Assessment: Standards 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6

Standard

The assessment system is fit-for-purpose and consistent with the training product.
Performance Indicator

Performance Indicator

The RTO demonstrates:

(a) assessment is consistent with the requirements of the training product

(b) assessment tools are reviewed prior to use to ensure assessment can be conducted consistent with the principles of assessment and rules of evidence

(c) the outcomes of review inform any necessary changes to assessment tools. 

Standard

The assessment system ensures assessment is conducted in a fair and appropriate way and enables accurate judgements of VET student competency.

Performance Indicator

The RTO demonstrates:

(a) assessment is conducted in a way that is consistent with the following principles of assessment:

(i) fairness – assessment takes into account VET student needs, including through applying adjustments where appropriate and enabling reassessment if necessary

(ii) flexibility – assessment is appropriate to the context, training product and VET student, and assesses skills and knowledge held by the VET student irrespective of how or where they have been acquired

(iii) validity – assessment of skills and knowledge is integrated with practical application and would enable the VET student to demonstrate these skills and knowledge in similar situations

(iv) reliability – assessment evidence is interpreted consistently by assessors and the outcomes of assessment are comparable irrespective of the assessor conducting the assessment

 

(b) assessors make individual assessment judgements that are justified based on the following rules of evidence:

(i) validity – the assessment evidence assures the assessor that the VET student has the skills and knowledge described in the training product

(ii) sufficiency – the quality, quantity and relevance of the assessment evidence enables a judgement of competency to be made

(iii) authenticity – the assessment evidence presented is the VET student’s own work

(iv) currency – the assessment evidence demonstrates the current skills and knowledge of the VET student. 

Intent of Standard 1.4

The intent of Standard 1.4 is to ensure VET students’ skills and knowledge are assessed in a way that is fair and appropriate, and assessment outcomes are reliable. Robust assessment systems that enable assessment in line with the principles of assessment and rules of evidence are critical to upholding the defensibility of an RTO’s assessment decisions and qualifications. This underpins the integrity of VET.

Two of the ways that this is commonly achieved is by ensuring that:

• assessment is conducted consistent with the principles of assessment
• assessors make individual assessment judgements that are justified based on the rules of evidence.

RTOs trainers and assessors are expected to have a strong understanding of the principles of assessment and the rules of evidence and to be able to apply these in a practical way, guided by the RTOs systems and processes.

Self-Assurance Considerations:

In self-assuring against this Standard, consider (among other things):

• how you ensure that assessment is conducted in a way that is fair, flexible, valid and reliable
• how your practices ensure assessment is conducted in line with the Principles of Assessment
• how you ensure that individual assessment judgements are justified based on the rules of evidence.

Standard

The assessment system is quality assured by appropriately skilled and credentialled people through a regular process of validating assessment practices and judgements.

Performance Indicator

The RTO demonstrates:

(a) validation of assessment practices and judgements ensures the assessment system consistently produces valid assessment judgements that are consistent with the training product and the requirements of these Standards

(b) validation for each training product on the RTO’s scope of registration occurs regularly and at least every 5 years, as informed by risks to training outcomes, any changes to the training product, and feedback from VET students, trainers and assessors, and industry

(c) a risk-based approach is used to determine the component of the training product to be validated and the sample size of assessments

(d) validation is undertaken by one or more people who collectively have:

(i) industry competencies, skills and knowledge relevant to the training product

(ii) a practical understanding of current industry practices relevant to the training product

(iii) one of the credentials for validation specified in the Credential Policy

 

(e) in addition, where an AQF qualification or skill set from the Training and Education Training Package that enables individuals to make assessment judgements is being validated:

(i) the person(s) undertaking validation are independent and are not employed or subcontracted by the RTO to provide training and assessment

(ii) validation occurs following completion of training and assessment by the first VET student cohort

 

(f)validation outcomes are not solely determined by those who have designed or delivered the training or assessment

(g) how validation outcomes are used to inform revisions to the assessment system.

Intent of Standard 1.5

Regular validation of your RTOs assessment system is critical to ensure students have been accurately assessed against the skills and knowledge required by the training product through the assessment system. An RTO’s assessment practices and judgements need to be reviewed to understand where the RTO can make changes to improve the accuracy and strength of its assessment system.

While Standard 1.3 requires that assessment tools are reviewed prior to use to ensure they are fit-for-purpose, this standard requires that a sample of completed assessments within a training product is evaluated after the use of the assessment system to see if it has achieved consistent and valid assessment outcomes, regardless of who has made the assessment judgements.

RTOs should be undertaking validation of all training products on their scope of registration at least once every five years to assure themselves of the quality of the assessment system in place for each product, and to identify opportunities for improvement. The standard strikes a balance between setting a maximum validation cycle of at least every five years and allowing flexibility for RTOs to self-determine validation frequency and sequencing that is informed by risk, changes to training products and feedback. Recognising more frequent validation is expected to be undertaken where risks have been identified.

Given the important role validation has in assuring the quality of an RTO’s assessment system, this standard describes specific requirements about who can be involved in validation and the risk-based approach to validation. Engaging the right people to conduct validation and identify required changes to an RTO’s assessment system ensures the assessment system is informed by deep understanding of VET and current industry practice, and ensures objective opportunities for improvements are identified.

