The effects of neoliberalism: Teachers’ experiences and ethical dilemmas to policy initiatives within vocational education and training in Australia

Abstract

Neoliberal policy reforms have had a marked influence on nearly every aspect of education, including the enrolment practices employed by institutions, teaching and assessment practices, and even the outcomes for students and society. There is a widespread expectation that teachers should contribute to quality outcomes for students along with their moral/ethical development and character formation while at the same time behaving ethically in the currently challenging environment of the education sector, including the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector. However, this apparent pressure for maintaining quality education while simultaneously conforming to the ethicality of professional practices in the context of rapid policy changes of a neoliberal sort masks considerable controversy around the meaning of quality education with respect to both moral/ethical behaviour in education and the appropriate forms of practice that would constitute this area of education. A recent research project into the impact of the changing contemporary cultural context of VET on the creation of moral dilemmas facing VET teachers in their work has identified the VET teachers’ perspectives of the ethical dilemmas experienced, by identifying the tensions between competing values and the resulting interactions. The research design for the study drew primarily on exploratory and discursive interviews with 18 VET teachers in South-East Queensland, selected from those responding to a call for participation in the study. The study pointed to the value of dilemmas as constructs through which to generate knowledge of ethical conflicts arising from contextual changes in policy. Four drivers that they attributed to causing those dilemmas were identified: changing immigration rules, changing funding requirements, changing culture and philosophy of RTOs, and inadequate teacher preparation. In each of these respects, the ambitious business expectations engendered by neoliberal restructuring and reform in recent years can be seen as articulating or presupposing values pertaining to standards of practice and performance of the RTO, which in turn can be seen to compromise traditional norms associated with teacher professionalism. It is with these values and conflicts that we are concerned in this paper.

Background

Neoliberalism is a political ideology that celebrates the extension of market mechanisms by the state through strategies of privatisation, deregulation and fostering competition through the positive enactment of laws in order to provide for the exercise of ‘freedom of choice’ and for the purposes of constructing self-reliant, self-sufficient and self-optimising individuals (Castree 2010; Olssen et al. 2004). In a neoliberal society, collective well-being is considered to be maximised when each individual egoistically focuses on their own happiness through constant strategizing and making profit versus loss calculations for oneself (Rose 1998). Amongst the core policy tenets of neoliberalism is the ability of governments to pass legislation that encourages individuals, groups and organisations to self-organise and freely determine the best way forward for themselves, and at the same time through the power of market-like optimisations maximise the total well-being in society (Rose 1998). Neoliberal economic theory focuses on minimising the role of government in order to maximise the ability of the free market to run its course (Friedman 1962). The underlying logic of neoliberal economic theory is that competition in a free market should result in progress, efficiency and innovation. ¹

Castree (2010: 1725–1733) has outlined seven principal characteristics of neoliberalism: privatisation, marketization, state deregulation, market-friendly regulation, use of market proxies in government sectors, encouragement of NGOs to assume social responsibility and the creation of self-sufficient individuals. At its best, neoliberalism combines freedom of choice for the individual with optimal use of expertise to result in a higher level of wealth, health, well-being and efficiency in society than other policies could offer (Robinson 2010; Rose, 1998). At its worst, it leads to governments handing over the power of nations to profit-maximising multinational corporations, leading to commercial values overruling human needs, neglect of the common good and indoctrination and production of anti-democratic values (Down 2009; Giroux 2005; Olssen 2018). When all individuals in society are expected and educated to be enterprising, it can trigger structural inequality by supporting strong people to become even stronger, inadvertently blaming weak people in society for their own failures (Gill 2014).

Neoliberalisation and higher education

The education sector has been widely affected by neoliberal ideologies of governance. Neoliberal policy initiatives have been launched in many countries, aiming at governing schools and universities through market-like mechanisms based on choice policies and league tables competition as well as audits, inspections and high-stakes testing (Ball 2013; Olssen and Peters 2005; Olssen 2016, 2017). Under neoliberalism, many governments have reduced financial support for education, placing schools and education systems and sectors more than ever in direct competition with one another, reflecting the principles of market choice (Levin 2007). Whitty (2010) emphasises that recruiters at many educational institutions are trained to aggressively pursue and enrol as many students as possible, often with little regard for ethical standards or the best interests of the prospective students. Further, Zyngier (2009) contends that student-centred learning sits alongside notions of students and parents as consumers of education, while teachers become increasingly responsible and accountable as service providers. Universities are prioritising customer service and student satisfaction rather than upholding professional pedagogical standards and providing a rigorous but exacting education.

