You are on page 1of 6

Assignment-1

Of

st

PEEMT

Submitted To: Ms.Nidhi Prashar Lect.

Submitted By: Kapil Gupta [81406107139] B.Tech CSE 8th

It is defined by the TA as "the ability perform the activities within an occupation. the finalised framework will be published early in 1991. However. identifying what we believe to be serious flaws. 'Working Together Education and Training'. The Standards Programme forms part of the government sponsored 'reform' of vocational qualifications. In that White Paper the Government announced its intention to establish the National Council for Vocational Qualifications (NCVQ). In future. The MSC (now the Training Agency) was required by the Government "to take the lead in stimulating" such industry training organisations to develop such standards. policy since the publication of the New Training Initiative in 1981. This was initiated by the Manpower Services Commission (MSC) to develop such a framework for all occupations and facilitate the development of new national vocational qualifications (NVQs) for all sectors of industry. set in motion by the 1986 White Paper. and new qualifications will be based on this framework of standards. The emphasis on 'competence' has been a key feature of MSC. mainly in the US. and now Training Agency (TA). According to the TDLB's timetable.A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE 'STANDARDS IN TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT' INTRODUCTION The Training and Development Lead Body (TDLB) has recently published for consultation a set of documents setting out its framework of occupational 'standards' for training and development occupations. REFORM OF PROGRAMME VOCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS AND THE STANDARDS There has been considerable critical examination of competence based approaches to vocational education and training. it is important to be clear about the particular features of the current UK initiative rather than attempt merely to apply general criticisms about competence approaches. In this paper we will subject the TDLB's 'Training and Development Standards' to critical examination. Moreover." . to be determined by industry training organisations. we shall take the TDLB's work as a case study of the wider national programme ('Standards Programme'). only those qualifications which receive the endorsement of NCVQ will be recognised as 'national vocational qualifications' (NVQs). Such qualifications will be based on 'standards of occupational competence'.

based on the views of 'practical' people actually involved with the work of training and development. ie as practitioners and as employers as practitioners. An in depth analysis will tend. It is clear that the TDLB. In a similar fashion.1) The 'commonsense'. before we move onto a more in depth analysis. Any approaches to the development. all have an acute bearing on the quality of their work performance.. It's not just an academic exercise it's extremely practical and worthwhile. therefore. and so on training as a whole. It's only appropriate." (Training Agency:SFS. p2). the assumptions they have about their (legitimate) role in an organisation." (Training and Development Standards: Guidance Notes. the meaning they attach to the nature of their work. . by its very nature. presents a major obstacle to the presentation of an in depth critique. to be theoretically based. 'practical'." (TDLB:CD. with Training Agency guidance.. assessment and certification of trainers must therefore take this into account.. TDLB. "The Training Agency has set up a nationwide initiative to establish clear occupational standards . who would emphasise the 'practical' nature of the Standards. 1989. understanding and skills they develop. the TDLB states that "For many years we have been concerned about the quality of performance of our workforce. THE FACE VALIDITY OF THE STANDARDS In developing our critique of the TDLB Standards we shall start with a consideration of their face value. 1990.. 'worthwhile' nature of the Standards Programme. making assumptions. The language used in the booklet from which this quotation is taken (which accompanies a video on the Standards Programme) shows how the Training Agency attempts to equate educationalists and trainers' with 'academic exercises'. and to change the qualifications and training systems so that they are clearly based on what industry needs. As such it is likely to be treated to cursory dismissal by the proponents of the Standards.. Whereas 'we' are more concerned with what is 'practical and worthwhile'. rather than what educationalists and trainer assume we need. and there has been at least one resignation from the TDLB as a result. as claimed by its proponents. that their performance and practice should also be led by nationally agreed and employment led standards. 1990) We believe this claim to legitimacy by TDLB is valid insofar as the fact that training (and vocational education) practitioners have a pivotal role in the implementation of any attempted national vocational education and training system. This insistence on functional analysis alone has been described as 'fundamentalism'. Employers have frequently voiced their disappointment in the ability of the young people coming out of vocational education and training to perform in a job. has treated the development of standards for the occupation of training and development as an exemplar for the development of standards in other occupations. p. The TDLB has diligently stayed with the view that functional analysis alone will be able to provide the basis for examining competence. The knowledge.'STANDARDS IN TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT' AS AN EXEMPLAR "Trainers have a critical role in helping people to achieve standards..