Qualifications and skill sets from the TAE Training Package impact the quality of training and assessment throughout the VET sector. It is vital these training products are effectively delivered by trainers and assessors with the right skills and competencies in training and assessment. As such, there are specific requirements associated with delivering training and assessment and undertaking validation of assessment tools for any AQF qualification or skill set from the TAE Training Package.

RTOs should refer to Section 3 of the Credential Policy regarding the credentials required for people undertaking validation of assessment.

The requirement to undertake validation of assessment judgements in accordance with the Standards should not limit an RTO from undertaking a wide range of monitoring activities (including moderation), or any other process aimed at increasing the quality of assessment outside of the validation cycle.

Considerations for different RTOs

RTOs that purchase ‘off the shelf’ assessment systems and tools – RTOs that purchase assessment systems and tools are still required to ensure these tools remain relevant and fit-for-purpose in their context as part of a validation program. They must demonstrate how they quality assure their assessment system and validate assessment judgements in line with this standard.

Self-Assurance Considerations:

In self-assuring against this Standard, consider (among other things):

• your practices for designing and adopting a validation program for the training products on your scope of registration
• what validation activities are aiming to identify in assessment practices and judgements, and when a validation activity may need to be expanded
•  how you determine which components of a training product are to be validated and when
• how you determine the sample of assessments
• how you determine who is involved in validation and the practices that are in place to ensure that only appropriately skilled and credentialled people undertake validation
• how you adjust the assessment system for a training product based on the outcomes of validation.

The requirement to undertake validation of assessment judgements in accordance with the Standards should not limit an RTO from undertaking a wide range of monitoring activities (including moderation), or any other practice aimed at increasing the quality of assessment outside of the validation cycle. 

Standard

VET students with prior skills, knowledge and competencies are supported to seek recognition of prior learning to progress through the training product.

Performance Indicator

The RTO demonstrates:

(a) VET students are offered opportunities to seek recognition of prior learning and are made aware of the RTO’s policies for this

(b) recognition of prior learning is based on evidence of prior skills, learning and/or experience, and is conducted in accordance with the assessment system

(c) decisions about recognition of prior learning are fair, consistent and transparent, maintain the integrity of the training product, and are documented.

Intent of Standard 1.6

An important outcome of a competency-based VET system is that students who can demonstrate certain competencies described in a training product (to the level of rigour required by these Standards) can have such competencies recognised without undertaking further unnecessary formal training.

RTOs play a role in supporting students to efficiently progress through a training product where they have the relevant pre-existing skills, learning and/or experience. Students, including prospective students, who consider that their prior learning reflects what is required under the training product can be assessed and may have their training product abridged to reflect their proven competencies. RTOs are to determine the extent to which an  individual meets the training product requirements through an assessment process that complies with the requirements in the Standards.

It is recognised that enabling recognition of prior learning might not be appropriate or practical in all circumstances. For example, it may not be an efficient use of a student’s time or RTO resources to undertake assessment of prior competencies for short, low-cost courses. However, in this case RTOs must be transparent with students about their policies for recognition of prior learning and must be able to justify why recognition of prior learning is not appropriate where it is not made available.

RTOs are required to act fairly, consistently and transparently when making decisions about recognition of prior learning.

Considerations for different RTOs

RTOs delivering short courses – For some particularly short, low cost courses, a recognition of prior learning process may have limited value to students. In such cases, RTOs must still be able to demonstrate how they have formed this view and how this is transparently communicated to students prior to their enrolment.

Self-Assurance Considerations:

In self-assuring against this Standard, consider (among other things):

• how you ensure individuals are aware of the opportunities to be assessed for recognition of prior learning
• how you ensure assessment of recognition of prior learning is conducted in accordance with the Standards and is robust enough to identify proven competencies
• how you have used the principles of fairness, consistency and transparency in designing your recognition of prior learning policy and practices
• whether the practice used to record recognition of prior learning outcomes meet the Principles of Assessment and Rules of Evidence
• how do you ensure individuals understand the recognition of prior learning process should they choose to engage in this way

In considering the reflective questions, consider the extent to which your current practices are working and what if any, changes you could make to improve these. It may be helpful to think about examples.

1. How can you demonstrate your assessment system is fit-for-purpose and consistent with the requirements of the training product(s)?
2. How do you monitor your assessment system and assessment outcomes?
3. How does the design of your assessment system support assessment in line with the principles of assessment and rules of evidence?
4. What do you have in place to plan regular and structured validation of training products on your scope of registration?
5. How do you promote recognition of prior learning and ensure students understand the process and options available to them?
6. How do you make changes to your assessment system?

Standard

• Standard 1.7 - credit transfer
• Standard 1.8 - facilities, resources and equipment
• Standard 2.4 - training support
• Standard 2.5 - diversity and inclusion
• Standard 4.1 - leadership and accountability
• Standard 4.4 - continuous improvement

Compliance Requirement

• 1 & 2 - information management requirements
• 5 to 9 - AQF certificate documentation
• 10 - student identifiers
• 11 - NRT logo
• 12 & 13 - transition of training products
• Schedule 2 - Nationally Recognised Training Logo Conditions Of Use Policy

Credential Policy

• Section 1: Credentials for Validation of Assessment