Emerging empirical research shows that there are teachers at all levels of education who see the policy pressure to infuse entrepreneurship into education as highly problematic (Johannisson 2010; Korhonen et al. 2012; Rae 2010). Such policy pressures are perceived by many teachers as a covert introduction of capitalist and egoistic values into the education system, clashing with traditional humanistic values in education such as equity, participation and the common good (Olssen and Peters 2005; Nakar et al. 2018). Barnett (2000) and Bagnall and Nakar (2018) utilised Lyotard’s concept of ‘performativity’ to argue that marketization has become a new universal theme manifested in the trends towards the commodification of teaching and research and the various ways in which universities meet the new performative criteria, both locally and globally, in the emphasis upon measurable outputs. Empirical research has indicated that such policy pressures trigger a narrowing of the curriculum and a culture of teaching to the test (Berglund 2013; Cuban 2007; Komulainen et al. 2011; Dahlstedt and Hertzberg 2012).

Against this background the debate about education as a public good versus a private good is highlighted. In Australia, as in many countries throughout the world, the role of an educated workforce in the contemporary era is to facilitate society over and above adding value to the individual student’s human capital. Any doubt about the prominence of the ‘public good’ priority is dispelled by recent policy changes in Australia which mandate higher fees for the Humanities and certain oversubscribed courses while lowering the fees for degrees qualifying students for employment in sectors currently or prospectively needing workers. The effects of this policy priority have been felt in the Vocational Education and Training (VET) context for some time, in large part in response to changes to the government’s Skilled Occupation List (SOL) which determines the occupations most in need of workers in a given period.

Neoliberalisation and vocational education and training

VET in Australia in recent decades has been subject to a range of major policy reforms in response to globalised pressures for it to become more effective, efficient and competitive in its responsiveness to consumer demand. Among these are the factors that determine the nature of competition not only between the Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institutions (which conduct the majority of VET in the nation) and the private Registered Training Organisations (RTOs), but also the economics of industries, new RTO entrants, the bargaining power of students and agents and the threat of substitute services or products (Nakar 2016).

Accordingly, the way VET operates in Australia has substantially changed. In particular, it is claimed that in the contemporary VET environment, instead of serving as a public good, education is transformed into a private good- market commodity where the orientation of training providers has shifted away from ‘education and training’ towards ‘business and service’. The criterion of success has changed in this transition from a concern with pedagogical standards and the adherence to professional educational norms, towards accountability in terms of economic value for money assessed competitively through a consideration of market comparability amongst like providers in the production of outputs. In doing so, the role of the VET teacher is also held to have significantly changed (Mitchell 2012; Nakar 2013, 2016). While these reforms have enabled such institutions to be viable in economic terms, such policy reforms have also been noted to date as raising significant ethical challenges for teachers in the sector (Nakar, 2019).

Research project

A recent research project (completed in 2017) by the lead author into the impact of the changing contemporary cultural context of VET on the creation of moral dilemmas facing VET teachers in their work has identified the VET teachers’ perspectives of the ethical dilemmas experienced, by identifying the tensions that exist between competing pedagogical and business values and the resulting interactions (Nakar, 2017). Correspondingly, the study utilised a qualitative methodology, drawing primarily on exploratory, discursive, conversational interviews with 18 VET teachers in South-East Queensland, primarily in the state’s capital city, who were selected from those responding to a call for participation in the study. Participants were selected to include a diversity of teaching fields and experience in diverse public and private providers; both men and women in the approximate proportion of their representation in the VET teaching population were included, representing a diversity of industry and workforce backgrounds, while also ensuring that each had some years of experience in VET teaching. The selection criterion in this regard was that of persons who saw themselves as having such roles and who had not less than 5 years of experience in such roles in TAFE. The researcher’s position was as a previous teacher in VET who was cognisant of many of the issues from personal experience; while this insider knowledge gave her awareness of the context, the interviews were structured in such a way that the researcher had no impact on the issues raised.

Each primary, audio-recorded interview lasted between 30 and 60 min, with generally brief follow-up interviews to clarify or expand on any points arising from subsequent reflection on and analysis of the recordings. The focus of the interviews was on existential issues arising from changes in the contemporary VET teaching context, rather than explicitly on dilemmas, to ensure that important material was not avoided or lost through any confusion of meanings. The dilemmas per se were identified by the researcher in her interpretative analysis of the interview transcripts. The process of analysis followed that articulated as interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) by Smith and Osborn (2003). It focused on identifying pertinent dilemmas common to a majority of the respondents: how they were experienced and interpreted, their contextual drivers and the teachers’ responses to them.

