Task Based Competency to Problem Based Capability: An Australian View Mark Watson Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Victoria, Australia markwatson@swin.edu.au ABSTRACT
Models of education and training are an ever evolving construct, dealing with inputs from many directions with vested interests in the outcomes.
must look to determine which way is up. Design Education in the Australian Tertiary Education Sector
Design Education is primarily focused on the tertiary area or higher education field yet to get there, students should be able to follow a pathway of integrated education and training.
Design as a professional discipline has, since the mid-20th century been an incumbent of Technical Education yet peculiarly placed within the Arts, with Institutes of Technology or Polytechnic Colleges issuing Diplomas and Fellowship Diplomas right up unto the 1990’s.
From compulsory education in the primary and secondary systems to the tertiary and professional development areas of education and training there is a move to reduce duplication. This paper looks at Design Education’s fit within the Australian and International context.
A shake up of the tertiary education sector saw Technical Colleges promoted to University status, and the technical aspects split between, trade, para-professions and professionals.
Author Keywords
Competency; Capability; Problem-based learning; Task based learning; Training; Education. INTRODUCTION
In the West we have a saying “like a square peg in a round hole”, meaning that something or someone is not fitting into the niche of his or her society. One could ask the existential question “is it the hole that is misplaced or the peg”? Design education has evolved in line with developed society apace with the industrial age since the mid-20th century. Even before this the industrial revolution was playing forward ideas and ideologies embraced by some and demonised by others. One of those ideologies is Competency Based Training. With Higher Education adopting the paternal ‘top down’ approach, it is interesting that competency based education and training is considered a ‘bottom up’ approach. In looking at the existential nature of design education we Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
A vocational education sector or Technical and Further Education (TAFE) developed to provide training and education to the trade and para-professions issuing Certificate training and Diploma education. This later evolved as dual sector TAFE Institutes (Further Education / Higher Education) and they developed and delivered Degrees in areas not in direct competition with the Higher Education sector. The Australian experience is imperfectly framed in the Australian Qualification Framework, a scaffold sequence of qualifications in constant flux through the changing nature of public / private and sectorial education and training delivery. AQF
In order to establish a hierarchy to academic qualifications the Government instituted the Australian Qualification Framework or AQF which was illustrated by a ladder or framework with an ascending order from Certificate 1 to PhD. A recent review of the AQF titled Second Edition [1] was released in January 2013 with a circular, clock face style diagram of qualification, replacing the vertical ladder, with Certificate 1 placed at the top at 12 o’clock rolling through the classifications to the PhD which nestles alongside the certificate 1 at 11 o’clock.