Short-course training, often referred to as micro-credentials, is being seen as an increasingly important form of training, particularly as the world comes to terms with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the vocational education and training (VET) sector, training package skill sets and accredited courses are recognised forms of short-course training.

Nevertheless, a surprising amount of other, shorter, non-qualification training occurs in the VET sector, officially known as enrolments in subjects not part of a nationally recognised program (course). This report refers to them as ‘subject bundles’.

This report contributes to the information already available on the largest segment of the VET sector, by analysing these subject bundles and their salient features. Research found that engagement in subject bundles was found to be typically short, with bundles of three subjects or fewer accounting for 89.5% of RTO-student pairs. Furthermore, engagement was focused on a small number of bundles (with 601 of around 50 000 bundles accounting for 90% of the RTO-student pairs) and with a relatively small number of RTOs (with 456 RTOs registering 90% of student activity).

Of particular interest is determining the role these subject bundles are fulfilling and, by extension, identifying opportunities to further expand the role of this segment of the VET sector.

Key messages:

• The analysis clearly indicates that subject bundles are mainly concerned with regulation and skills maintenance, either explicitly or implicitly. This activity can be grouped under the broad headings of workplace safety, emergency preparedness and authority to operate.
• This segment is largely a ‘private’ market — more than 93% of subject bundles were funded on a fee-for-service basis — with relatively little government intervention. The fact that the employer or the individual is prepared to pay for the training in many cases is due to a regulatory requirement, but also implies that the training is seen as having value as a (micro) credential in the marketplace.
• There is an opportunity for governments to stimulate ‘non-regulatory’ subject-bundle activity focused on emerging/persistent skill needs and on increasing labour market participation.
• The noticeable differences between the states and territories in subject bundles can be largely attributed to differences in regulatory requirements, funding regimes and the economic structure of the state/territory.