Research outcomes

Four common dilemmas were identified: the dilemmas of (1) responding flexibly to heightened student diversity, (2) limiting educational engagement, (3) constraining teacher responsiveness and (4) manipulating learning assessment. As per teachers, dilemmas drew from a unique set of drivers and circumstances. Each of these dilemmas was seen as being driven by tensions between what participants (intrinsically) understood that they should do in a particular situation and what they felt impelled to do by extrinsic drivers or pressures from changed circumstances in the contemporary cultural context of VET. The four interpreted drivers were (1) changing immigration rules, (2) changing funding requirements, (3) changing culture and philosophy of RTOs and (4) inadequate teacher preparation. The nature of each of those categories of the interpreted drivers to the dilemma under question is here briefly explained and evidenced in narrative and stories from the participants.

Changing immigration rules

The participating teachers pointed out that although not a part of VET policy, Australian immigration policy plays an important role in the enrolment of international students in VET. Access to permanent residency in Australia after initial course completion was cited as a major motivator by teachers for choosing to study in Australia and in a particular course selected by students. Linking training to immigration was considered by one of the teachers interviewed, Frank, as the crux of all the ethical dilemmas that were created. For Frank, the ability to make money is more than the trainers’ ethical stance.

At the time of the study, employment priority areas were aged and disability care, youth work, hospitality, accounting and engineering. Thus, Certificate IV-Diploma studies in these areas were at that time well subscribed. Teachers reported that while listing the qualification in the SOL has the potential to assist in meeting Australia’s skills needs, they were concerned that RTOs and educational agents/brokers have put migration outcomes before a quality education for students.

The ethics that we [VET sector] had early on are different than ethics we have now because there have all been melted down by the system, by the immigration department, by the RTOs, by the people who are making money. So the ability to make money is more important than the trainer’s ethical stance. (Frank)

Teachers pointed out that changes to immigration policy influence the demand for training by affecting the size of the student population as well as the size of the RTO. Teachers noted that changes in immigration policy had provided significant incentives for RTOs to develop courses and recruit students in areas which maximised their profits and growth and excluded those which did not attract large student intakes.

The Government recognizes that international students bring an enormous amount of money, and one has to fit their needs. (Natalie)

Frank, for example, reported that when a course is removed from the SOL of the immigration departments, RTOs had a tendency to cut back on those courses too and focus on courses that were listed on SOL. Natalie highlighted that one of the strategies that RTOs utilised to sustain financial viability was adding and eliminating their academic program offerings, particularly from the Migration Occupations in Demand List (MODL) [now SOL] list to fill the gap.

We’re sometimes faced with situations where decisions are based not on education, but decisions that are based on financial return, on numbers, on audits, on quality assurance, on meeting our funding masters, as opposed to what is actually a part of the relationship between the teacher and the student, which is the best outcome for the student. And that’s not necessarily the shortest, cheapest, most logical fit, in terms of QA [quality assurance] that is required. (Ruby)

Teachers further pointed out that immigration policy also affected students’ post-study outcomes, as students enrolled in courses without a hope of obtaining employer sponsorship would no longer avail themselves of that benefit. Gina and Peter expressed their concern on behalf of students in light of what they perceived to be the unfair attitude of the government. These teachers found themselves in the dilemma whether to tell the students to drop the course [removed from SOL list] or then continue without intention of getting a job at the end of their study period. They also pointed out that the constant changing of courses from the demand list for immigration purposes, even if there was an apparent shortage of such skills in a particular industry, upset students who were genuinely interested in the course.

Frank voiced his resentment thus:

These decisions are being made by bureaucrats for some reason. They are making a choice based on their perception of what raises [profit] better than the others. So, the ethics of training goes to Australian government policy. Australian government policy is unethical as it is doing harm to people. (Frank)

James stated that such practices also affect the price list of the courses offered by the RTOs: more demand for the course resulted in increased course price by the RTOs with the sole intention of increasing their profits. Daniel also noted:

It’s a free market. If someone’s prepared to pay twenty-three thousand, you charge them twenty-three thousand. (Daniel)

Three teachers pointed out that students’ confidence is further affected when courses removed from the SOL list are later reinstated to the list to compensate for lost enrolments. However, due to the desire to live and work in Australia, international students react predictably to undertaking such vocational courses. Frank also pointed out that RTOs often respond to uncertainties in enrolments by adjusting business strategies and delivery practices, for example, by changing course duration and offering flexible payment options to students to combat the negative effects of changes in rules and policies. Such changes created further uncertainties in the minds of students regarding the sincerity or quality of the Australian providers:

It is sometimes embarrassing to be seen as Australian because of this sort of thing going on. It is incredible. (Frank)

Changing funding requirements

Fifteen participants alleged that the move towards the market-based allocation of VET funding constituted one of the major drivers of the dilemmas faced. Teachers pointed out that although the shift towards a more competitive and commercialised training market had been growing gradually, the trend gained further momentum under the impetus of recent government policies, particularly in relation to the contestable funding environment which, although expected to improve the productivity of the publicly funded TAFE, proved overly burdensome and created greater uncertainty within the sector and RTOs.

