Parliamentary question without notice | Vocational Education and Training
08/09/2015
The Hon. J.M. GAZZOLA: I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills a question about young people in vocational education and training.
Leave granted.
The Hon. J.M. GAZZOLA: We all know the important role that participation in vocational education and training provides, enabling employment in our communities particularly for young people. Minister, will you provide information about the extent to which young South Australians are engaged in vocational education and training?
The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills, Minister for Science and Information Economy, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Business Services and Consumers): I thank the honourable member for his most important question. This government shares his view in terms of the vitally important role that education and training play for young people in their ability to find work as well as the broader benefits obviously provided to our economy and community. The short answer to the honourable member’s question is that South Australia’s young people are highly engaged in vocational education and training (VET) programs. The National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) recently released data on this very issue and it makes interesting reading in the context of the government’s training guarantee for SACE students program.
Analysis of the NCVER data that was just released (it is data for the 2013 year) indicates that nationally most young people were participating in one form of education and training. The national estimates of participation by young people in education and training in 2013 show a 1 per cent increase in school enrolments and a 3.6 per cent increase in higher education compared to 2012. In South Australia more young people were participating in VET in schools: there was a 2.3 per cent increase, and in VET overall a 2.5 per cent increase in 2013 compared with the previous year. The percentage increases, as you can see, were above the national average and the highest in the nation.
In South Australia, the number of young people in higher education increased by 3.8 per cent, or 700 students, compared with 2012. South Australia boasted the second highest proportion of young people who successfully completed at least one unit of competency or module as part of a VET qualification at certificate II or above in the nation. In South Australia this was 28.7 per cent, which again was above the national average by nearly 2 per cent.
This government recognises the importance of promoting VET qualifications to secondary school students. That is why we have put in place policies and funding to encourage and improve access and take-up by students. The Department of State Development subsidises training delivered to eligible secondary school students by approved RTOs in three ways: the training guarantee for SACE students (TGSS), school based apprenticeships and/ or trainees and Innovative Community Action Networks (ICAN). Around $1 million of funding is allocated by the department to TAFE, who auspice VET delivered in schools, and the government is also committed to quality VET delivery in the school sector through fee-for-service arrangements as well.
As the Minister for Education recently announced, a massive 96 per cent of public school students continued their studies into year 12 last year—the highest proportion ever. It’s also pleasing to note that the NCVER Student Outcomes Survey released in December last year tells us that 78.7 per cent of South Australian graduates were employed after training, and this is well above the national average. In fact, if I recall, South Australia was one of the leading jurisdictions in employment after training.
This government has a strong record of believing in and investing in our young people and backing them in decisions that they make to prepare for their future. It’s sad to see that the Liberal federal government is so keen to slash important funding to these training initiatives.
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Supplementary, Mr President?
The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Ms Vincent.
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Thank you. I have a few, so thank you for your patience. Can the minister provide information as to how many VET students are identified as having a disability as a percentage; of those, how many students with disabilities actually complete their studies? And a final more general question: is the minister able to provide a breakdown of the most common fields that are being studied by VET students and how those compare with corresponding available jobs on the jobs market?
The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills, Minister for Science and Information Economy, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Business Services and Consumers): The report that I referred to was an NCVER report, so it’s a federal body that is responsible for monitoring and reporting on our training system. They provide jurisdictional breakdowns for some of their data. This particular report was for SACE outcomes, so I am just clarifying—are you asking for those people with disabilities who are registered for SACE training and apprenticeships?
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Yes, I’m sorry. I think I said VET, but I actually mean SACE.
The Hon. G.E. GAGO: I am not aware that NCVER makes that breakdown, so I am not sure whether that data is available but, if it is, I will certainly make sure that is brought back to the house as soon as possible.
In reply to the Hon. K.L. VINCENT (12 February 2015).
The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change): The Minister for Education and Child Development has received this advice:
The SACE Board does not collect indicators to show that a SACE student has a disability. However the SACE Board does have a SACE Modified Subjects Policy.
Modified subjects provide a curriculum and assessment option for students with identified intellectual disabilities. They are designed for students who are unable to reach the performance standards in mainstream subjects because of an identified intellectual disability.
Modified subjects are designed to allow these students with identified intellectual disabilities to demonstrate their learning in a range of challenging and achievable learning experiences.
Modified subjects allow students to develop their capabilities and personal learning goals. Students learn how to identify, develop, and achieve their personal learning goals in the context of the subject undertaken. To do this, students need the support of teachers, parents/carers, and other significant people in their lives. Students with identified intellectual disabilities have significant limitations in both intellectual functioning and in adaptive behaviour (conceptual, social, and practical).
Modified subjects are intended for students who are identified with any of the following: severe multiple disabilities (also referred to as students with severe intellectual and physical disabilities) moderate to profound intellectual disability mild intellectual disability (i.e. students who cannot meet the performance standards of a mainstream subject because of their intellectual functioning and adaptive behaviour). These students need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
The following is the 2014 data for students studying modified subjects, based on figures prepared for the SACE Board’s annual report.
241 students completed at least one full-year (20 credit) Stage 2 Modified subject in 2014. This represents 1.4% of the total cohort.
In 2014 128 students completed the SACE by studying at least one Modified subject at Stage 1 or Stage 2.
A distribution of enrolments represented as a percentage of the total enrolments for Stage 2 20 credit Modified subjects, is as follows:
English Pathways: Modified 25.3%
Health: Modified 21.9%
Mathematics Pathways: Modified 20.1%
Creative Arts: Modified 8.5%
Business and Enterprise: Modified 8.0%
Scientific Studies: Modified 6.7%
Cross-disciplinary Studies: Modified 4.8%
Society and Culture: Modified 4.6%
Language and Culture: Modified 0.2%
The second more general question is unable to be answered by the SACE Board as this information is not collected.
