In the minds of many New Zealanders, university degrees carry greater status than industry qualifications. But many tradespeople earn as much, or more, than an average university graduate. Many tradies also go on to start highly successful businesses.
Financially, the plumber may well come out ahead of the public servant. Why, then, are industry qualifications not valued more highly than they are?
The root issue is cultural bias in favour of academic learning, but the traditional school curriculum also contributes to the higher status of degrees. Most subjects are derived from university disciplines, creating a mindset that school is preparation for university.
Things might be about to change. Under the government’s proposal for new school qualifications, students will be able to study ‘industry-led’ subjects in Years 12 and 13. The goal is to improve the quality, status and uptake of vocational education in schools.
It is a worthy aim – but challenging to deliver on. My new report for the Initiative, Working Knowledge, makes recommendations for policy settings that will help make industry-led subjects a success.
The first challenge will be getting the curricula right. Industry Skills Boards (ISBs) will write them. That should ensure that the industry-led subjects are well aligned with the needs of business. But ISBs must consult with schools and subject associations to ensure that they are also appropriate for secondary students and deliverable for schools.
On the implementation side, few schools are set up to offer strong vocational programmes. They should receive per-enrolment funding to support industry-led subjects. Schools could use it to employ additional staff, enrol students part-time in tertiary institutions, or engage employers to offer work-integrated learning opportunities.
The funding should be redirected from the university component of the fees-free tertiary entitlement. That expensive scheme has done nothing to boost university enrolments.
Because many students see vocational education as low-status, they may need incentives to consider industry-led subjects.
Industry-led subjects could potentially yield industry certificates alongside contributing to school qualifications. And an Industry Award, equivalent in status and workload to University Entrance, would provide a clearly signalled pathway from school to industry training.
Industry-led subjects are a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change the game for vocational education. We owe it to our young people to get it right.
Dr Michael Johnston has held academic positions at Victoria University of Wellington for the past ten years. He holds a PhD in Cognitive Psychology from the University of Melbourne. This article was published HERE.
5 comments:
Should have difficult, rigorous high school tests that only 10% can pass. They go to university. The rest go to trade schools and apprenticeships to become plumbers, nurses, watch repairers, carpenters, etc.
They’d need a leftist exam before they’re allowed to go to university. Woke nonsense.
Federation University in Ballarat (Aus) has academic and vocational programmes running alongside one another under the same roof.
Some NZ high schools are very well set up for vocational programmes and offer technical qualifications up to NCEA level 3 (yes, I know that's being phased out...... a pity in my opinion, given the versatility of that system). In this context, it is noteworthy that all-boys high schools are ahead of co-eds as the demand for tech/vocat educ in an all-boys school is higher than in a coed and so a better material and human resource base is warranted.
Readers may be interested in my 2005 paper "Smoothing the secondary-tertiary education interface: developments in New Zealand following the National Qualifications Framework reforms", Journal of Vocational Education and Training, Vol. 57, pp. 411-418.
I note an article in the Herald this morning that ''teachers'' (presumably correct thinking union ones) are concerned there is not enough treaty in the new curriculum. It seems teachers, at least a good number, are merely ideologically driven by their own truths and self-virtue...they are now predators....predators of the minds of young people.
The elephant in the NZ classroom is that we have appallingly, one of the longest tails of under achievements in the developed world.
The bottom 25% of achievers in the classroom will either end up on welfare , in jail or doing menial tasks. Forget trades or vocational training for them since they are only semi -literate and numerate .
If you focused on this group, all students would
benefit because what these low achievers need most is the ingredient missing in our schools- structured learning. This means behaviourist - traditional methods coupled with the findings of cognitive science and this would also produce more STEM subject students.
There are far too many social - science graduates as a product, from my perspective of constructivist progressive education.
Primary schools are where these changes to more structured learning are required most. Some progressive ideas can be successfully applied at higher levels of learning but get them out of dominating crucial early learning .
Despite Nicola's changes to literacy and numeracy I still see students with difficulties with the basics because primary teachers are having to make such a momentous changes in their teaching methods and still adhere to old ineffective ways. I have encountered teachers who have no idea about how to actually teach effectively .
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.