A place for social science – comment by CEO Craig Robertson

Do the social sciences have a place in vocational education and training? That was a question given to several TAFE representatives during the week.

When the consultation with The Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia was first mooted, I thought there was little room. Apart from an already crowded assessment regime (a point raised by all participants) the study in VET of matters that fall under the seven major fields of social science – Anthropology, Archaeology, Economics, Geography, History, Law, Linguistics, Politics, Psychology and Sociology – is not apparent.

From a different angle, however, it is clear. The action of social scientists is directed to examining institutions like government, the economy, and family, how individuals and groups interact with one another and what drives human behaviour. Here are some examples from training packages:

The disembowelment of knowledge from the learning journey of VET students under training packages is recognised by many commentators. Leesa Wheelahan writes[1] extensively on this subject. Writing about units of competency, Leesa says:

Required knowledge …. is listed as unproblematised concepts that have been decontextualised from disciplinary systems of meaning

The contested nature of management and leadership are absent (in unit on Manage and Lead People) while an idealised notion of management and leadership is presented, contextualised by unproblematic notions of work

How is the challenge set by Leesa dealt with? The AQF is a starting point. The revised AQF, accepted by governments but not yet implemented, at its core defines qualification as covering three domains: Knowledge – field specific information and ideas needed to inform action; Skills – the abilities required to take action; and Application – taking action.

VET focuses its accreditation and regulation effort toward application – taking action, despite the hints within training packages of the knowledge required to buttress these actions.

The work of Jeanne Gamble[2] offers some direction. Gamble analysed certain occupations looking for the place of formal knowledge like systems knowledge and scientific knowledge and situated knowledge such as craft and ‘how to’ knowledge. Samples for baking and mechatronics are shown at the end of the newsletter.

There is lots of talk about the place of curriculum in the national architecture of the system – responsibility possibly to be given to skills organisations, for example and Macklin proposes it be examined as a strategy in Victoria. Possibly that’s the answer.

This issue is not frivolous if we heed the Deloitte report of 2019 where they say the future of work is more of the head and heart than by hand. For example, 86 percent of the jobs created between now and 2030 will be knowledge worker jobs, with one quarter professionals in business services, health, education or engineering and two-thirds will be soft-skill intensive.

The Academy in its report poses a new future for social science focused on understanding and informing modern society and preparing people to address the challenges facing the world in the 21^st Century. VET faces the same future and needs new tools by which to do so.