ACE Vic

First Some History:

The taskforce developed a Ministerial Declaration on Adult Community Education, which was endorsed by State, Territory and Commonwealth ministers at the 13th MCEETYA meeting in July 2002. 

During October, ACEVic and the ANHLC ACE Issues Group conducted a consultation process to gather feedback from the field about what they would like to see in the upcoming Ministerial Statement on ACE. The result is the following statement:

ACE builds the skills, knowledge and abilities of Victorian communities by providing 

• Informal learning opportunities alongside formal learning pathways,
• Welcoming and accepting environments,
• Pedagogy that is flexible and learner-focussed,
• Programs driven by local needs,
• A diverse range of organisations which each reflect, nurture and are involved with their local communities,
• Interpersonal connections to build better and stronger communities,
• Awareness of diversity, and promotion of harmony and connectedness,
• Entry level computer education to those who would otherwise be left behind in the digital revolution,
• Personalised attention so that learners feel valued and are not lost in the system.

ACE is build on a set of values and practices that encompass:

• Reinvesting skills, knowledge and money in local communities,
• Being in it for the long haul: an ongoing presence in specific localities reflecting a commitment to ensure all members have the opportunity to reach their potential,
• Connection to a broad range of social and community services and supports,
• Holistic application of adult learning practices,
• Commitment to all members of a community particularly the most disadvantaged and marginalised,
• Strong return on investment of resources.

The unique features of ACE that need to be maintained in the new funding and policy environment are:

• Registration as an ACE provider with the ACFE Board should be confined to those organisations which have a commitment to place based and driven community development,
• Registration as an ACE provider with the ACFE Board should be confined to those organisations who are community owned, managed and operated,
• Government policy should support collaboration, complementarity and partnership to meet local needs,
• Providers should be supported to maintain our flexibility and responsiveness alongside high quality standards,
• Government statements and policy should reflect ACE as a relevant, recognised and respected partner in the training system,
• The special significance of ACE in remote & rural communities should be protected because there will be devastating effects on those communities if local ACE providers are lost.

Representatives from ACEVic and ANHLC met with Minister Allan on the 3rd December 2007 to brief her on the statement.

The Victorian Government’s Review of the vocational education and training system has now been announced. This is one of the most radical shake-ups of funding to hit the sector in a long time. Please read ACEVic’s response to the package as well as our media release.

response-to-skills-for-victoria

media-release-skills-reform

ACEVic recently prepared a response to the Discussion Paper on the Language, Literacy and Numeracy program.  While only a small percentage of ACEVic members are involved in the delivery of this program, in earlier incarnations, this was a major source of activity for many providers. The introduction of price based competitive tendering, and the huge size of the regions covered by the program, has meant that less and less ACE providers have taken part in a program which is closely aligned to our core business of providing training to educationally disadvantaged people.  Read our submission below.

acevic-response-to-the-llnp-review

ACEVic was recently invited by the Minister for Skills and Workforce Participation, Jacinta Allan, to respond to the Securing our economic future: discussion paper on skills reform.  Our response is below.

acevic-response1

 In addition many members of ACEVic contributed individual responses. There were a number of common themes across the member submissions. These were:

• ACE providers are confident of their ability to thrive in a more open market, but only where competition is around capacity to attract learners and achieve outcomes, not where competition means a price based “race to the bottom” as has occurred in federally funded adult education.
• Many adults presenting for ACE programs don’t fit priority learner groups but are nonetheless seriously educationally disadvantaged and in need of intensive support.  Some examples cited include learners with an undiagnosed mental illness and learners with quals achieved in other countries and in other languages.
• ACE providers are struggling to attract and retain teachers under the current funding regime.

We look forward to hearing the outcomes of the review.