Concepts underpinning...Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework...

Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

Version 1.1, June 2017

Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework Version 1.1, June 2017 ii

Contents Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 1

Development .......................................................................................................................................... 2

Phase 1: 2013-2014 ............................................................................................................................. 2

Phase 2: 2014-2015 ............................................................................................................................. 2

Phase 3: 2016-2017 ............................................................................................................................. 3

Scope and coverage ................................................................................................................................ 4

Rationale ................................................................................................................................................. 5

Underpinning concepts .......................................................................................................................... 6

Professional standards ........................................................................................................................ 6

Professional competency model ......................................................................................................... 6

Service provision contexts .................................................................................................................. 7

Existing frameworks ............................................................................................................................ 9

Teacher standards models .............................................................................................................. 9

VET models .................................................................................................................................... 10

Foundation skills framework models ............................................................................................ 11

NZ Embedded Literacy and Numeracy Resources ........................................................................ 11

A holistic competence approach ................................................................................................... 11

Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... 13

Appendix A: National Project Reference Group 201617 ................................................................ 13

Appendix B: Phase 3 Consultation and Validation Activities ............................................................ 14

© Commonwealth of Australia 2017

This work was developed by Wignall Consulting Services for the SA Department of State

Development with NTS-COPE funding from the Australian Government Department of Education and

Training.

Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework Version 1.1, June 2017 1

Overview This resource documents the development of the Foundation Skills Professional Standards

Framework (‘the Framework’) and explains underpinning concepts that inform the Framework. The

resource is one of a suite of resources that support the Framework. Other resources provide

information on the structure and purpose of the Framework, how the Framework might be used,

and how to interpret terms used in the Framework capabilities.

Diagram 1: The Framework and supporting resources


Development The Framework was developed with funding from National Training System Commonwealth Own

Purpose Expenditure (NTS COPE), managed and coordinated by the Department of State

Development, South Australian Government, on behalf of all Australian Governments between

20132017. Development commenced in 2013 to support the fourth priority from the National

Foundation Skills Strategy for Adults (the Strategy).

The development of the Framework was overseen by a national reference group with representation

from the Commonwealth and each State and Territory.

Appendix A lists membership of the national project reference group.

Work on the development of the Framework took place in three phases.

Phase 1: 2013-2014 The first phase of development was a scoping phase, conducted as an element of the National

Foundation Skills Workforce Development project, managed by TAFE SA under the auspices of the

South Australian Department of State Development on behalf of all Australian governments. This

phase explored options for professional standards by examining professional standard models used

in a range of industries and professions, and consulting with practitioners delivering foundation skills

in a range of environments across Australia.

Recommendations from the scoping phase, which informed phases 2 and 3 of the Framework’s

development, stressed the need for further research and consultation to:

• clarify the skills and expertise that practitioners who deliver foundation skills bring to their

work in community, classroom and workplace settings

• discuss the best ways to support practitioners’ professional development

• consider the viability and shape of a professional standards framework.

Phase 2: 2014-2015 The second phase of development was conducted as an element of the National Foundation Skills

Strategy project, also managed by TAFE SA under the auspices of the South Australian Department

of State Development on behalf of all Australian Governments.

Phase 2 activity combined quantitative and qualitative research and included:

• desk-based research on the qualifications used to credential practitioners delivering

foundation skills

• a national practitioner survey conducted by the National Centre for Vocational Education

Research (NCVER)1

• narratives reflecting on the professional journeys of a range of practitioners

• consultation with practitioners and stakeholders through a series of focus groups.

The aim of this phase was to gather new data and encourage widespread engagement with the issue

of practitioner pathways and professional development. Through information dissemination and the

involvement of key professional associations, dialogue was initiated with training providers,

community organisations, and hundreds of individuals who self-identified as having a role in

1 National Centre for Vocational Education Research, 2015, Who is delivering foundation skills? A survey of the LLN and education and training workforces.


foundation skills provision. In total, more than 800 people participated in the phase 2 research

activities.

Key findings included:

• acknowledgement of the complexity of foundation skills and acceptance that no single

individual can be an expert in all aspects of foundation skills provision

• a widely-held belief that responsibility for foundation skills belongs to everyone and that

collaboration between practitioners is often required to meet learners’ needs

• identification of the idiosyncratic combinations of qualifications and experiences that equip

practitioners for their work in foundation skills

• recognition that qualifications are only one part of practitioner identity and that skill

development occurs over time

• awareness of the opportunity to use the knowledge and experience of established

practitioners to upskill the workforce by engaging them in guiding and supporting new

entrants.

