The average age of New Zealand’s apprentices is 28 years. Just 6% of young New Zealanders go directly into apprenticeships when they leave school. That is less than a fifth of the percentage going to university. In stark contrast, about half of all German school leavers take up apprenticeships.
It is not necessarily a bad thing for people to get some life experience before they undertake an apprenticeship. Even so, why are more of New Zealand’s school leavers not taking up apprenticeship options, as many young Germans do?
Fundamentally, New Zealand’s apprenticeship system lacks coherence. Its fragmented nature entrenches the low status of apprenticeships relative to university study. It also makes the option of apprenticeship less visible to young people than it should be.
In Trade Routes, a new report for The New Zealand Initiative, I make recommendations to improve the uptake and quality of apprenticeship training in New Zealand. I drew much inspiration from Germany’s world-renowned ‘dual training’ system.
The glue that holds the German apprenticeship system together is its Chambers of Commerce. The Chambers administer qualifications, oversee industry standards, and fund training. All companies must belong to a Chamber and pay a levy. Levies are mainly used to fund training centres, meaning that training is fees-free for apprentices.
Chambers also make sure that apprentices are not exploited and that companies uphold their training obligations. Additionally, they are responsible for resolving disputes between employers and training institutes.
The nearest New Zealand equivalents of German Chambers of Commerce are Workforce Development Councils (WDCs). But, WDCs do not have nearly the breadth of responsibility or authority of the German Chambers. Their main role is in standard setting – that is, overseeing the professional standards for trades in their industry sectors.
WDCs also have a role in endorsing qualifications, but they are not ultimately responsible for approving them. That function rests with the New Zealand Qualification Authority (NZQA). Neither do WDCs administer funding for training institutions, as the German Chambers do.
The government is currently reviewing WDCs, which will be rebranded as Industry Skills Boards (ISBs). The review is a golden opportunity. Given the right policy settings, the new ISBs could greatly enhance New Zealand’s apprenticeship training system. If they are set up well, they will drive improvement in the quality of training and ensure that it focusses on the skills industry needs.
To make ISBs more effective than WDCs have been, they will need expanded roles, akin to those of German Chambers of Commerce.
A straightforward change would be to grant NZQA’s powers of programme approval and qualifications recognition to ISBs. Currently, providers cannot offer vocational programmes or qualifications unless they have been endorsed by a WDC and approved by NZQA. This is effectively a dual approval process. It is inefficient.
Evaluating international qualifications for comparability with New Zealand qualifications is another NZQA function that could be delegated to ISBs. NZQA could remain as an alternative provider of these services, providing an element of competition.
ISBs should also be given specific responsibility for supporting vocational programme development in secondary schools. That would help schools improve the quality and visibility of those programmes. As a result, it would very likely increase the flow of school leavers into apprenticeships.
Taking on these functions would give ISBs potential to effect positive change in apprenticeship training. But to realise that potential, they will need mechanisms to make them accountable to industry.
One factor limiting WDC’s accountability is that their members are appointed by Ministers, not elected by industry. When ISBs replace them, most members should be elected by industry associations. That would provide a clear line of accountability to the businesses represented by the associations.
Industry associations should be empowered to cast a number of votes for ISB members proportional to their share of trainees and apprentices in each ISB’s industry sector. That would give more say in the running of their ISB to associations representing industry sectors that train large numbers of apprentices.
If ISBs were given responsibility for programme approval, another desirable mechanism for accountability would be mandatory reporting of programme outcomes. Reporting should include completion rates; proportions of graduates gaining employment relevant to their qualifications; retention of graduates in the relevant industry; and results of employer surveys canvassing satisfaction with the graduates of each programme.
Much needs to be done to establish a coherent, high-quality apprenticeship training system in New Zealand. Trade Routes makes recommendations for secondary programmes, apprentices’ pay, and funding of tertiary training. But getting the reform of ISBs right would provide a firm platform to support further reform.
Dr Michael Johnston is a Senior Fellow at the New Zealand Initiative. This article was first published HERE
Fundamentally, New Zealand’s apprenticeship system lacks coherence. Its fragmented nature entrenches the low status of apprenticeships relative to university study. It also makes the option of apprenticeship less visible to young people than it should be.
