follow the WSQ requirements. Reflecting a similar shift towards the idea of curriculum more as a product was Sara, a director in an ATO that was approved less than 6 months ago. She explained: … as we move more and more into WSQ and I tend to think that over time some of our, quite a bit of our things are going to shift into WSQ anyway, then we become more and more outcomes driven … we used to be very process [and] praxis and [follow] this transformative-type learning but we are gradually shifting into a more competencybased, more product, more outcomes.
Figure 3.1: Sara. As reflected in her response, shown in Figure 3.1, a number of the parameters (such as ‘practice orientation’ and ‘model’) are very much to the right, under instrumental. Some parameters (such as ‘learning’ and ‘review and improvement’) still retain the interpretive features. Sara emphasised that some aspects of their training remained the same as what they had been doing for the past 15 years, even though they were now operating within the WSQ framework: WSQ definitely runs quite differently from how we have traditionally been doing things but the learning outcomes are not very different … the two things that … are different – one would be the fact that we have to adhere to the competency standard so meaning to say if a competency standard has already defined a certain learning unit in a certain manner, we often find that we can’t deviate too much even though we feel that something else may be better for that set of learner profile or that kind of a learning outcome that we want to achieve. … The second thing is of course the assessment because for our traditional offering we actually don’t assess in that manner but given that WSQ is competency-based and that assessment element comes into play, being a lot more I would say more conscious of that is important when we look at curriculum but whether it’s WSQ or our traditional offering, we have always been very outcomebased. Sara seemed to indicate that some measure of negotiation and calibration within the organisation is necessary to facilitate the transformations to the design and implementation process. Tim reflected similar sentiments when he worked with training organisations embarking on the WSQ journey. These ‘fixed’ areas, which are non-negotiable, can be a sticking point for training organisations to manage and navigate. Tim commented further: WSQ [has a] slightly different slant. Why? [When] most people embark [on] WSQ, they’ve been told or given certain deliverables already, and these deliverables are fixed.
50