These findings informed the development of a draft framework of capabilities for foundation skills

provision. Rather than create professional standards that establish professional benchmarks, the

development of a capability framework was seen to better accommodate the diverse roles

performed in the foundation skills field, and provide a common language to describe capabilities

achieved through credentials, professional development and practical experience.

Recommendations from the research and consultation informed phase 3 of the development

process. These included the need for:

• further development of the framework content to ensure relevant areas of specialisation are

captured

• validation with key stakeholders and professional associations

• exemplar mapping of qualifications, skill sets, professional development and practitioner

spiky profiles

• ongoing engagement with stakeholders.

Phase 3: 2016-2017 This third phase of development was conducted by Wignall Consulting Services and managed by the

South Australian Department of State Development on behalf of all Australian governments. The aim

of this phase was to finalise and validate the capability framework, and to develop resources that

would support its use to:

• describe current practitioner capability

• identify focus areas for professional capacity building

• describe expected practitioner capabilities for job descriptions or program requirements

• describe and organise professional development options.

Phase 3 activity included multiple rounds of national consultations via webinar and face-to-face

workshops to validate draft materials with practitioners, professional bodies and other stakeholders.

Appendix B lists key consultation dates and locations for phase 3 project activity.


Phase 3 of development resulted in the production of the following documents:

• The Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

• A guide to the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

• Power Point Introduction to the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

• Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

• Understanding the capabilities of the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

• Examples of use of the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework

The documents produced reflect stakeholder feedback on the need for resources that support

understanding how to interpret the Framework’s capability descriptors and how to use the

Framework in different contexts.

Feedback also indicated that stakeholders would prefer online tools for using the Framework.

Although the development of online tools was not within the scope of phase 3 project activity, a

prototype online tool was developed with the intention that it could be further explored and

developed in future.

The consultation and validation process generated the following recommendations for possible

future activity that would support the implementation and use of the Framework.

1. Expand the pre-release version of the online tool to support ease-of-use of the Framework.

2. Develop a quality assurance tool to identify levels of responsibility for foundation skills

service provision.

3. Provide professional development opportunities for potential users to learn about the

Framework and explore its possible uses.

4. Compile implementation examples.

5. Benchmark relevant qualifications and program requirements using the Framework.

Scope and coverage The Strategy that instigated the development of the Framework recognises shared responsibility for

the provision of foundation skills services and support. Priority 4 of the Strategy focuses on building

the capacity of the education and training workforces to deliver foundation skills. Under this priority,

Australian governments agreed to work collaboratively to:

• Strengthen and diversify the identity of the foundation skills practitioner field, and

• Support professional expertise in foundation skills delivery, including by exploring options for

developing professional standards for practitioners.

The Strategy recognises that many people have a role in supporting the foundation skills of others.

In addition to specialist practitioners, there are a range of education and training

providers and frontline workers operating within workplace, community services

and education settings who have the opportunity to assist adults with foundation

skills needs. Examples of these education and training providers and frontline

workers include employment and referral agency staff, counsellors, human

resources managers and trade teachers, among many others. Although they are

not foundation skills specialists, in the course of their work these people need

some capacity to recognise individuals who need assistance with foundation skills


development and the ability to do something about it within the limits of their job

role.2

The Framework provides a schema to recognise and support the diverse range of capabilities

required to provide foundation skills services in the workplace, in vocational education and training,

and in community contexts. As recommended by the research findings from phase 2 of the

development process, the Framework does not establish professional benchmarks to separate

specialist foundation skills practitioners from others. Rather, the Framework provides a consistent

language that can be used to articulate professional standards for a range of foundation skills

provision roles and contexts.

The multidimensional nature of the Framework encompasses wide variation in responsibility for

foundation skills provision, from awareness at one end of the continuum to primary accountability

and advanced knowledge and skill at the other. The Framework allows individuals’ skills, knowledge

and experience to be plotted against consistent descriptions of professional capability – producing

nuanced individual profiles that reflect unique combinations of knowledge and experience.

The Framework is divided into three domains:

• professional knowledge

• professional practice

• professional engagement.

Each domain includes 12 capabilities divided into three streams, giving a total of 36 capabilities. The

capabilities are described at four levels of professional standard, reflecting increasing knowledge and

responsibility.

For more information on the structure of the Framework refer to A guide to the Foundation Skills

Professional Standards Framework.

