Another training tips 56 video was released last Friday. Sorry it has taken me a while to write a post on this but I was having a few computer problems. Technology!
Anyway the video is part one of two clips covering the topic of recognition of prior learning. Yes, I have a few issues with RPL. As a trainer and assessor I have to provide RPL services. This is not a problem and I still believe that it is a service that should be provided for those people who are already competent due to life experiences, study etc. The real problem with RPL is that generally people seem to think that recognition should be just granted without out due diligence to respectable, valid evidence.
I have been on the other end of the process and I know what it feels like. You know that you are competent and hence you attempt to do the bare minimum in putting the evidence together as you believe that it is just a formality. You can actually start to get angry about the effort going into proving that you are competent. Why can’t they (assessors) just recognise your obvious competence and tick a few boxes and award you the unit or program. Of course this is rubbish. It is the RPL applicants role to prove without doubt that they are competent. The assessor’s role is to just check off that the criteria has been met. The process for the assessor should be as simple as here is a certain criteria and here is a certain piece of evidence and they match perfectly. This rarely happens.
Here is a simple example. If I was trying to get recognition for a unit on making a presentation the following evidence does not prove competence. Referee reports stating that I am a great presenter. A presentation I wrote, the actual paperwork. A self reflective journal on my presentation skills. All of that evidence could have been made up. It doesn’t prove anything about my ability to make a presentation. It may indicate that I know how to write a good presentation and it may indicate that I know what a good presenter should do (a book can tell you that) but it doesn’t prove to an assessor that I can make a competent presentation.
A video of me making a competent presentation would be a much more effective form of evidence. Is one presentation enough. Most likely no. You would need a sample of videos.
So here are a few things that RPL is:
- It is hard work
- It takes effort and time to put the evidence together
- It is not the assessor’s role to work the evidence out
- Only valid evidence will bring about competence
- Valid evidence isn’t easy to locate at times
- Presentation and layout of the evidence is just as important as the evidence
- A good evidence portfolio is logical, easy to follow and contains everything required to make a judgement
- RPL is evidence that you can meet a specific criteria to the standard required in a range of different situations
So next time you put in a request for RPL think seriously about:
- Whether you are truly competent (fully). There is no luck in the process. If the evidence is not there then do the learning, do the assessment.
- Whether you can find the evidence to back your claim. It is your responsibility to do this. Don’t get upset with the assessor if they ask for more evidence. If the evidence is not there, do the learning, do the assessment.
I am interested in your thoughts on RPL. How could we make it easier for learners and assessors? Watch the video. You can also catch it at this link. I believe that we should implement the term recognition of current competency (RCC). More on this at the end of the week.
Leave a Reply