Teachers were unanimously critical of repeated and erratic funding changes by the government and the disruptive effects that this has had on the stringent accountability factor resulting in a compliance culture. The expectation of audit-compliant procedures was that honest RTOs would flourish and expand, while poorer RTOs would face penalties. However, teachers revealed that such compliance was provided at the expense of quality and to the detriment of professional standards. The burden of paperwork fell on teachers and resulted in lack of attention to the quality of core teaching and learning tasks. The teachers encountered ethical conflicts which were related to their experienced tensions between mandatory external educational policy expectations – resulting in more time spent on paperwork and less on teaching – and their own beliefs and professional values about what is best for their learners.

It is so difficult, because the compliance requests, they come from the government, and the department of education. … There is such an obsession about all these, like admin has kind of become like this big mushroom that overshadows everything. It is a big dilemma and it includes not only the trainers, also the RTO, because they want to survive the business. (Claire)

Teachers also reported that the introduction of VET FEE-HELP (VFH) schemes in funding benefits motivated RTOs to enrol more students in that scheme simply in order to obtain greater funding benefits. VFH schemes were introduced in 2008 when the Australian Government extended the scope of its higher education loan program (FEE-HELP) of income-contingent student loans – formerly the higher education contribution scheme (HECS) – to the VET sector to reduce financial barriers for Australian citizens to enrol in full-time or part-time courses undertaken at approved VFH providers. This allowed students to access the income-contingent VFH scheme for studies at diploma and higher levels, as well as Certificate IV studies in the priority areas of aged and disability care, youth work, accounting and engineering. The VFH scheme was misused by many providers in luring students unethically to join those courses purely for the purpose of increasing their profits.

Profit and the student outcome are both interlinked and the educational lefties, understand that the business righties have to make money, otherwise we [RTOs] are out of the game. As one previous CEO said … it is like ying and yang, means it is internally interwoven and connected. So for those of us, who have got a strong ethic about education, that is great, but you’ve [one has to] got to have a full understanding that unless we make money, it is not going to enable us to go forward. (Thomas)

Teachers alleged that the perceived unethical practices of passing more students simply to avail the institution of more funding was one of the consequences of the government’s funding model.

[I was told to] pass them … nobody could fail, everybody has got to pass. A lot of the fund is connected to the passing of international students, which is a real ethical situation for the RTOs. That was a massive explosion for me. (Natalie)

Changing culture of the RTO with provider competition

All 18 teachers reported that changes in immigration rules, funding benefits, and the resultant ongoing struggle for survival for RTOs had resulted in changing the culture of the RTO, producing a strong emphasis on profit-maximisation through competing with other RTOs for student enrolments. Participants found that high ideals of student service which existed in companies at times when they were successful were replaced by mere profit motive as management focused on more cost-effective alternatives to traditional models of higher education. Such cost-cutting strategies included shortening the length of time required to complete a program, offering online learning to reach more students without incurring the added costs of facilities and faculty staffing, restructuring staffing models and reducing staffing levels. In taking such actions, participants claimed that RTOs (both TAFE and private) had become increasingly privatised as they directed their efforts to paying attention to the business of education rather than focussing on the best pedagogical practices in education. This had led to increasing fundamental ethical and moral questions for teachers about the adopted strategies by RTOs.

I think any time [that] money is, or profit is, put on any industry, as the driving factor, it’s open to corruption. (James)

Do you know the word ethics and business? You know, they don’t really sit comfortably together, which is true. It’s all about making money in VET. (Natalie)

TAFE teachers felt that market-driven funding with greater competition between public and private providers encouraged change in the culture of where education was provided for high fees but at the expense of quality. TAFE teachers were concerned that TAFE colleges were required to operate as businesses rather than as government services:

We have gone from being a PPP ² [Productivity Places Program] to being reabsorbed back into TAFE Queensland, and from there, it is supposed to become a leaner, meaner business model that competes on a fully contestable funding model [competing with the private RTOs]. (Ruby)

I think the whole business structure of vocational education, they talk about privatizing TAFE and other things, and honestly I don’t understand the economics behind it at all. It suddenly became more about business than people. (Annabelle)

TAFE teachers pointed out that it was a general assumption of all teachers that private organisations are more prone than public and not-for-profit ones to targeting students to enrol and marketing their products without due diligence as regards to their educational suitability for such courses. However, teachers pointed out that to ensure financial sustainability, TAFE were also responding by experimenting with changes to their business models.