Rationale The Strategy identified the potential for professional standards to strengthen and diversify the

identity of the foundation skills field. While the concept of a single ‘foundation skills field’ is at odds

with the array of people working to support adults with their foundation skills, the development of

the Framework has the potential to connect people in disparate roles and contexts.

The development of a shared language for foundation skills provision can help to:

• build and promote a shared understanding of professional practice

• recognise areas that should be targeted for workforce capability building

• identify career pathways and related roles

• value the contribution of practitioners with diverse roles and responsibilities

• encourage knowledge sharing, mentoring and the renewal of professional knowledge and

skill.

2 SCOTESE, 2012, National Foundation Skills Strategy for Adults, p. 20


Underpinning concepts The Framework captures and describes the capabilities required across a wide range of job roles

within education and training, personal and community, and workplace and employment contexts.

Through consultation in the development phase, many practitioners concluded that no single

individual can be an expert in all aspects of foundation skills provision. The range of provision –

across learning contexts, learner groups, foundation skill levels, and skill areas including the breadth

of language, literacy and numeracy and employability skills – provides multiple fields of expertise

and many niche areas of specialisation. As such, not all the capabilities in the Framework will apply

to all practitioners.

Capabilities relating to the delivery and assessment of English language, literacy, numeracy and

employability skills have been separated into individual streams in the Framework for specificity.

However, this can appear to create an artificial separation between the capability descriptors. In

reality, there can be strong interdependence between these capabilities. For example, practitioners’

ability to deliver employability skills may be highly dependent on their ability in the delivery of

English language – with all that entails in terms of cultural competency, learning styles and

methodology.

Through gradations of level, the Framework makes it possible to capture the way in which an

individual practitioner’s capabilities combine to form a unique profile.

Professional standards Foundation skills delivery is a complex field of practice that includes a diversity of practitioners

delivering a wide variety of skills across a range of contexts. Research findings from the early phases

of the Framework development process, indicated that a range of practitioner capabilities is

required and that there is no single definition of a foundation skills practitioner.

The first phase of the Framework development project explored options for developing professional

standards for practitioners who are delivering foundation skills. Professional standards were

identified in the Strategy as a potential mechanism for strengthening and diversifying the identity of

the foundation skills practitioner field, and supporting professional expertise in foundation skills

delivery.

In many other industries, formal professional standards include structures and systems linked to

descriptors of associate and professional roles within the industry. Examples of structures and

systems include qualification frameworks, codes of ethics, membership arrangements, continuing

professional development requirements, registration conditions, and quality assurance procedures.

Early project research indicated that the introduction of new structures and systems, especially if

they were to be regulated or compulsory, was not supported or necessary. However, there was

support for a standard framework that would provide a consistent, shared language for describing

and documenting the responsibilities and capabilities of those working in foundation skills service

delivery.

Professional competency model The Framework is based on a professional competency model of expertise, i.e. a continuum of competence rather than a model where the level of the practitioner remains static. The language of the Framework and its capability descriptors convey increasing knowledge and responsibility across four levels.

The levels of professional standard reflect the fact that the provision of foundation skills services


often relies on a team effort involving several people with varying levels of responsibility and expertise. The levels apply to each capability and indicate the degree to which that capability is central to someone’s role and how much it is their sole responsibility. In this light, level one should not be viewed as a beginning stage of development, but a reflection of job roles where the provision of foundation skills services is not the main focus and is done only with support and collaboration from others.

Table 1 summarises how increasing responsibility and knowledge expectations apply across the four

levels of the Framework to generate a gradation of expertise for each capability.

Table 1: Responsibility and knowledge across the Framework’s four levels

Levels: 1 2 3 4

Responsibility:

Seeks support and

advice from

experienced

foundation skills

providers

Takes responsibility

with support or

guidance, or as part

of a team

Takes responsibility

independently and

in collaboration

with others

Assumes

independent

responsibility and

provides leadership

or mentoring for

others

Knowledge:

Has awareness of

the subject but

needs assistance to

apply to own

practice

Has sound

knowledge of the

subject and applies

to own practice

with some guidance

Has comprehensive

knowledge of the

subject and thinks

critically and

creatively about the

application of

knowledge to own

practice

Has mastered

available

knowledge of the

subject and

systematically

reviews and

evaluates the

application of

knowledge to own

practice

Language used in the Framework descriptors was drawn from the Australian Qualifications

Framework (AQF) to reflect the depth of knowledge required for the different levels of capability.

