ERIC Number: ED423368
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 1996-Nov
Survey of Users in 1996 User Choice Pilot Projects. Working Paper No. 7.
Smith, Joy Selby; Smith, Chris Selby; Ferrier, Fran
The effectiveness of the "user choice" approach to allocating public funds for training was examined through telephone interviews with 46 employers who were associated with 48 of Australia's 50 User Choice pilot projects (including employers associated with 7 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander initiatives). The employers uniformly indicated very high levels of satisfaction with their training under the pre-User Choice arrangement, and at least one or two expressed doubts about the new arrangement. Technical and further education (TAFE)--sometimes in conjunction with enterprises' own training companies--was the provider most frequently used by respondents over the past 5 years. The overwhelming majority of respondents stated that choice of training providers was moderately or very important. Concern was expressed that the current trend toward amalgamation of TAFE might restrict enterprises' choice of training providers. The providers associated with the initiatives involving indigenous populations considered ability to customize training more important than choice of provider. (The report contains 17 references. Appended are a table summarizing the allocation of User Choice national project funds to Australia's states and territories and a table detailing the titles, clients, and providers of User Choice proposals by territory.) (MN)
Descriptors: Apprenticeships, Educational Attitudes, Educational Finance, Employer Attitudes, Financial Support, Foreign Countries, Indigenous Populations, Job Training, National Programs, National Surveys, Participant Satisfaction, Pilot Projects, Postsecondary Education, Program Effectiveness, Public Education, Resource Allocation, School Business Relationship, School Choice, Vocational Education
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Sponsor: Australian National Training Authority, Brisbane.
Authoring Institution: Monash Univ., Clayton, Victoria (Australia). Centre for the Economics of Education and Training.