ACCREDITATION SYSTEMS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK FOR FIJI

Prepared by

Selai Waqainabete
Project Officer National Qualifications Framework
Training & Productivity Authority of Fiji
Fiji

Veniana Kaisau
Senior Education Officer Home Economics
Technical Section, Ministry of Education
Fiji

INTRODUCTION

The global mobility of labor and the increasing rate of movement of skilled workers across international boundaries have brought a whole new set of challenges to educational and training institutions, to the labor market, the government, the planners of education and the entire nation.

For Fiji, the rate of skilled migration has continued to increase over the years and the skills gap left as they move is getting wider and wider. Even for basic skills such as those needed in the construction industry, for example, are difficult to find. The lack of skilled and semi-skilled and even professional workers in the labor market is a key challenge that institutions such as those in the Technical and Vocational Education and Training industry are facing.

The Technical and Vocational Education and Training Industry in Fiji is currently at a state of flux. The demand for training and the challenge to provide for the changing needs of the market has resulted in the need to be innovative and versatile. The loss of workers from the labor market although a threat initially, is however, also an opportunity and this has not been missed by training providers and tertiary institutions that have come into Fiji to try and capture the growing market of school leavers who come out of our school system every year.  This has also brought on a new set of problems and challenges that calls for the setting up of a system that can oversee and monitor the quality of training provided and ensure that when students graduate from these institutions they are able to find employment in the labor market because they have the basic skills and relevant knowledge needed.

CURRENT ACCREDITATION SYSTEM

Technical Institutes and Vocational Schools / Centres

With the lack of a national accreditation system, institutions carry out their own quality assurance and there is no guarantee that two institutions offering a program of the same name and level is necessarily of the same quality.

For established training institutions like the Fiji Institute of Technology and the University of the South Pacific, they have their own systems of accreditation and quality assurance similar to those carried out by institutions overseas such as Australia and New Zealand. This has also allowed them to recognize the programs and qualifications they each offer and award.

The Fiji Institute of Technology currently franchise some of its trade courses to a number of vocational schools and vocational centres and have a system whereby these schools and centres are assessed to ensure that they can conduct the courses to the level expected by the institute. 

This however may not be the same for other institutions, unless they are franchised courses, recognition and portability is not guaranteed.

Levy and Grants Scheme

As the National body responsible for industry training in Fiji, the Training and Productivity Authority of Fiji (TPAF) carries out assessment and accreditation of training providers under the Training Grants Scheme. The scheme operates parallel to the Levy Scheme which a payroll tax on all employers but with the exemption of specific categories of workers specified in the Act. The levy that is collected by TPAF is intended to encourage employers to train their employees and although it collects the levy it does not mean that it has to provide for every training requirement for each employer. While it is not necessary that TPAF  provide all the training it is however, a requirement that the training program to which employees are sent have been given grant claimable status. In order to provide a more systematic approach to processes managed by the Grants Unit, the Council (as it was previously known as the Fiji National Training Council prior to 2003) in 1994 established a Training Grants Committee from its management staff to deliberate on the scheme and to recommend changes.

Changes included a revised Grant Assessment Criteria which specified a more detailed and objective approach to assessment of training grants for employers. Assessment included a more in-depth approach that focused on comparing the employers training program in much greater detail against the criteria.

The accreditation system for Grant Claimable purpose is based on a number of very objective criteria such as the availability of facilities and equipment, appropriate teaching materials and manual, the use of appropriately qualified and experienced instructors, adherence to statutory requirements in cases where these are required and satisfaction of appropriate industry and professional bodies with the curriculum. Accreditation is given on a course by course basis and in cases where courses are on-going, accreditation is given for the entire period in which the course is expected to be offered. Under the Grants Scheme, employers are eligible to claim grant when their employees attend a training program that has been accredited with grant claimable status.

This accreditation system applies to all training providers providing training to employees of organizations that are covered under the Levy Scheme and these include private training providers and organizations.  For those institutions that do not train workers or people that are employed by organizations who are levy payers, they will have no reason to apply for grant claimable status and therefore do not come under the accreditation system required under the grant scheme. This basically means that apart from getting registered by the Ministry of Education, there is no other national system in place that will attest to the quality of training provided and recognition of certificates awarded by such private training providers.

THE NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK

The Fiji National Training (Amendment) Act was assented to by His Excellency the President of Fiji on 24 October 2002. This allowed for a number of changes one of which was the designation of TPAF as the national organization for technical and vocational training Fiji. The amendment also resulted in a change in the structure of the organization through the establishment of three new councils: National Training and Productivity Council, National Standards and Accreditation Council and National Quality Awards Council.