An ethical dilemma for me, now that TAFE has become autonomous, they’re pushing for more numbers to make us profitable because, before TAFE didn’t have to be as profitable. It was a community-based educational system, whereas now it’s all for profit, But I just feel that they [students] are not getting their money’s worth. (Renee)

Jim stressed that due to repetitive funding cuts, TAFE have gradually declined or eliminated once worthwhile programs like arts and craft, or learning Italian or cultural subjects as they have been identified as high cost, having low market demand and less central to RTO’s mission. Neoliberalisation can, in this sense, be seen as having a conservative impact on curriculum offerings and the design of educational programs generally. As Jim puts it:

If it’s not considered vocationally [financially rewarding] important, it has been removed. … So that’s the way capitalism is driving education today, which to me is bit sad. (Jim)

Two teachers from private RTOs raised the same concerns:

It is like any business. At the end of the day, if you are not making money, you don’t cover business, and therefore that becomes your driving factor. (Gina)

Ultimately, we are in the business of education. (Daniel)

In addition, teachers explained that the current VFH funding model by the government to subsidise vocational education to disadvantaged groups brought changes to cultures and mindsets in private RTOs and to students across different systems and sectors. It has created a provider-led market leading to an increase in the unethical practices of charging zero or low fees, offering free iPads or laptops and similar marketing strategies. Such practices have severely impacted the market, negatively affecting students, employers, VET providers and the reputation of VET sector. Claire, for example, reported that RTOs, particularly those in the private sector, focus on getting student money at any cost. Other participants comment that

We got all of our money from the Government, not from the students. So our client is not the student, our client is the Government. That culture is what carries over. (Robin)

Everything is getting privatized, and it’s all becoming, school, education is becoming money focused for the RTOs, the students are treated more as customers, rather than students. (Jim)

The purpose of education is for businesses to make money. (Ruby)

Teachers reported that such competition created a tendency for RTOs to attempt to steal each other’s students by offering a multitude of programs and flexible attendance as a way of increasing their revenue:

First of all it should come from the top. I think if it was an ethical place then attendance would be compulsory and it would be part of the assessment, like if you don’t attend you don’t pass. And they wouldn’t do deals with students. (Jim)

Teachers raised their concerns that such visible unethical practices of RTOs have led to a change in the attitude of students as well, where they seek to negotiate a better bargain across different RTOs. The quality of the education was measured by student satisfaction and hence the value for money was determined by the student on the basis of the flexibility offered by RTOs.

Two teachers reported that to attract more students, their organisation offered a much lower price for a course as against their competitors.

They could be part of a marketing tool for this particular College. Like you see online, the Diplomas [selling] for thirty-nine dollars. There is a free-market out there, and it’s not good in the long term for everyone that’s involved in vocational education sector – and that starts with the student. Because the student is what we’re here for. (Mark)

Frank reported that such practices by competitors placed pressure on other providers, including TAFE institutes, to significantly drop their fees. Competition between providers has become a major feature of the education marketplace. Such environments resulted in creating imperfect competition in which everybody is a price maker.

People seem to think the more money you pay, the better quality learning you get. But it’s not just that. I feel that the prices are dictated by the industry. It’s like housing, isn’t it. When – as prices go up, everyone else puts their prices up. (Karen)

While their attitudes were characterised by cynicism and an awareness of tensions within the sector, the participants also identified that not all RTOs are run along competitive lines and that many remained committed to the educational mission of genuinely supporting their students. They noted that some institutions could offer programs in high-demand fields and yet still manage to avoid engaging in unethical practices in order to achieve the levels of profitability and growth that keep them competitive with less scrupulous players. One teacher claimed further, however, that the pressures to ‘cut corners’ were inevitably having an effect within the sector. In a general sense, the VET sector was being burdened by a model of imperfect competition populated by profit-seeking providers whose business models have scant regard for educational standards and ideals:

The emphasis on education now is more about the revenue and not about the quality of delivering. It’s bums on seats, you know, money coming in rather than let’s do a really good job. (Mark)

Teachers also considered that they were held responsible not only for ensuring that educational outcomes are achieved, but also for actively profiling and promoting the courses offered by the school and for upholding the business goals of the institution – no matter what the conflicts involved. Frank, for example, reported that he was expected to encourage his graduating Certificate II students to take up Certificate III. He further reported that this created conflict as he knew that some students if pushed to take up such course would fail miserably.

Teachers pointed out that such changes in the culture had made it practically impossible for RTOs to achieve a balance between academic and commercial objectives as RTOs have had to grapple with ways of pursuing more revenue from students, making education a business, while at the same time endeavouring to pursue the genuine goal of education: to create knowledge through quality learning and teaching. Teachers reported that it was not possible that these two agendas can co-exist.