In Trade Routes, a new report for The New Zealand Initiative, I make recommendations to improve the uptake and quality of apprenticeship training in New Zealand. I drew much inspiration from Germany’s world-renowned ‘dual training’ system.
The glue that holds the German apprenticeship system together is its Chambers of Commerce. The Chambers administer qualifications, oversee industry standards, and fund training. All companies must belong to a Chamber and pay a levy. Levies are mainly used to fund training centres, meaning that training is fees-free for apprentices.
Chambers also make sure that apprentices are not exploited and that companies uphold their training obligations. Additionally, they are responsible for resolving disputes between employers and training institutes.
The nearest New Zealand equivalents of German Chambers of Commerce are Workforce Development Councils (WDCs). But, WDCs do not have nearly the breadth of responsibility or authority of the German Chambers. Their main role is in standard setting – that is, overseeing the professional standards for trades in their industry sectors.
WDCs also have a role in endorsing qualifications, but they are not ultimately responsible for approving them. That function rests with the New Zealand Qualification Authority (NZQA). Neither do WDCs administer funding for training institutions, as the German Chambers do.
The government is currently reviewing WDCs, which will be rebranded as Industry Skills Boards (ISBs). The review is a golden opportunity. Given the right policy settings, the new ISBs could greatly enhance New Zealand’s apprenticeship training system. If they are set up well, they will drive improvement in the quality of training and ensure that it focusses on the skills industry needs.
To make ISBs more effective than WDCs have been, they will need expanded roles, akin to those of German Chambers of Commerce.
A straightforward change would be to grant NZQA’s powers of programme approval and qualifications recognition to ISBs. Currently, providers cannot offer vocational programmes or qualifications unless they have been endorsed by a WDC and approved by NZQA. This is effectively a dual approval process. It is inefficient.
Evaluating international qualifications for comparability with New Zealand qualifications is another NZQA function that could be delegated to ISBs. NZQA could remain as an alternative provider of these services, providing an element of competition.
ISBs should also be given specific responsibility for supporting vocational programme development in secondary schools. That would help schools improve the quality and visibility of those programmes. As a result, it would very likely increase the flow of school leavers into apprenticeships.
Taking on these functions would give ISBs potential to effect positive change in apprenticeship training. But to realise that potential, they will need mechanisms to make them accountable to industry.
One factor limiting WDC’s accountability is that their members are appointed by Ministers, not elected by industry. When ISBs replace them, most members should be elected by industry associations. That would provide a clear line of accountability to the businesses represented by the associations.
Industry associations should be empowered to cast a number of votes for ISB members proportional to their share of trainees and apprentices in each ISB’s industry sector. That would give more say in the running of their ISB to associations representing industry sectors that train large numbers of apprentices.
If ISBs were given responsibility for programme approval, another desirable mechanism for accountability would be mandatory reporting of programme outcomes. Reporting should include completion rates; proportions of graduates gaining employment relevant to their qualifications; retention of graduates in the relevant industry; and results of employer surveys canvassing satisfaction with the graduates of each programme.
Much needs to be done to establish a coherent, high-quality apprenticeship training system in New Zealand. Trade Routes makes recommendations for secondary programmes, apprentices’ pay, and funding of tertiary training. But getting the reform of ISBs right would provide a firm platform to support further reform.
Dr Michael Johnston is a Senior Fellow at the New Zealand Initiative. This article was first published HERE
10 comments:
What organization is going to provide a whole heap of remedial maths and reading and writing so that all those in our long tail of
underachievement - in fact one of the longest in the developed world - could be prepared for apprenticeship courses ?
This obvious issue should have been addressed decades ago but our Min. of Missed Education and all the other institutions of indoctrination oops education have been so marinaded in various ideologies including Progressivism and Marxism they were blinded to ever seeing this despite ongoing complaints from parents and industry.
I suggest that a deep look is taken at the BCITO apprenticeship model before going off on a tangent as normal. The BCITO officers are ex tradesman generally and visit apprentices onsite with their employer and ginger the apprentices up over lagging correspondence etc. NOT at all a bad system and it works.
