RPL

=Recognition of Prior Learning and Recognition of Current Competencies=

//**Argument for:**//
The Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) and the Recognition of Current Competencies (RCC) are a processes for acknowledging the knowledge and skills people have gained through informal and non-formal learning in the workplace and life experiences. RPL is the process used to applying for a credit transfer that acknowledges previous studies, on-the-job experience or informal training (Herald Sun 2011, pg.92). It is a "major policy initiative of all Australian governments, and is seen to be an important element in developing and sustaining the knowledge and skill base necessary for Australia’s social and economic future" (Misko 2008, p 1). This initiative was developed and implemented with the aim of benefiting and motivating people without formal qualifications to seek further knowledge and skills through formal education and training (ibid p.13).

Misko defines RPL as an "assessment process that assesses the //individual's// non-formal and informal learning to determine the extent to which that individual has achieved the required learning outcomes, competency outcomes, or standards for entry to, and/or partial or total completion of, a qualification" (ibid, p.2). The Herald Sun (2011) qualifies this definition but adds "RPL can mean students finish their courses earlier, have reduced study costs or take on further study, which can lead to a second qualification or identify other competencies".

RPL and RCC were implemented during a period of skill shortage, it was seen as a way for business to save time and money on upskilling staff and to meet the increasing demand for education (Misko 2008, p.7), re engaging older people in the work force and acknowledging the skills of migrants to address skills shortages (ibid, p.17-18) and provide gap training (ibid, p.35). The primary reason for applying recognition of previous expereince or current competencies "are job related" (ibid, p.37), to improve employment opportunities or change career directions.

The RPL and RCC processes are possible because the "Education and training in the VET sector is based on collaboration between government and Australian business and industry" (ibid, p 6) and it is recognised that all parties could benefit as the major advantages include:
 * ensuring that knowledge and skills already successfully achieved do not need to be repeated;
 * encouraging individuals to continue to upgrade their skills and knowledge through structured education and training towards formal qualifications and improved employment outcomes; and
 * providing individuals with the feeling of worth and self-confidence —an understanding that their knowledge, skills and experiences acquired in various settings are valued and can be used to access formal learning pathways.(ibid, p.1)

The 1980-90's the Vocational Education and Training sector develped national curriculum based on competencies that aligned with training in all industries from hospitality and tourism, horticulture, plumbing, electrical, transport and patient, child and aged care. This curriculum facilitated RPL and RCC as a process of mapping and matching competencies with demonstrable knowledge and skills particularly in the workplace. It also supported the "portability" (ibid, p.23) of knowledge and skills for a mobile population providing a speedy and accurate guarantee of training standards for employers.

Initially RPL was a stressful, confusing and complex process of proving experience and skill aquisition, this has been recognised with facilitators being trained to assist applicants to fully understand the process and to recomend the appropriate documentation for submission. Web-based e-portfolio software (ibid, p.29-30) has been developed to facilitate the recording and storage of personal documents, images and video files to streamline and support future RPL and RCC applications. This particularly important for people travelling locally and overseas to have documentation in a situated context that further supports the mapping of qualifications.

This Australian Country Background Report (CBR), commissioned by DEST and prepared by the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) with input from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, provides a synthesis of qualitative and quantitative data on the recognition of non-formal and informal learning in Australia highlighting innovative policy initiatives and practices, issues and challenges. []

//**Argument against:**//
The RPL and RCC processes are time consuming and expensive for applicants. A candidate applying must provide detailed evidence of learning and skill aquisition through an extensive employment record, participating in on the job training and demonstration of current competencies. This is a stressful expereince as it involves maintaining detailed documentation such as employment records, pay slips, letters, certificates, references, up-to-date resume and attendance in short courses and training. Applicants must also grapple with unfamiliar jargon that is associated with competency based training and understand the Australian National Training Reform Agenda.

A theme that has been common throughout this debate (from the 'against' perspective ) is the issues of applicability and assessment standards for the recognition of a formal understanding of the informal aspects of learning. A primary issue is "the lack of a consistent definition is that it has not been possible to establish a nationally comprehensive, consistent and internationally comparable quantitative database, and thereby benchmark performance and assess progress" (Misko 2008, p.116). This has hindered opportunities from research and t o date, "no empirical studies that have investigated the extent to which certain groups have benefited from RPL in comparison with other groups" (ibid, p.39) except for older aged workers, where research "found little support for the commonly held view that RPL will especially help mature aged job seekers without formal qualifications" ( ibid, p.39). Indicating that RPL and RCC are not as widely known or accepted as a method of recognising informal and non formal learning as anticipated, that the process is far to challenging and there is a fear of rejection.

One of the primary issues with RPL and RCC is the mismatch of current knowledge and skills and the need for new training agenda to match the rapid developments in technology, "the Ministerial Council for Vocational and Technical Education (MCVTE) recognises that Australia faces a substantial structural mismatch between the skills of the workforce and the needs of the economy" (ibid, p.31) This is also evident in the flexibility required in both formal training and informal skill acknowledgement by training providers to rectify this mismatch and skills gaps (ibid, p.31).

Misko states in the report that the "uptake of RPL levels is greater in higher VET level qualifications than for lower qualification' (ibid, p.36) and y oung people have not actively engaged, as the "RPL pathway has not been taken up by young people aged 15-24 years in the way anticipated by the policy" (ibid, p.13), this is primarily due to their lack of literacy skills and understanding of the complex process, fear of being rejected and a preference for attending formal education and training (ibid, p.39).

The introduction of RPL and RCC is ultimately left to "employers who will decide the extent to which they will use the recognition of non-formal and informal learning in their recruitment and hiring practices", this situation will have a "major impact on the success of any strategies for integration" (ibid, p.20) to address gender imbalance and support younger, older and migrant workers to upskill.

It has further been identified that "people wishing to access formal education and training pathways through RPL lack the confidence to pursue the steps on their own, and need considerable assistance and encouragement throughout the process" (ibid, p.117) adding expontially to the cost of the process for applicants taking the process out of their reach both time and cost wise. Concern has also been expressed at the equity of the RPL and RCC process with attitudes of assessors varying from a form of assessment to "others view it as a process for confirming professional credibility and competency achieved through the workplace" (ibid, p.118) and are consequently more supportive.