However. an issue which we partly addressed above. How do they relate to other Standards? 6. we can identify problems with regard to the TDLB Standards. Are the Performance Criteria accurate? 5. The basis of disaggregation must be coherent with the distinctions which actually occur. we believe that the TDLB Standards are. D) each of which was then disaggregated further. Are the Standards clear? 2. Are the Standards comprehensive? 4. not least with regard to the the treatment of people as 'human resources'. Although there is no comprehensive agreement on the meaning of the term. Comprehensiveness and Accuracy The questions for consultation pose the issue of 'accuracy' in terms of the performance criteria. There are of course considerable questions which arise from this. or a separate function. plans and systems. but the TDLB has a four stage model: identify training and development needs. How would you use the Standards? 3. under six headings: 1. design and update training and development strategies. To focus solely on accuracy of performance criteria would be to sidestep the important question of the accuracy of the Standards themselves. The initial disaggregation for the TDLB Standards is on the basis of the 'training cycle'. But if we accept for the present such a perspective. and that of personnel management. C. provide learning opportunities. The consultation on the draft standards has been undertaken over the summer. and was due for completion in September. the generally accepted basis of the concept is that the activities and functions traditionally undertaken in the specialist areas of personnel management. a concept which has widespread acceptance within the training field. B. resources and support. open to immediate criticism in terms of the claims to validity presented by the TDLB. plans and systems. they would need to reflect accurately the nature of training and development practice. this four stage model proved to be insufficient. should be integrated into overall strategic management of the organisation. complete with its managerialist orientation. This four stage model was then used to four separate functional areas (coded A. The question of whether training and development is a specialist function within personnel management. the TDLB introduced a fifth area (E). we shall take the issue of accuracy along with that of comprehensiveness. evaluate the effectiveness of HRD (human resource development) strategies. A series of questions were posed by the TDLB. There are various ways in which the training cycle is presented. However. establish and maintain effective communications and feedback systems.However. Are the Standards strategic? Usefulness In order for the Standards to be useful (to practitioners and their employers). has to a considerable extent been made redundant by the advent of the concept of 'human resource management'. industrial relations and training and development. One of the key issues upon which there has been considerable agreement over recent years is with regard to the relationship between training and development as an occupational area. in fact. .

alternatives have been used. no substantial theoretical or empirical justification has been presented. THE NATURE OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT WORK There are of course a wide variety of methods for analysing work performance. arising from strategies adopted for maintaining legitimacy. expectation. developed over time and through close experience and involvement with standards development by a group of researchers and trainers at Barbara Shelborn Associates.. the Training Agency has rejected all of these in favour of the relatively new technique of functional analysis. and is mainly descriptive of how the method should be used and/or merely makes generalised claims about what benefits it will lead to. As yet. Thirdly.Critical issues in training The TDLB claims that the Standards are intended to reflect 'best practice'." (Mitchell. 1977). Another key area now seen to be of critical importance is that of quality. Very little published literature on functional analysis currently exists. They particularly focussed on the training and development issues arising for those who were attempting to move from 'provider' roles to 'change agent' roles. and of 'survival and influence'. and organisational culture. We might expect then that there would be clear reference to issues which are currently regarded as being critical in terms of best practice. little recognition is given to the way in which this is currently perceived in organisational management. task analysis) and some fairly recently developed (eg occupationl training families). some long established (eg skills analysis. we can examine an individual's work performance in terms of its relationship to the real person with broader 'life' issues (the 'personal' or 'biographical' approach) (see figure #). examining training specialist roles. role. treating the job as existing independently of the jobholder (the 'job' or 'technical' approach). Pearn and Kandola (1988) present a variety of methods for analysing jobs. Secondly we can focus on the performance of the individual within a social context. 1989) ALTERNATIVES IN ANALYSING WORK PERFORMANCE Despite the fact that vocational education and training has traditionally placed a heavy emphasis on methods for analysing work performance which are based on such functionalist assumptions. During the 1970s the MSC undertook an examination of North American approaches for skill comparison (Freshwater and Townsend. However. for managing role boundaries.. It seems to us that we can consider the nature of work performance in three ways. Although the Standards Programme is claimed to be about quality. Firstly we can concentrate on the observable activities which are performed. examining work performance as the enactment of role which emerges through the interaction between the roleholder and others with their varying perceptions. and for accessing sources of power and . etc (the 'role' or 'social' approach). many of which are not primarily intended for training purposes. Significantly for the area covered by TDLB. the 'role' approach was adopted in the work of Pettigrew et al (1982). We have referred to the emphasis on human resource management in recent developments in the training field. The important issues were those of 'fit' between personal style. The method seems to have been ". What does exist tends to be repetitive.

in public policy terms. CONCLUSIONS The Standards Programme and the reform of vocational qualifications has been generally welcomed. has similarly been echoed by the suggestion that training practitioners are to blame for Britain's failure to train its workforce as well as competitor nations. When placed in the wider frame of the directions taken in Government policy on vocational education and training the Standards Programme may be seen as being a key element in a policy of control. Many of these concerns may be generalised to the Standards Programme itself. 'Education. its origins may be traced much further back. the policy is in reality being driven by a specific approach which has little theoretical or empirical justification. that the blame lay with teachers. We believe that such welcome is misplaced. that education in Britain had failed to deliver what it promised. . The explicit theme of the Great Debate. rather than the claimed major step forward in enabling Britain to improve its economic performance and the achievement of social advancement for its people. The report referred to many existing apprenticeships as examples of 'restrictive labour practices'. sponsoring the research. were later echoed in terms of vocational education and training. and proposing Government intervention to develop a national training system which was 'standards based'. They began with the Central Policy Review Staff's report. THE 'STANDARDS' PROGRAMME AS PUBLIC POLICY INITIATIVE Although the current Standards Programme was initiated by the Training Agency following the 1986 White Paper. to develop workshops to help real trainers to develop their competence in the real organisational contexts in which they operated. When the specific case of the TDLB Standards for Training and Development are critically examined major concerns emerge. The research enabled the Chemical and Allied Products Industry Training Board. Although based on a rhetoric of concern for 'standards' and 'competence'. [The not always implicit theme. to the 'Great Debate' on education launched by James Callaghan's Ruskin College speech in 1976.] The Great Debate was followed under the Thatcher Administration from 1979 by a steady stream of official documents and initiatives focused on labour market intervention. Training and Industrial Performance' setting out the problems as perceived.influence.