So, we all have to make decisions whether or not, we are here as number one to make money in order to continue the business, or are we here to make educational outcomes for a student body going forward? (Thomas)

Inadequate teacher preparation

Teachers observed that while there has been a trend towards increased privatisation and marketization of vocational education, teaching preparation and support practices have remained comparatively constant. Teachers have been ethically challenged to make difficult decisions while coping with high-stakes pressures from RTOs, students and the industry along with stringent accountability legislation. A prescriptive approach has been adopted to formalise the organisation’s vision as well as subsequent actions. Teachers reported that they lacked sufficient preparation, induction and professional development opportunities, support from their union, or a thorough understanding of the standards or codes of conduct. In addition, traditional educational work norms such as teacher autonomy, independence, flexibility and professionalism were being progressively subverted by business norms which demanded increased teacher appraisal and monitoring, regular ongoing teacher assessment and insistence on attendance at the workplace in relation to new norms of ‘presentism’ and the abolition of traditional practices such as ‘working from home.’

Teacher preparation

All of the 18 participating teachers reported that they were not prepared well in their teacher preparation courses for VET. While teachers acknowledged that Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (TAE), which was required as a minimum qualification for teaching in VET, provided the essential foundations on which further skills and knowledge can be built through on-the-job experience, further learning or both, the teachers reported that the qualification does not provide all the knowledge and skills which many practitioners need.

I don’t think we’re training people well enough to deliver training in that environment, because we’re relying a lot on them knowing the content as adult trainers. (Karen)

It doesn’t give me any skills to go and do that in the classroom. (Drake)

Neoliberalisation in this sense was resulting in a reduced emphasis on teacher training, with many courses and programs being ‘slenderized’ for cost-cutting purposes.

Teachers pointed out that some of them and their colleagues managed to get their TAE qualification within inappropriately short timeframes or through inappropriate recognition of prior learning processes and had a lack of understanding of what it means to be a teacher in a diverse classroom.

TAE (Certificate IV in Training and Assessment TAE40110) for fifteen hundred dollars online, have to teach one group of students for eight, ten hours, and all of a sudden, you’re a teacher? Or a trainer? Absolutely shocking. TAE. It is a piece of paper. (Daniel)

You could go and Google now – I was only looking last week to do the Dip. in TAE. I just want to do it, just to get it out of the way, and you go and Google that now, and, the dual Dip., and it can range anything from two thousand to five thousand dollars. You can do it anything from one to two weeks to two years. It’s just all over the shop. (Drake)

However, five teachers reported that they had to keep themselves updated on the different versions of the certificate as they were teaching, ‘on the job’, which is both time-consuming and also did not necessarily give teachers any new knowledge:

The Certificate Four was just a hoop that we jumped through every two, three years because we had to. Not because it was taken seriously in any way, shape or form. (Ruby)

Lack of orientation

All 18 participating teachers reported that newly employed trainers did not receive any pre-service induction training covering an introduction to training materials, resources and assessment strategies. Teaching for many seemed to consist of being ‘one chapter ahead of the students’.

I’ve never been inducted. I got to teaching three years ago and I had an interview, the position was being offered to me as a part-time teacher. And I was supposed to teach two days. No resources, no nothing. (Sandra)

I had to find my classroom, I had to, there was no manual. Nobody told me about practical assessment, nobody told me about rating. (Frank)

You pretty much are on you own. Like, the classroom is your battlefield. You figure it out. (Annabelle)

Teachers reported that new graduates or industry professionals who have not had previous opportunities to work as a teacher find it very difficult to address institution-specific teaching and assessing expectations, to keep records of the assessments and lesson plans and to address local policies and processes.

So, you get all these new teachers coming along and trying to find their footing in the place and it can be difficult, because we don’t have, orientation or anything. You just fend for yourself. (Natalie)

But those industry experts, who just jump into teaching, it is hundred percent difficult for them. Because I’ve seen people come and lost their way, saying this is not worth it. (Daniel)

Teachers reported that although new staff from other RTOs would be familiar with teaching strategies, they needed an introduction to the institution-specific expectations of assessment and policies which was not provided by their new employing RTO. Teachers reported that new teachers were often hired in a situation of crisis, to fill an urgent need, so the initial period of job induction was never provided to them. Teaching for new teachers was made more difficult when they had no collegial collaboration for resources and learning materials in their subject area, when they faced large classes with large numbers of diverse students, and particularly when they had a range of paperwork to cater for:

I remember on Monday the week that I was supposed to start working, I got up at 4 o’clock or 5 o’clock in the morning saying, oh you by the way, you got another subject to teach, tomorrow 9 o’clock. (Sandra)

It is like, when we need someone to fill in the class, we drag some guy off the street, who is breathing and put them in a class and go for it. (Mark)

Professional development

Five teachers reported that in response to economic developments, changing legislation, privatisation and concerns of an unethical educational environment, their professional development was inadequate, and this seriously affected their experience, contributing to difficulties in decision-making in the absence of such professional development:

You never get a professional development of teaching or training so that you know how to deal with such conflicts? You’re left to yourself to be sorting that out. (Robin)