The mandate to establish a National Qualifications Framework for Technical and Vocational Training was also a result of the change brought about by the amendment of the Act to be overseen by the National Standards and Accreditation Council. Specific responsibilities include:

• Develop a national qualifications framework that complies with international standards
  
  
• Develop, apply and carry out regular review of vocational competency standards relating to qualifications specified in the national qualifications framework
  
  
• Arrange for the accreditation and registration of training providers and trainers and to approve regular review of such accreditation and registration
  
  
• Administer and conduct national examinations and tests for trades and other vocational skills pertaining to qualifications specified in the national qualifications framework
  
  
• Generally coordinate accessible and flexible qualifications systems, the standards of which are recognized internationally to meet national needs

The National Qualifications Framework will allow the award of National Certificates set against national standards which means that different levels of programs can be conducted at various centres and at different types of institutions leading to a national qualification. The framework is aimed at addressing the lack of a national system and is expected to achieve the following:

• Bring together separate education and training systems into a single, national system
  
  
• Provide an easier pathway for learners to enter the education and training system and be able to progress with it
  
  
• Open up opportunities for the recognition of prior learning and current competencies of those already in the industry
  
  
• Provide the avenue for the offering of different levels of programs at different centres but which can lead to a national qualification
  
  
• Ensure the quality of training provided meets industry needs
  
  
• Provide for the lack of any national system of accreditation and recognition of training providers and quality assurance of the courses they offer and the certificates they award
  
  
• Provide access to, and mobility and progression within education, training and career paths

Action Plan

In commencing the work on the development of the Qualifications Framework, a six phase action plan was drawn up. Work on the implementation of the plan began in June 2004 soon after the project officer was appointed in May.

• Phase 1: Development of  data base of industry and stakeholders
  
  To ensure that all key stakeholders and industry members are captured, extensive information gathering was carried out to establish a database. This provided the internal information source that enabled the project team to reach stakeholder and industry members during the awareness phase.
  
  
• Phase 2: Awareness Campaign
  
  This was carried out extensively covering all industry areas and all centers around the country. The level of awareness prior to the campaign was minimal for some industries however the support and agreement with the need to establish a framework was overwhelming.
  
  
• Phase 3: Model and Framework Presentation
  
  The third phase involved the running of a workshop to which industry members and stakeholders were invited. The workshop was conducted to:
  
  
  
  • Provide and an opportunity to hear from overseas (NZ, Australia) experts of their experiences of having a National Qualifications Framework
    
    
  • Bring together industry members and stakeholders to deliberate on a number of key issues pertaining to the kind of framework that would be developed for Fiji
    
    
  • Determine industry and stakeholder opinions and feelings about the framework

A key part of the program was the presentations of guest presenters from the Australian National Training Authority and the New Zealand Qualifications Authority on their frameworks. To allow for interaction and reflection on the issues highlighted by the guest presenters, the participants were divided into their industry groups for discussion.

In line with the objectives and the expected outcome of the workshop, five key questions were developed and given to the groups to be the focus of the discussions.

• What are your major expectations of the National Qualifications Framework?
  
  
• What do you think should be the key components of the framework?
  
  
• Should the adoption and implementation of the framework be made compulsory or voluntary?
  
  
• As TPAF has only been given two years, which organization do you think should ultimately be the custodian of the NQF? Why?
  
  
• Who will be responsible for funding the implementation and sustenance of the NQF?

Generally, the response from individuals as well as from the industry groups indicated strong support for the development of a National Qualifications Framework. It was also clear from the presentations and discussions that participants understood the intent of the framework and were therefore clear on their expectations and what they felt should be the final outcomes of the NQF.

Although TPAF is only looking at Technical and Vocational Training, all industry groups have indicated that coverage of the NQF should be all encompassing including all levels from the school system up to PhD. Level.

In identifying the key components of the framework, it was agreed that industry members and stakeholders should make up the standard setting bodies where involvement of the industry advisory council, some of which already exist, can be directly involved.

There was also general agreement on the fact that an independent body will need to be established to look after the NQF at the end of TPAF’s two years.

There was also strong support for the Government to provide funding not only for the implementation but also for the sustenance of the NQF and may be involve the users on a user pay basis once the NQF is up and running.

• Phase 4: Model Development

The project is currently at phase four with a draft model already developed and is now ready to be presented to industry members and stakeholders on August 10.

In terms of accreditation and quality assurance, the draft model outlines a proposed system of accreditation that will require training providers and institutions to conform to a number of requirements that will ensure their accreditation as a recognized training provider and therefore enable them to assess against standards registered on the framework, offer training aligned to the standards on the framework and award qualifications registered on the framework.

It is envisaged that the meeting on August 10 will result in the confirmation of the model that is appropriate for Fiji. Whether stakeholders will agree with the model which has been drafted in the light of the recommendations highlighted during the model presentation workshop or otherwise the progress of the project will depend on the outcome. Therefore the implementation of the fifth phase - Model finalization and sixth phase - Model implementation will be determined by the outcome of the August 10 meeting.

ISSUES

With the growing skills gap and the pressure placed on training institutions to train workers, and the general agreement on the need to establish a qualifications framework the added challenges that are likely to arise include issues such as:

• Reservation of certain industries with the establishment of the framework as it will only encourage workers to leave what is already a struggling industry in terms of maintaining skilled workers.
  
  
• Financial and other assistance that private training providers will need in order to upgrade their facilities to qualify for accreditation.
  
  
• Demand for increase in salary and wages when employees are able to gain recognition of their skills through assessment against standards. Where employers are currently paying less for lack of a formal qualification even though employees have the skills, provision for recognition of prior learning may bring on a new set of expectations from employees.