VELG National VET Conference 2016 - Chris Robinson
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
2 j'aime•619 vues
Presentation by Chris Robinson, Chief Commissioner Australian Skills Quality Authority 15 September 2016
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
En vedette
En vedette (12)
Similaire à VELG National VET Conference 2016 - Chris Robinson
Similaire à VELG National VET Conference 2016 - Chris Robinson (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
VELG National VET Conference 2016 - Chris Robinson
- 1. National VET Conference 2016 Celebrating VET Chris Robinson Chief Commissioner Australian Skills Quality Authority 15 September 2016
- 2. Australia’s VET sector Australian VET is in much better shape than is commonly believed BUT A minority of providers are not interested in quality training and assessment The nefarious behaviour of a few has seriously damaged VET reputation ASQA has acted to de-register 10% of RTOs The VET market is failing to drive quality improvements and some new measures are needed to improve quality Delivering quality training 1
- 3. 2 Australia’s VET sector – the good news • Around 4.5 million students undertake VET training annually • This represents 27% of working age population • Caters for young people and adults • one third 15–24 years / two thirds older • Caters for males and females • approximately 45% female • Caters for low SES • 20% of VET students in lowest SES quintile Source: NCVER Australian vocational education and training statistics 2015 Widely accessible vocational education and training
- 4. 3 Australia’s VET sector – the good news • VET provides skills for jobs – it is not curriculum driven training • National industry endorsed Training Packages are developed to meet the training needs of an industry or a group of industries • Training Packages specify the skills and knowledge required to perform effectively in the workplace in different occupations • 77.5% of VET enrolments are in courses under national Training Packages • Over 80% of people with Certificate lll or higher VET qualifications are employed – similar to bachelor degree graduate employment rates Providing skills for jobs
- 5. 4 Australia’s VET sector – the good news • 84% of employers were satisfied that nationally recognised training provided employees with the skills they required for the job • 82% of employers were satisfied that apprentices and trainees were obtaining the skills they required from training • 76% of employers were satisfied that vocational qualifications provided employees with the skills they required for the job • 86% of graduates were satisfied with the overall quality of their training • 84% of subject completers were satisfied with the overall quality of their training Sources: NCVER Employers’ use and views of the VET system 2015 NCVER Government-funded student outcomes 2015 Meeting student and employer needs
- 6. Australian VET sector – the bad news • Media focuses on bad news—gives the impression that the VET sector is in crisis • Poorly designed funding schemes have promoted unethical provider behaviours • Brokers are an impediment to quality • RTOs are not paying enough attention to meeting the national training standards • Many RTOs fail to assess properly • Many offer courses that are too short to enable students to gain full competence 5
- 7. Australian VET sector • Manage the risk that learners won’t get quality training and assessment from a registered training provider • Enable employers to have confidence that workers will have certified competencies • Protect Australia’s international reputation for high quality education and training The purpose of ASQA’s regulation 6
- 8. 7 Australia’s VET sector • Testing new organisations seeking to enter the market • Re-registering existing providers • Approving applications to add a new course/s to a provider’s registration • Accrediting national VET courses (outside of training packages) • Proactive compliance monitoring ASQA’s regulatory activity
- 9. ASQA’s regulatory activities over past 5 years • Processed over 31,000 applications from RTOs • Conducted almost 6,000 audits to check compliance • Refused: - some 15% of new RTO applications - almost 6% of existing RTO re-registration applications • Made 290+ decisions to cancel/suspend a provider’s registration • In total ASQA has taken a decision to cancel the registration or refused the registration of almost 400 RTO’s (10% of RTO’s) 8
- 10. Australia’s VET sector Rejections as a percentage of completed decisions ASQA’s regulatory activity 9 Application type Refused 2011/12 Refused 2012/13 Refused 2013/14 Refused 2014/15 Refused 2015/16 Initial registration 31.4% 14.9% 12.2% 9.2% 16.1% Renewal of registration 12.1% 9.5% 3.5% 3.2% 5.7% Change of scope registration 3.9% 2.2% 1.4% 0.6% 0.7%
- 11. ASQA’s regulatory impact • Number of RTOs in Australia has fallen from almost 5,000 in July 2011 to some 4,600 today, after decades of increasing numbers • Around 1,000 (or 20%) of RTOs that existed in July 2011 are no longer operating • Reasons: - direct regulatory action by ASQA - indirect effects of ASQA regulatory action - reasons other than ASQA regulation 10