During all these years, while I worked in the vocation – as a vocational trainer, I wasn’t – a single time when we would discuss, like teaching and pedagogical issues. (Claire)

Moreover, teachers reported that provisions for professional development varied significantly between organisations and were almost non-existent for casual and sessional staff whose overall numbers as a proportion of the teaching profession were substantially increasing. The area of concern most identified by teachers was continuing professional development that helps ensure that new entrants to the VET sector have a firm foundation upon which to build their teaching careers. Two casual teachers reported that they were not encouraged to develop their professional skills through training unless they paid for it and also did it in their own time:

If you employ a casual teacher, there’s no allowance for professional development or mentoring or anything like that. When you are paying a casual teacher, the money is always tight. So, they don’t or are going to want to invest in PD. They just want the job done. Teachers should be supported financially to get professional development. (Mark)

Five teachers reported that professional development was carried out only to ensure that compliance had been followed so that the RTO could show the auditors. In this sense, professional development had been redefined to being more expressly concerned with exacting compliance in relation to the business standards of the provider. Renee, for example reported that rather than a professional development session on how to ‘mark the roll’, she would like computer training:

Some of the training is either stuff that we know back to front, so that was a waste of hours doing workplace health and safety training. So the PD [professional development] they’re giving us isn’t what, as teachers, we need. (Renee)

Two teachers reported that professional development mainly focused on new accountability requirements of teachers, explaining the paperwork required to pass the audit:

We always were trained in how to complete the admin, the new admin, and we got long trainings, we got hour-long trainings, half-day-long trainings, but we were never trained in how to – for the big picture you know, how to fit that into what you were doing as a trainer. (Claire)

PD was more about having paperwork in work. You can’t use black pen or blue pen. The topics were bureaucratic details, acronyms about this program and that program. So, a lot of discussion was spent talking in pure procedures as to what you can do, can’t do. (Jim)

Mentoring and support

The teachers reported that there were not enough opportunities for them to be mentored by the seniors in the field and that staff support of this sort had declined as the competitive context had increased.

There is not enough mentoring done with potential teachers. (Mark)

Also, two teachers reported that the unions had also ceased to intervene in relevant decision-making arenas and have instead become more compliant through power raised by the system.

We tick all the boxes for audit that we’re going to do that professional development, because we need to pass the audit. But it’s not about, how you feel as a teacher [or about] what kind of support you need. (Sandra)

In such situations, it was evident that many felt betrayed by the union:

I used to be a part of union; I am not anymore. I am not planning to go back. I don’t belong to the union and I won’t in this current form. The union should also have done some more to protect students because protecting students would automatically then protect trainers. (Frank)

I have been involved with having a requirement for union support in the end of a long and worn-out process and basically, they didn’t deliver. (Claire)

I belonged to the union. The whole time I worked in TAFE, I asked them for some advice one time and they basically told me that they could not help me. So, I wouldn’t say that the union would protect you. (Mark)

The major issue identified by the study is the lack of teacher awareness about unions where teachers can confront their issues and seek support. Though there is no separate union for VET teachers in separate faculties, they all come under the umbrella of the Australian Education Union. However, at the same time, the teachers are not making any efforts to reverse the challenges in teaching and the working environment due to the teacher redundancies and unsecured working environment in the VET industry.

Code of conduct

Teachers reported that they could not get enough guidance from the policy and procedures of the RTO. Teachers pointed out that, in VET, each RTO had its own code of practice that encouraged high standards of behaviour and professionalism. Yet, their professionalism was being constantly reconstructed and redefined by the standards and rules established by governments to moderate or compensate for the ill-effects of the competition caused by the introduction of quasi-markets.

The teachers took the view that the codes were working poorly due to the following reasons: some of them considered that codes were poorly designed; some considered that there was a lack of reference to renewed reforms and development; some considered the frameworks were not understood by teachers; and some blamed the situation on a lack of training and assistance. Clearly, more detailed empirical research on this dimension is called for.

