency movement, applied linguistics and language testing: some reflections and suggestion for possible research agenda. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing. (55-56). Retrieved from Language Testing and Research Centre University of Melbourne.
Sang, K.L. & Gibson, D. (2002, November). Towards knowledge-based economy in Korea. Int. J. Technology, Policy and Management. 2(3) 201-205. Retrieved from University of Texas Publications.
Schwalger, S. (1994). Competency based training: Opportunities for interactive multimedia. In C. McBeath and R. Atkinson (Eds), Proceedings of the Second International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 499. Perth, Western Australia, 23-28 January. Promaco Conventions. http://www.aset.org.au/confs/iims/1994/qz/schwalger.html.
Tippelt, R. & Amoros, A. (2003) Capacity Building International Germany Technological Cooperation, System Development and Management in Vocational Training Division. Retrieved from http://star-www.inwent.org/starweb/inwent/docs/Lehrbrief_01_engl.pdf
Vaile, M. (2000). Australia and knowledge economy. The Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved from Trade Minister.
Wheelahan, L. (2006, July). Bernsteinian and realist synthesis to critique instrumental and constructivist theories of knowledge & learning’. Paper presented at 4th International Basil Bernstein Symposium, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey. Retrieved from Academia.
Wood, J. (2003). Australia: an under performing knowledge nation. Journal Intellectual Capitall. 4 (2), Pp 1-12. Resource University of Wollongong Online Resources.
