South African vocational colleges' experiences delivering vocational learning programs using occupational standards

INTRODUCTION

South African policy objectives for technical and vocational education and training (TVET) emphasize the relevance of training to address a range of social and economic problems (Department of Higher Education and Training, 2013). In the last twenty years, trends in policy advice from international organizations (Fretwell et al., 2001; OECD, 2010), inter alia the International Labour Organization (ILO), have suggested the development of occupational standards and profiles which capture broad work competencies that inform training programs (Aggarwal, 2020). A recent Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) manual (OECD, 2024) states as follows: "Occupational standards are recognized documents that define the skills, abilities and attitudes that workers in an occupation must possess to effectively carry out their tasks". Similar to ILO and OECD proposals, South African policymakers introduced occupational qualifications with extensive advice to facilitate the development of occupational standards that are elaborated on in documents for intended curriculum and assessment criteria (QCTO, 2014). The study explored South African colleges' experiences with implementing curricula based on occupational standards and set forth mitigation strategies for colleges in other countries to guide curriculum content.

METHODS AND RESEARCH DESIGN

The article draws on data from research (Alphonsus, 2024) that initially identified 5 high performing vocational colleges, based on the successful completion of learning programs in which students had received national certification to practice their trades. A sample of four successful colleges was drawn to represent urban and rural areas, as well as those privately and/or publicly funded. Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted, the Table 1 summarizes the number of each type of participant and the participant description.

Qualitative research project applied phenomenological study methods (Creswell, 2007) Data analysis was undertaken within a conceptual framework derived from "occupational capacity", a term that encapsulates two broad elements needed for the development of expertise to practice: that of specialized or systematically organized knowledge; and the social organization of work. Winch (2015) argued that an individual must possess systematically organized knowledge to exercise professional judgment and to be able to justify decision-making and actions in an occupation.In the German context, Winch (2010) identified two kinds of propositional knowledge: Kenntnis which refers to contingent knowledge and discrete propositional knowledge, and Wissen which refers to organized propositional knowledge.

Winch's explanation of professional judgment in occupational capacity is based on several types of knowledge (knowledge by acquaintance, practical knowledge, and disciplinary knowledge) all working together. The concept of inferentialism is used to show connections between bodies of knowledge in systematically organized knowledge and their relationship to practice. Winch (2013) holds that inferentialism within a systematic body of knowledge is a characteristic of an occupational practitioner.

The analysis of the interview data used the occupational capacity conceptual framework to find common themes among participants' experiences of the phenomenon—interpreting and translating intended curricula documents into enacted curricula. The common themes as synthesized descriptions "consist of 'what' they experienced and 'how' they experienced it" (Creswell, 2007). For this article the descriptions were analyzed by comparing with an understanding of systematically organized knowledge—the results section captures the essence of the participant's experiences. For example, one common theme described in detail by participants was how they wrestled with making connections in the curriculum between the development of knowledge (often referred to as theory) and practical skills in relation to the practice with a focus on how the student builds increasingly complex knowledge and skills—this concern is closely reflected much needed inferentialism needed for practice which is developed in systematically organized knowledge in the curriculum.

RESULTS

Three teaching and learning experts, one curriculum advisor, two lecturers and two work experience managers concurred that official occupational standards were either too broad or too specific to translate directly into enacted curriculum. Thus, the translation required occupational standards and module content interpretation by subject matter experts about content rationalization, additional content needed, and impractical content considering the resources available at colleges. While participants supported the move towards a qualification that combined theory (knowledge), practical skills, and work experience, challenges arose with regard to delivering the required embedded knowledge, abilities, and skills linked to work tasks, such as insufficient time for foundational knowledge and skills, and difficulties in sequencing curriculum content.

A teaching and learning expert illustrated the problem as follows: "So, they don't tell you, you need to do science, or you need to do math. There is no module assigned to that. But if you would look at the embedded knowledge inside the knowledge module—the learner will not be able to do the electrical calculations, the mechanical drawings for toolmaker if they do not have those four subjects [Mathematics, Science, Trade Theory and Mechanical Drawing], and you cannot incorporate that information into the specific learning fields, because then it will be really too much. The reason why I'm saying that is the timeframe is so short; there's no room to give the student all that information".

A third of the participants (three teaching and learning experts and two lecturers) complained that foundational knowledge and skills required to meet the learning outcomes were often missing from documents or referred to ambiguously as "embedded knowledge" without explaining how such knowledge was to be acquired.

An extract from the data below foregrounds a key difference between learning how to practice, and how practice itself occurs. Another teaching and learning expert describes how the separation of content from the work tasks performed in the occupation lacks the integration needed for teaching and learning processes: "So, the expectation, when you look at the document, it's as if these things are taught in silos. But in practice, we don't separate them. They are meant to occur at the same time. For example, how do you teach an apprentice to use a certain machine? In teaching that, that aspect, you cannot just teach how to use the machine. Because at the same time, this learner should actually produce certain components with this machine. So those aspects don't sit separately. They happen at the same time. So then on top of it, I'm teaching them the safety aspects. I'm teaching them the theory on that machine and I'm teaching them how to actually operate the machine and in operating during the process of operate, we integrate by them actually bringing a particular task that this learner is doing, and producing. So, at the end of the learning intervention, there is a practical component that sitting here and saying, right, so do you now understand how all these steps bring you to this point? But sometimes when you look at the document, how the things are structured, you would feel as if they are sitting in silos … it takes a person who's had that experience to know …"

In terms of the understanding of systematically organized knowledge as being connections between know-how and know-that, the participant explains that connections between knowledge and skills need to be made in enacted curricula to enable students to become occupational practitioners. As a result of the "siloed" approach in the intended curriculum document, a group of experienced teaching and learning experts is required to develop the enacted curriculum, thus defeating the purpose of regulatory documents that seek to provide curriculum content guidance for college teaching and learning in South Africa.

CONCLUSION

The article sets forth two challenges experienced in South African vocational college curriculum implementation. First, foundational knowledge and skills, and associated time allocations are not clearly defined in the curriculum documents. For instance, many colleges had added a pre-requisite foundational curriculum component, leading to an additional year of training before students could enter the learning program. Second, the process of sequencing the curriculum content was difficult because of the way content had been fragmented into different modules and much integration was needed. Curriculum documents therefore had to rely on groups of experienced disciplinary experts to interpret curriculum requirements to deliver the program, and such experts were not always available to colleges or were expensive to procure. Colleges suggested that a list of experienced enacted curriculum experts be made available to colleges struggling with translating and sequencing curriculum from intended curriculum documents. While international education policy advice often suggests that occupational standards are a way to improve vocational education delivery, this may be challenging in poorly resourced national vocational education and training systems. This research found that even well-resourced vocational colleges in South Africa needed guidance for curriculum content development based on occupational standards.