Reframing recognition of prior learning

FEATURE | John Mitchell, John Mitchell’s Inside VET column, Campus Review, 13 September 2006. Reprinted with permission.

Dr John Mitchell
Dr John Mitchell is a VET strategist and a consultant to Reframing the Future

Reframing the Future is promoting improved approaches to recognition of prior learning that are fairer to the candidate and increase the use of recognition services.

Recognition of prior learning (RPL) is one of the most popular topics in VET at the moment for governments and practitioners alike, and new strategies are required to increase the usage of RPL from its current low levels.

In AQTF Standards for RTOs, RPL is defined as the “recognition of competencies currently held, regardless of how, when or where the learning occurred. RPL assesses the individual’s prior learning to determine the extent to which that individual is currently competent against the required learning outcomes, competency outcomes, or standards for entry to, and/or partial or total completion of, a qualification”.

To meet the need for new RPL strategies, Reframing the Future, the national staff development program for VET, recently conducted forums in five capital cities to encourage participants to engage with current research on skills recognition and assessment, to identify what ‘new practices’ mean or look like and to develop more confidence in applying professional judgment in recognition and assessment practice.

Enabling factors

One of the two keynote presenters at the forums, Andrea Bateman from Bateman & Giles Pty Ltd, called her presentation ‘RPL: Yes, we are there!’. Her point was to acknowledge the core of capabilities which exist in VET to deliver RPL effectively, “but that the statistical collection standards (AVETMISS) and an outmoded view of what is RPL may be clouding [the] VET RPL landscape”.

RPL AND ITS MANY GUISES

For some VET practitioners, says Andrea Bateman:

RPL is a framework in which a specific form of assessment occurs
for others it is an assessment at a point in time
and for others it is a purpose of assessment.

If one takes the view that RPL is an assessment which does not take place at the end of training, then RPL manifests itself in many guises. We experience RPL:

close to enrolment
just before training begins or on the cusp of training
within a training scenario and negotiated with the trainer
as part of a package of units of competency assessments
as part of the development of an individual learning plan.

RPL in these various forms is given different names, such as:

Recognition of current competencies
Diagnostic or formative assessment
Skills recognition
Early progression
Upfront assessments
Challenge tests.

“The line between ‘pure’ RPL and other forms of assessment, sometimes referred to as ‘fast track’ and ‘partial RPL’ are not clear, nor are they differentiated in the data collection,” says Bateman.

In the field, says Bateman, RPL is practised effectively by many practitioners, so attention needs to shift to what enables that process. Research she conducted with Bowman, Clayton and others, summarised five enabling factors: effective promotion of RPL; improved processes for RPL; enhanced communication strategies; better support for applicants; and more support for assessors.

For instance, in providing better support, candidates can be coached in how to move through the RPL process, mentors can be involved in the overall process and, if appropriate, specific support can be made available in the areas of literacy and numeracy.

Ultimately Bateman believes the assessor’s skills are critical. “Assessors involved in RPL need to be accepting of the concept of RPL, be highly skilled in their vocational field, have industry currency, be conversant with their training packages, be highly successful assessors and assessment tool developers and have confidence in their judgments.”

Traditionally daunting

The other keynote speaker was Brian Spencer from the Community Services and Health Industry Training Board in Victoria. Spencer says the traditional approach to RPL is flawed. “The process involves a time-consuming, retrospective, paper chase. The process is often regarded as too bureaucratic and too demeaning for experienced workers and they tend to avoid engaging in the traditional process.”

“Current processes are surrounded in cost and complexity. People who assert they have a certain competency by virtue of their life experience, previous work history, a transferable skill or informal learning are often faced with suspicion and daunting demands for documented proof. The current process typically starts with a paperchase: collect a portfolio that will demonstrate that you have that competence. This can be a daunting task to those of us who do not have filing cabinet minds and forget along life’s journey to collect and document every achievement and learning skill that we have acquired.

“For many people, the request for recognition of current competency ends at this point. The task is not just too big, it is nebulous and protracted. How on earth do I find the proof I need? How do I know when I have collected enough?

“Sir Humphrey Appleby from Yes Minister, observed that if you wanted the minister not to do something, it was important to present the issue as complex, costly and controversial. If you wanted him to agree to a proposal, it was important to present it as simple, cheap and popular. This is exactly what we have allowed to happen with achievement of competency. Recognition is presented as complex, costly and controversial. Attending classes is presented as simple, cheap and popular.”

This positioning of recognition as complex is regrettable, says Spencer: “For an industry like mine that recruits mature-aged workers, with an enormous backlog of skilled and able existing workers who have no formal certification for their skill base, this is a great tragedy.”

Improved model

FEATURES OF AN RPL MODEL

Key distinguishing features of the model developed by Brian Spencer and the Community Services and Health Industry Training Board in Victoria are:

Interview and observation driven. It recognises that most of the key competencies in CS&H (and in service industries generally) are interpersonal and demonstrable. They require real time responses from a worker to a client need. Interviewing is an entirely valid and appropriate way of establishing competency
A focus on generating evidence as opposed to collecting historical evidence
Evidence relates directly to the competency standards
Concurrent acceptance of both a validation pathway and development pathway. This allows a candidate to bridge the small gaps between partial and full competency before being assessed.

In response to these shortfalls, over the last four years Spencer’s organisation has developed and implemented an approach to RPL that overcomes these off-putting aspects.

“The significant difference of the CS&H ITB recognising competency model is that it is aligned to an industry’s familiar practices and is grounded in adult learning theory. Our process aligns to the job interview process without comprising the validity of the assessment. It includes established ways of dealing with paper-based evidence and examples of work.

“It is considerably less onerous than traditional approaches to recognising competency. Industry is more inclined to support the recognition of competency process and candidates wishing to avail themselves of it.”

Candidates are the beneficiaries, says Spencer: “Most people develop skills through their working lives which are not always formally recognised. The recognising competency approach allows people to demonstrate their knowledge, skills, and attitudes as part of their everyday work through the observations and practical questions posed to them by a trained assessor.”

“The approach also enables the candidate to be formally recognised for what they already competently know and can do, and to qualify for a nationally accredited qualification or work out what additional requirements are needed to meet the requirements of a qualification.” For both Bateman and Spencer, recognition of prior learning requires that the skilled and knowledgeable assessor be able to balance a rigorous process with the confidence to make informed judgements.

ICVET Promoting Emerging Practice, TAFE NSW International Centre for VET Teaching and Learning

November 2006 Headlines

Reframing recognition of prior learning