This is tedious. I'm not misleading people. There aren't any units of competency called Novel Writing etc in the existing course. There are 'specialisations' which is what I'm talking about when I talk about teachers contextualising or creating subjects from units. If you scroll back you can see we used a similar list in Refine Writing.

If we are going to talk about curriculum design at least let's use terms accurately. Units of competency describe the competencies which have to be assessed. As to how the unit is delivered this is up to the teacher. We've removed the reporting requirement.

We broke the 340 hour unit down because it's unfair to students. If a student fails to complete the full 340 hours it can be difficult for them to get credit for completed studies. We break down units to make obtaining credit easier. Units are about assessment not about delivery. All unit hours are nominal. You can combine units to your heart's content as long as you can make sure you are assessing people on the competencies expressed in the units and report on this. Don't muddle units with teaching material. They are assessment guides. I repeat delivery is up to the teacher.

I can only wearily repeat there aren't any Cultural Context units in the current course document and I would point out that I don't think they've existed for at least ten years. I must say it's been that long since I heard the term.

If you want to write a Myth and Symbol unit and assess students on their knowledge of mythology or Jungian archetypes you can. I think it's a bit doctrinaire myself but go ahead. Nobody will stop you. Just make sure it's supported by industry (industry are publishers and editors, employers etc) ie that there's an industry need and that they're properly written in competency based terms. And talk about it as much as you like in class. You can use Myths and Symbols in any number of units. Go for it.

#34: David Trembath - Last words before getting on with my life 

What an interesting yet somewhat alarming debate- like many others I too am a graduate of Bendigo Regional Institute of TAFE [Dip PW&E 2002] what an amazing course it was & could still be.

However the big issue that seems to have been given little attention is under the new training curricula will the proposed new courses enable graduates to articulate into Arts degrees at university level?

I believe this question needs to be urgently addressed  - the TAFE pathway has allowed a significant number of students to gain access to university - Bendigo campus of LaTrobe being a case in point.  Many of these students have built on the expertise gained during the TAFE Diploma & continued on to  postgraduate studies in Arts at both Masters & PhD level.

As others have indicated the Dip PW&E has provided grounding for students, many of whom were unable to participate in higher education through financial or other disadvantage the means by which they too are able to achieve their full potential. 

Will current articulation ageements between TAFE & the university sector continue or do negitiations need to be reviewed to ensure that in future students are not denied the advantages others have enjoyed. 

David are you able to respond please?

#34: David Trembath - Last words before getting on with my life 

B'H

 

With all due respect, I recently completed the Myths and Symbols course and found it very informative, although I did want a bit more on the Asiatic myths and symbols. The lecturer has an extensive knowledge of her subject matter and was able to deliver interesting material from a wide range of sources in a variety of ways. You do not seem to know what you are talking about when you glibly state:

"If you want to write a Myth and Symbol unit and assess students on their knowledge of mythology or Jungian archetypes you can. I think it's a bit doctrinaire myself but go ahead. Nobody will stop you. Just make sure it's supported by industry (industry are publishers and editors, employers etc) ie that there's an industry need and that they're properly written in competency based terms. And talk about it as much as you like in class. You can use Myths and Symbols in any number of units. Go for it."

Knowledge and a depth of understanding what myths and symbols entail and how those myths and symbols impact on our understanding and perspective on the world around us, involve more than just being able to read mythology and have a basic knowledge of Jungian archetypes. Sounds like you need to take the course. It might expand the narrow confines of your present thinking somewhat to have taken such a course. However there are people who cannot cope with too much creative thinking and depth of knowledge. It is scary. However you have to allow that not all people want their minds chained by reason:

 

Earth was not: nor globes of attractionThe will of the Immortal expandedOr contracted his all flexible senses.Death was not, but eternal life sprung. 
Laws of peace, of love, of unity;Of pity, compassion, forgiveness.Let each chuse one habitation:His ancient infinite mansion:One command, one joy, one desire,One curse, one weight, one measureOne King, one God, one Law.
And a roof, vast petrific around,On all sides He fram'd: like a womb;...Like a human heart strugling & beatingThe vast world of Urizen appear'd.
In chains of the mind locked up,Like fetters of ice shrinking together,Disorganiz'd, rent from Eternity.Los beat on his fetters of ironsoul sicken'd! he curs'dBoth sons & daughters: for he sawThat no flesh nor spirit could keepHis iron laws one moment.

 

Blake's poetry like all good poems can be read on many levels. Blake may have spoken against organised religion of which we have many varieties in today's world. Conformity and consumerism are religions of a sort and so is materialism and businessism. People like William Blake are very scary people. We would not want too many of them roaming around now, would we?

When I read your comment:

"If we are going to talk about curriculum design at least let's use terms accurately. Units of competency describe the competencies which have to be assessed. As to how the unit is delivered this is up to the teacher. We've removed the reporting requirement." 

I do not wish to appear rude, but it sounds like you swallowed some sort of curriculum manual and are having a bit of a problem with elimination of said manual. 

Let's say you are teaching a unit on Screen Writing - I would first want to write up what the goals and outcomes for the students are. That should include a selection of competencies as well as how those competencies are assessed. I would have thought that competencies and assessment criteria go hand in hand. But then who am I to know and what do I know. I only taught in Australia and Israel for 18 years at a number of institutions and secondary schools reasonably successfully I might add.

Then getting back to the unit, you would look at a variety of texts in order to deconstruct  them for students so they can compose their own texts for assessment which should be able to give any lecturer an idea of how well they have understood the textual analysis. It is not rocket science,  but it requires thought and the development of perceptual skills which go beyond a hastily constructed unit for skilling in order to obtain employment at a basic entry level. Employers relish having graduates that are highly skilled with a good background knowledge. They do not want graduates that they have to undertake to train on the job. That is why these two or three day intensive technology courses might be good money spinners for an institution, but really do not give the required depth of knowledge needed for competent use of software in a workplace situation that a semester course in the same might. 

Well you might be weary. If I had to stand for false ideas and values, I would be weary too.