TO BE A 'TEACHER' OR A 'FACILITATOR' -- That is the Question?:

Saturday, 4 May, 2002:

iwishihad comments about the Vocational 'Teaching Solution' in this 'Dream-Alive' land:

Vocational education is now 'big business'. With the move to 'improve Innovation' it seems obvious the trait would infect the education 'industry'. Innovation 'only' comes to those penniless, suffering hardship, a well known premise. Innovate to survive has always been the lot of innovators.
(Mind you, allegedly rich Bill Clinton became a very good innovator, but allegedly suffered from a different kind of 'hardship' inferred herein!)

So, how does one encourage the facilitation of innovation within the Vocational education system? Easy. Enforce hardship. The 'Facilitator' (ne, 'Teacher') will then survive by innovating innovative innovation within those innovatively facilitated, no? Put the Facilitator on a yearly, competitive, renewable Contract. No tax relief. Yeah!

But there's more. Vocational education is facilitated by multitudes of 'Lifelong Learnt' Facilitators -- those 'dinosaurs', some having 'old' academic qualifications having 'been doing it for for the past 40 years hands-on expertise only' types.
Fairly obviously, if one is teaching 'Lifelong Learning' one must have an understanding of how a being learns, no? If not, one cannot teach (er, facilitate.) Those having 'Lifelong Learning' would need to understand how they actually lifelong learnt, eh? Without this understanding they, obviously, have been wasting the time of those facilitated, being unable to transfer their 'lifelong learnt content' to the learners, who, after all, are really in charge of their own learning or, being 'facilitated' within a facilitating facility, no?

To quote one comment*: "do TAFE and VET teachers need teaching qualifications? Very clearly, they do."

iwishihad muses that those laying down the rules must clearly understand the perceived ramifications thereof, and imagines:

*The Australian TAFE Teacher: pages 18/19 Vol 36/1 ISSN08153701