Opinion: Australians should stick to renovating property, not the Qualifications Framework

Many experts now agree that the Australian Qualifications Framework, or AQF, is starting to look like the suburban 'renovator’s delight': tired, dated, and in need of some serious work.

However, while Australians are known for our passion for renovating, it would be unwise to extend this piecemeal approach to education policy reform. Renovations don't always deliver the sort of cohesive 'resolved' finish of an architect-designed home. Sometimes it's better to think through and commit to a new, purpose-built structure.

The Australian Qualifications Framework sets out the parameters and requirements for all tertiary qualifications offered and awarded in Australia, from school to university level. It's probably not known to most people, certainly not to most learners or students, but it scaffolds and structures the qualifications they undertake, much like the foundations and frame of a house.

However our Qualifications Framework is now looking a bit like a 1950s brick veneer with one bathroom and a two-strip concrete driveway – solid, does the job, but no longer fit for the way we live and work today, and certainly not well placed to take us into the future. 

Yet, as many homeowners know, making 'additions' and 'renovations' to an existing house can end up causing more problems down the line. Adding a rumpus room on the back or a garage out the front might feel like improvements, but these types of 'add ons' can just further complicate the floorplan, and not really improve the situation at all.

In property it's all about 'functionality and flow', and so it is with an education and training system.

Several 'add ons' or 'alterations' are currently proposed for Australia's Qualifications Framework – potential new qualifications at the AQF 7 level to be taught in the VET sector, and proposed 'uni ready' sub-bachelor courses to be taught in universities. This comes on top of the Covid-era add on, the Undergraduate Certificate, which sits somewhere between AQF Levels 7 and 8. Shall we call it a mezzanine.

The 2019 Expert Review of the Qualification Framework, led by Professor Peter Noonan, took a good hard look at the AQF structure and recommended some major architectural changes – changes that, in the Panel’s opinion, were required to ensure it continued to meet Australia's needs.

For example, one significant flaw they identified was that the Framework takes a hierarchical approach, placing skills below knowledge in a linear ladder-like structure. This is unnecessarily binary, and really, a fiction. The reality is that skills and knowledge are intertwined, with all jobs requiring both, but in different combinations.

The result of this hierarchical approach is that qualifications focused on skill development (like VET Certificates) sit on the ground floor of the house, and qualifications focused on the acquisition of knowledge (like university degrees) sit on the upper level, but there is no ease of movement between the two. It's like somebody forgot to put in a staircase.

For an education and training system to properly enable lifelong learning (as it must) learners must be able to develop both skills and knowledge in flexible ways, and to be able to move up and down the levels with much greater ease than is currently the case.

Another problem identified by the Panel was that the current framework doesn't adequately address the context in which skills and knowledge are developed, and the importance of application. This means recognising that skills are acquired and practiced through applying the learning in context – for example, a workplace. Qualifications, and therefore qualifications frameworks, must acknowledge this reality, in order to be clear about how learning happens, and expected learning outcomes.

These fundamental shortcomings of the AQF, and others, won't be fixed by adding one new qualification type into the mix, or providing access to a different type of provider. These policy changes are the equivalent of a bit of landscaping, or splashing around a bit of paint. 

Creating the 'functionality and flow' we so badly need in our education and training system requires a cohesive, design-led approach to reform.

Fixing the Australian Qualifications Framework may seem like boring stuff, but, like the concrete slab under the house or the engineering of its steel frame, getting it right is critical to ensuring a strong, functional structure that will last for years to come.

The Federal Government might need to put down the paintbrush and hammer, dust off the blueprint provided by the Review Panel in 2019, and get serious.