Capabilities at levels 3 and 4 of the Framework are generally underpinned by the type of knowledge

provided through qualifications at AQF level 8 and above.

The Framework is designed so that practitioners can describe themselves or their practice across multiple levels, depending on the capability being considered. Individual practitioners have their own unique set of capabilities that have been developed to different extents, and exercised at different levels, depending on their own context knowledge, skills and experience.

The Framework’s professional competency model supports continuing professional development. Rather than specify a point at which practitioners are deemed ‘competent’, the Framework highlights where capabilities can be further extended and diversified for different contexts.

Service provision contexts The Framework describes capabilities as generically as possible to enable them to be used across the

diverse contexts in which foundation skills services are delivered. Foundation skills service delivery

takes place in three broad contexts:

• education and training

• workplace and employment


• personal and community

Differences in culture, objectives, expectations, rules, stakeholders and resources make every

context unique. Along with the three broad categories above, service delivery contexts may also be

distinguished in relation to their:

• delivery environment – physical or online, formal or informal

• intended outcome – targeted foundation skills building, integrated skill development, skills

assistance or support.

The context in which service provision takes place affects how the capability descriptors in the

Framework will be interpreted and demonstrated. Table 2 captures the range of contexts in which

foundation skills service provision may take place, although many examples of foundation skills

service provision will not fit neatly within a single context.

Table 2: Contexts for foundation skills service delivery

Context Delivery environment Intended outcome

Education and Training

All types of formal education and training environments, including

classroom, outdoor learning space and online delivery locations of adult

learning, training or education programs

1. Improving an individual’s foundation skills, e.g. Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP), Skills for Education and Employment (SEE), Certificate in General Education for Adults (CGEA)

2. Supporting competency in a vocational skill with contextualised foundation skill building, e.g. calculating area in a carpentry training program

3. Supporting individuals or groups who need help with a foundation skill, e.g. integrated or stand-alone learner support models

Personal and Community

All types of personal and community environments, including physical and

online locations for social service agencies, community services

facilities, libraries and community-based organisations

1. Improving an individual’s foundation skills, e.g. tutoring in a community house or library

2. Supporting participation in community or personal programs or activities with contextualised foundation skills building, e.g. reading and numeracy skill development as part of a cooking class

3. Supporting individuals or groups who need help with a foundation skill, e.g. helping someone fill in a form as part of social service provision

Workplace and

Employment

All types of indoor and outdoor workplace environments, including

apprentice training facilities, workplaces and job/employment

service agencies

1. Improving an individual’s foundation skills, e.g. activities to build communication skills for participating in a meeting, or writing skills using organisational templates for case notes

2. Supporting the development of vocational skills with contextualised foundation skills development, e.g. knowledge of fractions to underpin use of workplace equipment

3. Supporting individuals or groups who need help with a foundation skill, e.g. helping to complete a workplace incident report


Existing frameworks Research on existing vocational education and training (VET) and teacher capability frameworks

contributed to the development of this Framework. This research examined standards-based

documents developed for the teaching and training sectors. Examples include:

• AITSL Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (for primary and secondary teachers)

www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers

• ACTA EAL/D Elaborations of the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers

www.tesol.org.au/RESOURCES/Australian-Professional-Standards-for-Teachers

• Draft Professional Standards for Vocational Education and Training Practitioners (Version 1.4

2015 QLD, unpublished)

• VET Practitioner Capability Framework (IBSA 2013) https://store.ibsa.org.au/vet-

practitioner-capability-framework

The project also examined frameworks used to describe foundation skills in education and training,

such as the Australian Core Skills Framework and the Core Skills for Work Developmental

Framework, and selected models of international best practice, such as plain English language in the

Embedded Literacy and Numeracy web-based resource from the National Centre of Literacy and

Numeracy for Adults, University of Waikato, New Zealand.

www.literacyandnumeracyforadults.com/resources/356158

None of the models examined had all of the features that were identified in phase 2 research as

being required for the development of professional standards for the foundation skills workforce.

However, some structural features and language from the examined models were found to be useful

for the conceptualisation, structure and function of the Framework.

The NCVER research report found that Australian foundation skills practitioners come from diverse

educational and vocational backgrounds and teach, train and assess in a variety of environments.

These environments include large and small registered training organisations (RTOs), schools,

universities, adult community education and social service organisations, industries, and businesses.

