Skills Tasmania (the former State Training Authority, ie the government authority in charge of issuing formal traineeship and apprenticeship qualifications in Tasmania) has been conducting a survey. The survey asks the question of both graduated apprentices and employers as to their opinions on whether the outcomes of completing the apprenticeship met the expectations of employers and graduates.
The pilot qualification they looked at was the Certificate III Hospitality Commercial Cookery, which is the qualification all our chefs need to attain under an apprenticeship in order to ultimately be able to call themselves a chef.
The questions both parties (separately) were asked as part of the survey were quite interesting.
The graduates (who completed their apprenticeships in 2006/7) were asked in a phone poll: How did most of the learning take place? (85% was on-the-job) Was any of that (of those 85% who responded to the previous question) off-the-job? Was what you learnt off-the-job consistent with what you learnt on-the-job? (53% neither agreed or disagreed) Did your off-the-job training provide you with additional skills? (54% said yes)
They were then asked to rate their training (by both their employer and their Training Organisation) over the course of their apprenticeship. 70% rated the employer training “quite highly”; 82% rated the Training Organisation training “very good” or “excellent”.
They were asked if they were employed now. 95% said yes with 1/3 of those being still employed as a chef with the same employer.
They were then asked if they were still employed in the same occupation as they did their training in. 81% said yes; 10% said no. Of the people who didn’t go on in that field, they said they were doing the following:
gym instructor, call centre worker, roofing, front of house, restaurant supervisor, chocolatier, had a baby, mining in WA, retired.
They were asked if there are aspects of their current job which they would have liked to have learned in their training. 90% said they would have liked to have learned more diverse food cuisines. Also mentioned was the business aspect of things, ie menu, ordering, costing, and front of house.
The employers were treated differently. An appointment was set up with them, and their questions asked face-to-face, and in a bit more detail. They were statewide, and varied businesses (ie cafes, restaurants, pubs, catering businesses etc). They were also asked about the knowledge and skills of those who had completed the Cert III.
Their questions: Do your graduates have the skills to meet your expectations? Most said yes. Some found certain aspects might be missing.
The outcomes of this question depend on many parameters:
employer type
employer provided training – ie the ability of the qualified chef to pass on their skills, and the quality of his/her skills
employer involvement – usually the chef is the main person involved in the training. With the employer himself involved in the training additionally it’s more preferable.
training organization provided training – some inconsistencies were identified
apprentice attitude and aptitude is also important. An apprentice may be provided with excellent opportunities, but how much the apprentice gets out of it, and how well-suited to the job they are, is up to them.
How relevant is the off-job training to your workplace? Varied responses; some yes, some no, not relevant, but the majority said it was of benefit. Some asked if the training had changed to take account of the fact that modern cuisine had changed a lot over the past 15 years and wanted to know if the training reflected that, because much of the training was developed using French-based cuisine, but Australian food has moved on since then.
There is obviously more but I thought the above was very interesting, and may be of interest to many Rita readers.
Tuesday, 27 May 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
Informative post Rita, a great snapshot at the state of play between the two parties-however a third is glaringly missing-the customers!
Regency Park TAFE in South Australia is widely regarded as a leader in its response to reflecting more current food trends on the carriculus for its students. There were a number of reasons for this but an important one was having gifted teachers, who were themselves leaders in the industry, most notably, Cheong Liew, the man credited worldwide with east-west cooking first. These people unshackled themselves from the increasing irrellevent confines of the French cookery orthodoxy & taught what was being practiced in many innovative kitchens around Adelaide.
Phillip Searle, Christine Manfeild, Cath Kerry, Lee Tu Tai( I think thats how you spell it!?)Anne Oliver, Lew Kathreptis & Maggie Beer-a few of Australia's most innovative & respected chefs whose influences are still felt today.
Perhaps to make the training more rellevent we need to engage people to teach who are not part of the system already? People who have just come off the floor, the bar & the kitchens of a contempory industry?
As ever, Gobbler, you're correct. The customers opinions are missing. Probably if they just check out a blogsite they could get a pretty good snapshot of how things are going from the customers perspective! Seriously, as it was a government survey checking on the validity &/or relevancy of todays training, it was obvious to ask the main players - employer and graduated apprentice. Anne Ripper was present at that info session (where I heard the content of this post), and asked the question as to why Training Organisations weren't asked to participate. The answer was as above for the customers, basically.
I think giving cheong liew a gong for east-west fusion is an old misnomer, Gobber.
The edges blurred long before. Some of its results have been awful, with many so-called fusion dishes a disaster.
The trade routes, spice trail and even marco polo were trading food and techniques long before the
70s in Adelaide and Cheong.