I would also add that getting a place in University can be easier than finding a job that offers an apprenticeship.
Gaynor - for students who are struggling especially with reading , Visit IRLENS Syndrome . In short the blocked transmission of data from eyes to brain, leaves a jumbled and confused plethora of letters that is easily fixed by correct coloured sheet of plastic over the page or the same coloured glasses. A simple process of placing the different shades of plastic over the page till the result is instant recogniton and quite overwhelming .
From the Altogether Autism website:
>The Royal Australia and NZ College of Opthalmologist have made a strong statement on the use of Irlen lenses,
“Overwhelmingly the research shows no benefit from this treatment in children with reading difficulties and vulnerable parents are being exploited and having their children subjected to unnecessary screening practices.”
Rinkle tinkle goes the cash register...........
Absolute rubbish Barend .Poor comment . Move down the page and see other comments.
Just a corporate scared of losing market share. I have seen the childrens progress .
Readers might like to consult the Royal Australian and NZ College of Ophthalmologists' 2018 publication
https://ranzco.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Irlen-Syndrome-Position-Statement-May-2018-2-1.pdf
The College's position statement reads as follows:
"1. The use of Irlen lenses in the treatment of reading difficulties is controversial
2. There is no scientific evidence that Irlen syndrome exists or that treatment of reading difficulties with Irlen lenses work
3. Irlen syndrome is not recognised by the medical community or the World Health Organisation (WHO)
4. There is no documented evidence that Irlen lenses are harmful, but may divert time and resources away from proven strategies which help with reading e.g. explicit phonic instruction
5. RANZCO does not support the use of Irlen lenses"
Noone wants to mention it, but why are women underrepresented in the trades?
Half the school leaving population seemingly uninterested in becoming trade skilled?
Those who love to spout equality of the sexes and disparity in salary and pay never mention trade jobs and focus solely on "white collar" and "office" jobs.
Two thirds of university graduates are women, while boys continue to be treated as dysfunctional girls in schools.
I believe NZ has a bigger problem than just a lack of school leavers choosing Trades as a vocation
I have been aware of the irien sydrome and am skeptical but cautious.
I helped my mother teach many hundreds (1500) students who were failing in reading but were almost 100% remediated by structured phonics . One method my mother used for some children was 'coloured reading ' which was writing all the vowels in a word red to highlight them or writing in large print alternate words in a text in different colours. This was something she did as an enfant teacher in NZ in the 1930s when Universal Literacy was the practice and ideal.
I am well aware of the placebo - novelty effect and painting all the desks yellow in a class might have caused an improvement for a while as well . Anxiety is an issue as well in reading ability. Marie Clay's Whole Language (WL) Reading Recovery guessing method notoriously improved the reading scores for failing children for a while but tragically over time the children were worse off than if they had not been given it at all. How come most of academia , the medical profession , and all our educational institutes accepted wrong WL for over 50 years?
I also have a friend who swears coloured overlays got her reading so I don't like to take a hard line with her and suggest it was always complete rubbish. She says she has difficulty reading black print on white paper.
English, however is a phonic language and we actually learn to read by hearing as much as by sight. Structured Literacy ( phonics) should always be given the highest priority in teaching reading . All the research, neuroscience and cognitive science confirm this . Actually all subjects should be taught in a structured way as well.
Anon 9:51 I agree with you fully. Phonics reading instruction has been shown, by rigorous research to have boys succeed as well as girls while WL ( Whole Language) reading method seems to favour girls who are usually more linguistically.able .They certainly talk more !
As an old girl I do believe there has been a feminizing influence in our schooling and I agree we need to focus more on the hard sciences taught explicitly and systematically that are the basis for trades and engineering. There are far too many soft science graduates.
As my mother used to say . Universal Literary ( only achieved with phonics) which was a foundational idea in our nation should have accompanied Universal Suffrage . Universal Suffrage , however took center stage and snuffed out, by Progressive Education ideas, Universal Literacy an equally noble idea. .
Post a Comment