- 12. Strengthening VET sector regulation • An enhanced ASQA Regulatory Risk Framework to better target resources to areas of greatest risk • A fully established Enforcement and Investigations Team - powers to execute search warrants and seize items - powers to issue civil penalties - able to act in conjunction with police and enforcement agencies • A re-designed ASQA audit model - focus on provider behaviours and practices as well as systems and processes - greater customisation to audit scope - broader spectrum of regulatory tools 11
- 13. ASQA’s Regulatory Risk Framework ASQA’s legacy regulatory approach was transaction focused – provider scrutiny most likely during application processing: • Audit of all new providers • Audits of change to scope and registration renewals determined by provider risk ratings and other regulatory activity underway at the time. ASQA has now moved to a proactive risk-based regulatory approach. Transition from application-based to risk-based approach 12
- 14. ASQA’s Regulatory Risk Framework The primary risk for ASQA to manage is a Registered Training Organisation certifying that a person has competencies that do not reflect his/her skills, knowledge and attitudes. • Additional risks associated with particular obligations of training packages • Risks related to international students and visa integrity What risk does ASQA seek to manage? 13
- 15. ASQA’s Regulatory Risk Framework Strategic: Systemic risk • Sector-wide risks Operational: Provider risk • Individual RTO risks How does our enhanced risk based regulatory approach work? 14
- 16. ASQA’s Regulatory Risk Framework Six national strategic reviews of training have been released • White Card for building and construction • Aged and Community Care • Marketing practices of RTOs • Early Childhood Care and Education • Equine Industry • Security Industry Systemic risk - ASQA Strategic Reviews 15
- 17. ASQA’s Regulatory Risk Framework ASQA’s Regulatory Strategy outlines the initiatives and targeted priorities for the period March 2016—June 2017. The target areas are: • Learner protection • Amount of training • Capability of trainers and assessors Systemic Risk – ASQA’s Regulatory Strategy 2016-17 16
- 18. Complaints and risk • Around 2,000 complaints about RTOs are lodged with ASQA each year • Complaints are a critical data source in moving from application led to data/intelligence led regulation • Assess whether a complaint is within ASQA’s jurisdiction and/or refer to appropriate authority • Decide what level of response based on risk/seriousness • Substantiated complaints are included in a provider’s profile for reference in future regulatory activity 17
- 19. ASQA’s new audit model The new model: • is an evolution of the current model • supports ASQA’s ongoing shift to risk-based regulation • allows ASQA to take decisive action towards providers that pose the greatest threat to sector quality. Risk determines: • Not only whether ASQA will scrutinise an RTO • But also the nature of that scrutiny What is changing? 18
- 20. ASQA’s new audit model Key features of the new audit model include: • audits organised around five key phases of the student experience • increased use of ASQA’s risk intelligence database to inform audits • customised depth and scope of audits, and • more support for timely regulatory action. What does it look like? 19
- 21. 20 ASQA’s new audit model
- 22. ASQA’s new audit model Staged implementation is currently underway. Following revisions to incorporate the findings of its evaluation, it will be rolled out fully in 2017. Implementation 21
- 23. Conclusions from regulatory work • Many RTOs struggle with assessment • Short course durations are a threat to quality • Some poor marketing practices are evident (e.g. VET FEE-HELP) • Brokers are often a problem • Poorly designed funding schemes can contribute to poor quality (e.g. VET FEE-HELP) 22
- 24. Conclusion Quality depends on many factors • Investment effort and quality assurance done by each RTO • Effectiveness of VET regulation • Design of VET system to promote quality 23
- 25. Questions? • Visit the ASQA website – asqa.gov.au • Call the ASQA Info line – 1300 701 801 • Send an email – enquiries@asqa.gov.au • Subscribe to the ASQA Update 24
Notes de l'éditeur
- Students: 4.5 million students represents 27% of the working population Caters for young people and adults one third 15–24 years / two thirds older Caters for males and females approximately 45% female Caters for low SES 20% of VET students in lowest SES quintile Training Packages specify the skills and knowledge required to perform effectively in the workplace in different occupations 77.5% of VET enrolments are in courses under national Training Packages
- * In the past two years most media coverage has been about fewer than 30 providers * Examples of funding schemes - VET FEE-HELP and some state funding schemes,