Discussion

The participants interviewed in this study explained their experiences of the key influences or drivers of the dilemmas that created the tensions in their working lives between the different responses in the commercialised context of VET sector competition and the requirements of broader responsibilities and accountabilities associated with more traditional educational roles. The key finding of the study – VET teachers practice in a complex VET enviornment which is becoming increasingly competitive and internationalised support the argument of Clemans (2009) who claimed that elements like funding and resources created competition between public and private VET institutes. Even more strongly, this finding confirms those of Knight (2010), Marginson and Eijkman (2007) and Phillimore and Koshy (2010) who identified that the goal of providing quality education must balance with the need for RTOs to achieve commercial sustainability. The present study found that the contemporary market contexts, characterised as they are by numerous and dynamic changes, require that all RTOs develop capacities for quick and flexible reactions in order to survive and develop their competitive capabilities in the market they serve. A key dimension for survival in a market-driven environment is how they perform relative to rival providers, and how able they are to communicate their better-than-average performance through persuasive market information signals. Students’ loyalty to an organisation varies on the basis of flexibilities offered by the RTOs. Under such a neoliberal regime, the marketing of courses has become a highly prioritised task for RTOs and the need to adapt to the students’ preferences increases accordingly. Teachers in this study stressed that the government policy which enabled approved RTOs to offer VET courses supported by government-funded, income-contingent student VFH loans had a corollary effect of promoting unethical strategies of marketing courses by RTOs to older, low-income and minority students, in part to attract the guaranteed federal financial aid revenue that these students generated. Increasingly and with more frequency, their employment was directly dependent on the success of recruitment and assessment.

In the process of realising RTOs’ ambitious business expectations, participants encountered ethical dilemmas that were related to their experienced tensions between their philosophy of education and the culture of the organisation. The participants stressed that the quality of VET education perceived by them as an important aspect of traditional educational standards had been compromised by expansion motivated by a profit motive and the adoption of a neoliberal model of accounting that determined success and failure in institutional and market terms. This new model undermined traditional ‘quality-driven’ educational standards and was seen by the participants as being driven by practices arising from the contemporary business model of education, through which an RTO’s profitability was given priority over the quality of teaching and student learning. These dilemmas were further exacerbated by the onset of new but related problems including inadequate teacher preparation time to deal with the tasks that the real business of education demanded, making them feel sacrificed on the altar of what were commonly seen as needless administration and compliance activities.

Although the participants identified that not all RTOs are run by competitive values and are committed to the educational mission that invest in their students and that offer programs in high-demand fields, they still do not engage in unethical practices in order to achieve the levels of profitability and growth that keep them competitive with less scrupulous players. The teacher claimed that a vast majority of the VET sector was, however, burdened by imperfect competition between profit-seeking providers whose business models have scant regard for educational standards.

The participants reported that they experienced dilemmas while deciding the best course of action when the rights of students conflicted with the rights of the employing RTOs. Some of the participants were ambiguous about what constituted ethical practice in the contemporary work environment. To act with integrity, a teacher had to consider how possible options for action aligned with their existing beliefs and values and previous decisions. The findings of the present study – that the participants found themselves ill prepared to make ethical decisions – support the argument of Tirri and Husu (2002) that teacher commitment to their moral, ethical and enculturation responsibilities prove overwhelming if they are not prepared well.

Conclusion

The competitive and individualistic values which are identified as underpinning the current global financial system are similar to those surrounding VET and these have come to the fore in the present paper. Neoliberal competition is frequently in contradiction to sound educational norms and values.

The participants reported that, overall, the language of business and competition had taken over quality education and services. However, the random application of principles of business to education has raised fundamental ethical and moral questions about the long-term impacts of such services to the students, RTOs, the VET industry and society more broadly. The question of the appropriateness of competitive strategies arises because competition within VET provisions displayed unethical features that were radically different from those encountered in traditional sectors of the economy. Furthermore, the current escalation of neoliberal structuration of VET education calls into question the social responsibility of RTOs in the direction they are presently taking. This study also found that even those for-profit colleges that are committed to the educational mission, that invest in their students and in robust support services and that offer programs in high-demand fields, still face pressures (and temptations!) to engage in troubling practices in order to achieve the levels of profitability and growth that keep them competitive with less scrupulous players.

This paper thus points to the effects of this combination of neoliberal, neoconservative and managerial tendencies on participating VET teachers by giving them a voice and exploring the dissonances they face as a consequence of conflicting demands and expectations. All too often, analyses of globalisation and the complex combination of neoliberalism and neo-conservatism remain on a meta-theoretical level, disconnected from the actual lived realities of a real teaching institution and professional work of its teachers. This paper has provided insights into how these contextual factors influenced participants’ practice; hopefully it also presents insights as to how the conflicts, anxieties and tensions faced by these teachers might be explored at even greater depth. In this sense, the way that contextual policy factors shape the macro-structuring of their environment and determine the rules which organise their working days, affecting their beliefs and practices as a result, has been explored empirically by tapping into the lived experiences of teaching staff and revealing substantial dissonance and tension at the heart of their professional lives.

The study thus recommends the importance of policy reforms taking into account the experiences and informed views of teachers. Teaching has its own norms and values which cannot be subject to the constraining pressures of the market. It is timely to remind ourselves that one of the most important activities scholars can engage in during this time of economic rationalism and imperial neo-conservatism is to analyse critically the production and circulation of these discourses and their effects on the lives of so many people. This study would urge us to take this role even more seriously than we have in the past.