The research also found that teaching, training and assessing are, for many practitioners, their main

job while for others, teaching, training and assessing are an adjunct to their main work. The findings

indicated that not all practitioners were formally delivering and assessing foundation skills but were,

nevertheless, supporting foundation skills development in associated roles such as placement,

information provision, resource development, and management roles.

The research showed that a flexible bank of capabilities, at a range of levels, is needed to describe

the skills of the diverse workforce delivering foundation skill services in a range of social service,

community, education and training, and workplace environments.

Teacher standards models Examination of a range of teacher standards highlighted the well-established organisational

structure derived from the Standards for Teachers of English Language and Literacy in Australia

(STELLA, 1999). The STELLA Standards Framework grouped capability statements under three broad

headings:

1. Professional knowledge

2. Professional practice

3. Professional engagement

http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers

http://www.tesol.org.au/RESOURCES/Australian-Professional-Standards-for-Teachers

https://store.ibsa.org.au/vet-practitioner-capability-framework

https://store.ibsa.org.au/vet-practitioner-capability-framework

http://www.literacyandnumeracyforadults.com/resources/356158


These categories are also represented in the structures of both the AITSL Australian Professional

Standards for Teachers and the ACTA EAL/D Elaborations of the Australian Professional Standards for

Teachers. Consultation through the project validation workshops found that these categories were

well recognised and accepted as an organising principle.

To accommodate the range of roles and responsibilities in foundation skills provision –

encompassing roles in teaching, program management, and associated support services –

capabilities need to be described at a number of levels, reflecting increasing knowledge and

responsibility for foundation skills services. People working in the provision of foundation skills

services may have highly developed skills and knowledge in some areas but not in others, depending

on the context and requirements of their role. For this reason, the bands of practice level used in

many frameworks, e.g. the VET Capability Framework, are not appropriate for describing the diverse

skill sets of those working with foundation skills.

VET models The unpublished Draft Professional Standards for Vocational Education and Training Practitioners

Version 1.4 2015 (the Standards), developed for generalist practitioners within the VET sector, had

many useful organising principles and standards statements that aligned with the skills and

knowledge that had been identified as being relevant to foundation skill service provision in the

phase 2 research. The Standards contain generic standards statements that can be applied in a

variety of education and training contexts. They apply to many practitioner roles including teachers,

trainers, assessors, lecturers, tutors, educational managers, workplace trainers and assessors,

workplace consultants, instructional designers, assessment developers, online facilitators, or work-

based trainers.

The Standards represent what practitioners should aspire to know and do as professionals in VET,

but not all statements in the Standards apply to all roles. The Framework also covers a diversity of

roles and has been constructed in a similar manner so that practitioners do not need to address all

36 capabilities, but can select those that are relevant to their role.

The VET Capability Framework (IBSA, 2013)3 describes a set of capabilities that ‘are intended to be

short and accessible ways of explaining what good performance looks like’. Its use in the VET system

to describe diverse workforce capability and drive professional development mirrors the intended

use of the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework.

The VET Capability Framework describes itself as a toolbox that can be used in a range of ways. The

tools developed to accompany the VET Capability Framework allow RTOs to use it for staff

development, performance feedback, and recruitment and selection; and practitioners to use it to

describe and review their capabilities and plan their careers.

The Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework can also be used by individual practitioners

for self-review, and by managers to examine notions of broader workforce capability. These in turn

lead to the identification of formal and informal professional development and use of a clear, shared

language that allows practitioners and systems to ‘talk with one another’ about expectations,

support and outcomes.

3 The VET Practitioner Capability Framework – Implementation Guide – Innovation & Business, 2013

Skills Australia<www.ibsa.org.au/vet-practitioner-capability-framework>


Foundation skills framework models The project examined the structure of two major frameworks used in the foundation skills field to

describe learners’ skills – the Australian Core Skills Framework (ACSF) and the Core Skills for Work

(CSfW) Developmental Framework. Although these frameworks are not directly linked to describing

practitioners’ skills, they contain structural features that were identified as matching the needs of

the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework.

Features of these frameworks that informed the project include:

• The Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1984) model of skills acquisition used in the CSfW which recognises

five stages of skill development: novice, advanced beginner, competent, proficient and

expert

• The ‘spiky profile’ concept from the ACSF that allows an individual’s skills to be described at

varying ‘levels’ across a set of skills.