- ASQA’s regulatory approach to date A legacy regulatory approach that is transaction focused – provider scrutiny most likely during application processing: Audit of all new providers Audits of change to scope and registration renewals determined by provider risk ratings and other regulatory activity underway at the time Provider monitoring informed by a risk rating to determine the form, focus and frequency of regulation Complaints management and investigations as separate functions Limitations of the legacy regulatory approach The main regulatory tool is auditing Audit effort focuses on applications limiting capacity to investigate concerns raised about providers via complaints or other data analysis Audit activity is often predictable for providers Standardised audit scoping matrices sometimes fail to test provider concerns reported to ASQA Limited application activity means limited scrutiny Provider risk ratings constrained by limited data Predictive risk indicators can be hidden in a single risk rating score The move to modern risk-based regulation – characteristics Regulation is targeted to areas presenting the greatest threat to quality VET outcomes for students, industry and the community Regulation is driven more by data and intelligence and less by transactional activities (e.g. applications and notifications) Regulation for providers is proportionate to their compliance posture (past and current performance) and the potential impact of their behaviour on students, industry and the community Regulation is informed by a provider profile rather than a single risk rating
- Systemic risk is a risk likely to exist across the sector or in a proportion of providers. If left untreated, significant risks of this type can have a detrimental impact on the quality of training and assessment for individuals, industry and the wider community and may lead to loss of confidence in the sector. Provider risk is the risk an individual provider presents through their choices and actions, which, if left untreated, could have a significant detrimental impact on training and assessment outcomes for students, industry and the community.
- Systemic risk is a risk likely to exist across the sector or in a proportion of providers. If left untreated, significant risks of this type can have a detrimental impact on the quality of training and assessment for individuals, industry and the wider community and may lead to loss of confidence in the sector. Provider risk is the risk an individual provider presents through their choices and actions, which, if left untreated, could have a significant detrimental impact on training and assessment outcomes for students, industry and the community.
- The 2016 –17 strategic initiatives and target areas complement ASQA’s ongoing commitment to focus on the small but concerning group of providers in the VET market engaging in practices that pose a threat to confidence in the quality of the VET sector.
- Since our establishment, ASQA has adopted an increasingly risk-based approach to regulation, which has allowed us to direct our resources towards areas that pose the greatest threat to quality, and to minimise the regulatory burden for the majority of RTOs. As mentioned earlier, ASQA’s Regulatory Risk Framework – available on our website - sets out a new regulatory approach that more effectively manages the risk of poor-quality training and assessment. This approach uses data and intelligence to identify and target the most significant sector-wide (systemic) risks and providers of greatest concern. As part of a suite of strategies to strengthen its risk-based approach to regulation, ASQA is developing a more proactive audit approach which focuses on the student experience. The new audit model will build on and improve our current audit practice. Essentially, this approach will see ASQA focus more on the practices and behaviours of registered training organisations (RTOs), and less on checking the compliance of RTOs’ systems and processes.
- We will run through each of these elements in the upcoming slides: Audits will be organised around five key phases of the student experience Providers that demonstrate a higher risk profile, a poor compliance history and/or poor student outcomes will be targeted through deeper-level audits The depth and scope of audits will be customised for each RTO and informed by improved risk intelligence and increased input by students The opportunity for RTOs to respond to audit findings will be limited to legal procedural fairness requirements, which will support more timely and effective regulatory actions
- A key feature of the new audit model will be a shift away from auditing compliance primarily against the Standards for RTOs 2015. The new approach is organised around RTOs’ practices and behaviours in relation to ‘key phases of the student experience’, while still referencing the relevant Standards. Audits will be organised around five key phases of the student experience: marketing and recruitment enrolment support and progression training and assessment, and completion.
- The emphasis of the staged implementation is on building a body of practice to test and inform the new audit approach. During the implementation, ASQA will test and evaluate the new audit model against a number of different audit types and RTO profiles. RTOs selected for an audit as part of the implementation process will be contacted by ASQA and advised about the new audit model. A new audit reporting template and other tools will also be tested through the implementation and refined based on the outcomes of the staged implementation.