Effective RPL - is it possible

I also listened to a great presentation by John Price on whether effective RPL is possible. As he says, sometimes RPL is referred to as RPHell...
There seem to be so many barriers to RPL and the question is - are there ways in which we can demystify the process and ensure that there are benefits for candidates?
There are barriers to the student in terms of the jargon we use - there are endless accronyms and references to units that are just meaningless to some students.
There is also a fear of endless paperwork as well as of a process that seems inflexible. Special needs don't seem to be catered for easily.
Students often don't feel supported and the costs can be high because the work is conducted on an individual, one-on-one basis.
The RTO itself is reluctant to get involved because of the extra time needed from staff and because of a lack of understanding about RPL.
Employers often don't understand why students want what is perceived as being 'a piece of paper' when they can get on perfectly well with their assigned tasks. They certainly question the value-add to the business.
So what can be done?
RTO's can work on streamlining the RPL process and this process in turn can be more adaptable to different circumstances:
1. Allow applicants to complete a user-friendly, plain English form.
2. Do some questions with the applicant in a conversational way - make sure that the questions relate to what the person does.
3. Let them do a practical demo if applicable or bring evidence
4. Get some 3rd party verification.
Adapt these steps based on the circumstances of each individual. Don't just go by unit - have a picture in mind of what a really competent person in the workplace looks like.
The key to RPL is that you do not know where the person was trained and how they were trained. So instead use the end as your starting point - and the end is a clear picture of a competent person.
You will then be able to map back to the units and to the critical pieces of evidence.

Changes to the AQTF

I recently listened to an excellent presentation by Margaret Willis, Director of VETAB.
She provided a very useful background to the history behind VETAB and reform in the VET system.
VETAB was established in 1991 because of the urgent reform needed in the vocational system through a co-operative federal set-up. ANTA was then established in 1992 and had as its role to establish a national training system. It did not however have a strong blueprint although it did know that there had to be a national register of competency standards, now NTIS and a meaningful way of collecting data through AVETMISS.
They also knew that providers had to be registered and in 1998 a framework began to appear that ensured mutual recognition of qualifications and it began a mindset for thinking about compliance.
These standards were however not strong enough and by 2002 the AQTF appeared. Providers did not all like the standards and in 2007 a new set of standards emerged that were more widely accepted.
The standards however worked from the assumption that all providers in the industry were about quality training. This assumption was however tested by providers who were not showing high levels of integrity and VETAB found itself drawn into ICAC investigations about the fraudulent issuing of qualifications.
VETAB was seen by ICAC as being too naive and trusting and so more changes are now introduced into the AQTF 2010 to ensure that the head of an RTO is a 'fit and proper person'.
There is more risk management and also far stronger tests on financial viability.
From April 2011 there will also be a national regulator and VETAB will disappear and hand over all responsibility to the national regulator.

AQTF 2007

I attended a presentation by VETAB on what the new changes are for RTO's in terms of their quality assurance. There are in fact substantial changes and the focus is going to be more strongly on learning and assessment. If a person is awarded a qualification, the person needs to be genuinely competent and at a level of competence acceptable to industry.
Because skills shortages have moved higher up on the national agenda, the vocational training area is under scrutiny to ensure that more people are qualified with high level skills.
COAG in Feb 2006 set a national commitment to reviewing and amending the AQTF standards and ensuring that it moved to an outcomes-based model to improve confidence in the national training system.
The changes to how RTO's will be audited are substantial and cover 3 standards. The other criteria are now covered in conditions of registration.
RTO's and auditors will need to get used to the new standards and the intention is to phase them in from July 2007.
As RTO's we will need to keep documentation of what impact our training is having on the learners and on the organisation. We will also need to keep records of what our students have achieved and changed in their skills levels and behaviour.
In addition to the new criteria, RTO's will also have the oppportunity to demonstrate excellence and to be either 'quality committed' or 'outstanding'. These new quality standards will be used for both internal and external assessment and will cover areas such as leadership in the RTO, people development, management systems and so on.
A final version of the new RTO standards will be on www.training.com.au in the next few weeks.