Both the ACSF and CSfW enable reporting of a mixed level of performance across a number of skills

and include the notion of skill improvement across time based on a continuous improvement model,

rather than static bands of performance. The descriptor statements of the Foundation Skills

Professional Standards Framework are statements of what a person may be able to do at a particular

level of performance. As in the ACSF, the levels of the Foundation Skills Professional Standards

Framework are based on the concept that a practitioner may have capability at different levels

across the 36 capabilities.

NZ Embedded Literacy and Numeracy Resources

With a view to creating a set of plain English capability statements, the project drew on the language

of this web-based resource from New Zealand. These resources use language about the skills

required to effectively meet learners’ needs in a web-based professional development resource

model. Terms used are linked to research and professional development resources. One of the

resources developed to support the Framework, Understanding the capabilities in the Foundation

Skills Professional Standards Framework is based on this concept and could in future be adapted to

an online format with links to existing research and resources.

A holistic competence approach Based on analysis of these framework models, the project explored holistic competence models of

standards development that are in keeping with the notion of continuing professional development,

rather than a notion of a point at which a teacher can be labelled as competent (and the attending

risk of stasis).

A holistic competence model…

... acknowledges that competence is complex and structured; that its many elements (competencies,

if you like) never appear unaccompanied in practice, but always in structured sets, and the

combinations of elements in these sets vary from time to time, place to place and practitioner to

practitioner. Which elements are assembled into practical structures will depend on judgements


made by the practitioner as he or she pursues goals and modifies performance in response to

feedback from the environment4.

In line with this model, the Framework does not set required standards as a single set of capabilities.

Rather, it enables users to make a judgement about which sets of capability descriptors describe the

required level of performance. Instead of establishing professional standards, the Framework

provides a consistent language that can be used to articulate professional standards for a range of

foundation skills provision roles and contexts.

4 Walker, 1993 p.94 in ‘Towards the development of standards of professional practice for the Victorian TAFE teaching workforce, Final Project Report: Standards and their use in enhancing professional practice’, Office of Training and Tertiary Education, Mulcahy & Jasman, 2003, www.ibrarian.net/navon/paper/Final_Project_Report_.pdf?paperid=1220787

http://www.ibrarian.net/navon/paper/Final_Project_Report_.pdf?paperid=1220787


Appendices

Appendix A: National Project Reference Group 201617

Janice Calcei and Cheryl Wiltshire Western Australian Department of Training and Workforce Development

Anita Dolstra ACT Treasury and Economic Development Directorate

Helen Ebsworth LINC Tasmania

Di Fong Training NT

Karen Horner TAFE South Australia

Louis Maule TAFE New South Wales

Tim Rawlings PwC’s Skills for Australia

Les Retford Queensland Department of Education and Training

Linno Rhodes Victorian Adult Literacy Basic Education Council (VALBEC)

Ben Rice South Australian Department of State Development

Cara Sergeant Industry Skills and Quality Group, Australian Government Department of Education and Training

Desirae Young Foundation Skills Branch, Australian Government Department of Education and Training


Appendix B: Phase 3 Consultation and Validation Activities

Project activity Participants Location Date

Framework introduction webinar 53 Webinar 7 November 2016



Framework exploration and discussion 28 Sydney Conference

8 December 2016

Self-review validation workshop 11 Brisbane 14 March 2017

Program requirements validation workshop 17 Sydney 15 March 2017

Self-review validation workshop 7 Sydney 15 March 2017

Program requirements validation workshop 6 Canberra 16 March 2017

Professional development validation workshop

7 Melbourne 17 March 2017

Self-review validation workshop 6 Melbourne 17 March 2017

Self-review validation workshop 13 Adelaide 23 March 2017

Workforce capability validation workshop 15 Darwin 24 March 2017


9 Perth 27 March 2017

Self-review validation workshop 14 Perth 27 March 2017

Workforce capability validation workshop 10 Hobart 29 March 2017

Self-review discussion webinar 27 Webinar 27 April 2017

Program requirements discussion webinar 15 Webinar 27 April 2017

Workforce capability discussion webinar 4 Webinar 28 April 2017

Professional development discussion webinar

11 Webinar 28 April 2017

Validation workshop follow-up survey 54 Online survey 1 May 2017


20 Melbourne conference

19 May 2017

Framework introduction and progress report 20 Perth conference

29 May 2017

Subject matter expert consultation 6 Phone and email

June 2017

Concepts underpinning...Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework...

Documents

Transcript of Concepts underpinning...Concepts underpinning the Foundation Skills Professional Standards Framework...