The question generally goes along the lines of this: “There used to be hundreds of SETA OHS skills programs (756 at HWSETA for example). QCTO have prioritised less than 20 skills programs in OHS for development. Are the public being short-changed more than 700 OHS skills programs?
HWSETA had a weird way of doing accreditation.
They had this thing where they would make every SDP applicant ‘create’ a new skills program, even if it already existed. They had to pick two or more unit standards, lump them together, call it a new skills program, justify the need for that program to exist in industry, and then apply to HWSETA for it. The training provider, if approved, would then be accredited to train only that program as a collection of unit standards and never separately.
Again, I compliment HWSETA for doing some things right, but the process I mentioned above is a prohibitive and very convoluted way of doing something that can be so simple. I could elaborate but this article is not about that.
The result of HWSETA’s accreditation policy was that each time a new applicant wanted to train anything, they effectively “created a new skills program” that was just a collection of the existing unit standards. Those began to add up over a 23 year period.
Fast forward to 2024 and each SETA needs to develop skills programs in their sector and convert them to QCTO skills programs. So they start by taking stock of how many programs they have.
HWSETA checks and finds they have 756 skills programs! Do all of these still need to be developed into QCTO skills programs? Will that not take years and years?
The answer is NO! Its just repetition of the same few unit standards the SDP’s were forced to group together. They took a few unit standards and made 756 skills programs out of it.
The actual number of unit standards HWSETA’s SDP’s used to create those 756 programs is much, much less. I’d guess less than 40. Even when we examine the unit standards that were used there is a ton of redundancy within the SO’s and AC’s of each unit standard.
QCTO approaches curriculum development from a task and occupation point of view. They ask “What must the competent learner be able to do”. The OHS programs are being developed to fill the necessary roles, and redundancy is being greatly reduced. This helps everyone be more efficient and provides the learner with a clearer path to a certificate for the role they need to fill.
As things stand less than twenty OHS programs are prioritised for development, and while more can follow, this does not mean there are over 700 programs still to go.
I encourage you to get involved in the process of developing OHS skills programs, or skills programs in your sector. More on that here.
I must add to this article a compliment to HWSETA for the way they have been handling the unit standard to QCTO change. As a SETA it is their job to submit an application to the QCTO to develop programs in their sector (Health and Welfare). Once QCTO approves the application, the SETA must develop the program and submit the curriculum to QCTO. The process is described here (in the 10 point list at the bottom of the page).
HWSETA have been doing this in the niche I work in which is first aid, OHS, and fire. These programs fall under health and welfare. Here is the letter QCTO sent HWSETA approving their application for a list of 18 OHS skills programs. These are the ones under development.
For comparison many other SETA’s have not been doing what is required and as a result, programs in their respective sectors are not getting established at QCTO as we get extremely close to unit standard expiration date (which for all intents and purposes is the 30th June 2024). Others are established but did not follow due process and are out of touch with what industry needs.
With HWESETA we were able to work with them and establish first aid well on time. Providers are accredited and training this before the first aid unit standards reach last date for enrolment (30 June 2024). That is great!
We are now working with them on the OHS programs. These have some way to go but are at least in advanced stages of the process and are being developed the right way (with proper stakeholder, subject matter expert, and public participation).