God, I was doing curried snags and soy sauce roast beef over in old Britain before him.
Bang a chong, git it on, as T-Rex used to say.
As for surveys, I think they are too self-serving to often show us the truth, well-meaning though they may be.
In my role as a mere customer, I can say that I want more knockabout middle-range and mid-priced eateries.
Five-Star I have abandoned. Cheap shit too.
I suppose Londoners would call the places I seek bistros or the new ``gastro-pubs''.
Plenty room for any sort of cuisine in there, without the high prices which deter so many of us.
We want a buzz, mark-ups on wine and imported beers that don't bring a tear to your eye, casual smart surroundings, friendly staff and the ability to go back often without getting a second mortgage.
And we will love those places to bits.
So Sir G, do I take it that somewhere like Dom's is your ideal? Meets all your criteria?
No, but I can't be doing with fine dining these days, Rita.
I know they are not all starchy and stiff but I just feel a lot more comfortable in easy-going places that will whip up anything from crayfish to shepherd's pie.
I don't wantfoams and egg cups with thing to amuse my bouche.
I want proper-sized starters and decent-sized mains.
I can top up my water or wine myself, thanks. I don't want a waiter to pour me a smidge of wine and ask how it is.'It is an empty and meaningless charade in Australia.
I'll soon tell you if it's corked mate.
I want fair prices and a range of eateries that go from Dom's to Italian and all places inbetween.
I want pub eateries and bistros where you might find a spicy eastern dish as well as steak and chips.
I want a changing menu. The reason why I avoid most of Hobart's Indian places is they are always the same. Specially the lunch menu, when lots of us grumpy old bastards are out for a feed.
I also could not give a toss for going out for breakfast. Bloody uncivilized.
So, there you go...I won't leave you guessing. And if the industry wants to go on and improve, that's the area me and lots of other customers would like.
Lets keep the spread of fine dining for huge cities. One or two places in our fine city are enough for passing-through oil magnates and corporate wheelers and dealers, who wouldn't give a flying fuck if we slid under the sea tomorrow.
They can always get better in Paris, New York, London and Tokyo tomorrow anyway.
Let's look after the crowd that counts.....people who live here and would like a restaurant and cafe culture we can afford.
Now that's a side of Sir G that I haven't seen before! Well done Sir G. I think you have encapsulated what most average eater-outers really want. And ideally it's what I too would love.
Marque IV (and their ilk) is great for special occasions. But generally I think all of us would like what you describe.
Meanwhile - great comment.
Yes, you must applaud Marque IV and other top-notchers....it can't be easy in a place of 200,000.
I don't wish in any way to demean their efforts.
People need a few places like this for those big occasions. Just treating a loved one, romance, major birthdays, celebrating that big job win, for no reason other that just because.
But the mid-range is where the action is and needs to be for me.
Think of the food pyramid and change that to eatery pyramid, with the peak a small but important summit.
I'm rolling and tumbling tonight, Rita!
And right on the mark ... sir grump we see eye to eye on that - eye fillet that is.
It is as you see it - to many places chasing a dream (the celestial good food guide) when the punter is happy with good old honest grub and a large helping to boot.
Cool room
Really good points Sir G and Gobbler. I wholeheartedly agree with the Regency comment. Those guys have got it going on. I have had the opportunity to visit and tour the kitchens and although it looks a bit funny on the surface it is a very professionally run and organised culinary school. Read 'Advance australian Fare' and you will soon get a feel for South Australia's contribution to our nations culianry landscape. You really would think they set up the whole Eastern seaboard restaurant scene! Local hero's include Scott Minervini and of course our own Gobbler.
Rita, when did this survey take place? - first I've heard of it.
PS RITA, I have just been reading the SMH's Good Living magazine.
Mathew Evans has a piece in about Dev'Lish cafe in Hobart and there is a piece on Boks Bacon.
Fascinating those Sydneysiders are catching up on little ol' Tas.
Good for us.
I just about totally agree with sir grumpy.
High end dining, when it's really good, is certainly worth the occasional splurge and these experiences go into the memory bank as special.
However, I have no desire to eat this way, or in these types of environments, all the time. I don't think I'm just kidding myself because I can't afford to live this way. I really believe it would quickly become quite boring.
As I get older, I'm still up for new experiences, especially of the food of other cultures. However, I also feel that the very best food comes from the finest and freshest produce prepared in the simplest and not overly elaborate way.
Apart from the quality of the food-value, friendliness, promptness and lack of noise are key factors in luring me back to any establishment.
hrv - it has only just finished and they are currently assessing the results.
Post a Comment