The Shift from Learner to VET Student and Its Implications

For decades, the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector in Australia has been defined by its emphasis on practical, skill-based learning. It has served as a crucial pathway for individuals seeking job-ready skills and immediate entry into the workforce. However, recent changes in the revised Standards for RTOs signal a profound shift in how the sector views itself and how it is positioned within the broader education landscape. Most notably, the replacement of the term ‘learner’ with ‘VET student’ is a subtle yet significant change, one that aligns VET more closely with traditional education systems rather than training systems.

This shift in terminology raises important questions about the future of VET in Australia. For years, there has been a growing movement advocating for VET to be considered an ‘education system’ rather than a ‘training system’. But what are the implications of this transition? Does this mark the beginning of the institutionalisation of VET, with TAFE institutes being positioned as dominant players, and the slow removal of non-TAFE providers? Is this signaling the end of vocational education and training as we know it, and the start of VET becoming a low-level part of tertiary education in Australia?

The Terminology Shift: From Learner to VET Student

The change from ‘learner’ to ‘VET student’ may seem like a minor adjustment, but it carries significant weight. The term ‘learner’ evokes an image of an individual engaged in skill development, someone who is learning through hands-on experiences and practical applications. This term aligns with the traditional purpose of VET, which is to equip individuals with job-specific skills that can be immediately applied in the workplace.

In contrast, the term ‘student’ is more closely associated with institutionalised education systems. Students typically engage in structured courses of study, with an emphasis on theoretical knowledge, assessments, and degrees or diplomas as the end goal. By adopting the term ‘VET student,’ the VET sector is being drawn further into the realm of formal education, blurring the lines between training and education.

The Institutionalisation of VET: Strengthening TAFE

One of the key concerns arising from this shift in terminology is the potential institutionalisation of the VET sector, with TAFE institutes being positioned as the dominant providers. For years, TAFEs have been seen as the backbone of Australia’s VET system, but the sector has also included private RTOs and other non-TAFE providers. These non-TAFE providers have played a critical role in offering flexible, industry-specific training that is often more closely aligned with the needs of local businesses and industries.

The use of the term ‘VET student’ aligns VET more closely with the institutional education model traditionally associated with universities and TAFEs. This shift could strengthen the position of TAFE institutes at the expense of non-TAFE providers, who have historically focused on more learner-centered, flexible training models. The revised Standards could signal a consolidation of power within the VET sector, with TAFEs being seen as the main institutions responsible for vocational education, while private RTOs and other non-TAFE providers are slowly phased out or reduced in influence.

The Push for VET as an Education System: A Departure from Training

For many years, there has been a lobbying effort to reframe VET as an education system rather than a training system. Proponents of this shift argue that education carries more prestige and is more closely aligned with the academic goals of higher education institutions. By positioning VET as part of a broader education system, advocates hope to elevate the status of VET and attract a wider range of learners, including those who may not have considered vocational training as a viable pathway.

However, this shift raises critical concerns about the purpose and identity of VET. Education systems are designed to develop knowledge and foster critical thinking, while training systems focus on practical skills and job readiness. By moving away from a training model, VET risks losing its core strength—the ability to provide learners with immediately applicable skills that are directly relevant to the workplace. Instead, it may become more aligned with traditional education, where theory and academic assessments take precedence over practical application.

Is VET Becoming a Low-Level Part of Tertiary Education?

One of the more concerning implications of this shift is the possibility that VET is being positioned as a low-level part of the tertiary education system. For years, VET has been seen as a parallel pathway to university education, offering learners a different but equally valuable route to career success. The practical focus of VET has made it an essential part of the Australian education system, particularly for individuals seeking careers in trades, hospitality, healthcare, and technical industries.

However, by aligning VET more closely with the institutional education system, there is a risk that it will be seen as secondary or lower-tier compared to universities. Universities have historically been regarded as the pinnacle of higher education, while VET has been viewed as applied learning. The concern is that if VET is subsumed into the tertiary education system, it may lose its identity as a provider of practical, industry-aligned training, and instead be relegated to a lower level of education, seen as less prestigious or valuable.

The Relationship Between VET and Universities: Equal Partners or Unequal Partners?

Another critical question is whether universities will embrace VET as an equal partner in the Australian tertiary education system. Universities have long been regarded as the providers of higher education, with a focus on academic excellence and research. In contrast, VET has been more focused on practical skills development and workplace training.

It is unlikely that universities will universally welcome VET as an equal partner. While there may be efforts to create stronger connections between the two systems, such as pathway programs or dual qualifications, the fundamental differences between higher education and vocational training are likely to persist. Universities may continue to view VET as a lower tier of education, designed for those who are not suited to the academic rigors of university study.

This unequal relationship could lead to a situation where VET is marginalised within the tertiary education system, with universities dominating the conversation and VET being seen as a less prestigious option for those who do not meet university entry requirements.

The Potential Decline of Non-TAFE Providers

If the shift from learner to VET student signals a move toward a more institutionalised model of vocational education, this could have profound implications for non-TAFE providers. Private RTOs have traditionally offered flexibility, specialisation, and industry alignment in ways that TAFE institutes have sometimes struggled to match. However, with the growing emphasis on VET as part of a formal education system, there may be less room for these alternative providers.

The revised Standards could lead to greater consolidation within the VET sector, where TAFEs are increasingly seen as the primary providers of vocational education, and non-TAFE RTOs are forced to either conform to the institutional model or risk being phased out. This would mark a significant departure from the diversity and flexibility that have been hallmarks of the VET sector for decades.

What Does This Mean for the Future of VET?

The shift from learner to VET student is more than just a change in terminology—it represents a fundamental shift in how the VET sector is perceived and how it operates. The potential institutionalisation of VET, coupled with the growing pressure to align with the education system, raises important questions about the future of vocational training in Australia.

• Is VET losing its identity? The move toward formal education could undermine the practical focus that has made VET so successful in producing job-ready graduates.
• Will non-TAFE providers be marginalised? As the sector becomes more institutionalised, there is a risk that private RTOs and other non-TAFE providers will be pushed out, reducing the diversity and flexibility that have been hallmarks of the VET system.
• Can VET remain relevant in the workforce? By moving away from its training roots, there is a danger that VET could become less relevant to industry needs, producing graduates who are more focused on theory than practical application.
• Is this the beginning of VET as a low-level part of tertiary education? As VET becomes more closely aligned with the education system, there is a risk that it will be seen as secondary to universities, undermining the value and prestige of vocational qualifications.

The Future of VET Hangs in the Balance

The replacement of the term ‘learner’ with ‘VET student’ may seem like a minor change, but it reflects a fundamental shift in the direction of Australia’s Vocational Education and Training (VET) system. This change signals a potential move away from the practical, hands-on learning that has defined the sector for decades and toward a more institutionalised, formal education model. The implications of this shift are far-reaching, raising questions about the identity of VET, the role of non-TAFE providers, the relationship between VET and universities, and whether the sector will continue to serve the immediate needs of industry.