Should RTO consultants be regulated through a Government or professional body?

Should RTO consultants be regulated through a Government or professional body?

Training and education is a complex and vast subject. It is only prudent that we regulate this field to make sure that individuals who are part of it are providing advice and are doing what they claim they can do.
Training and education consultants seem like a dime a dozen these days. However, with the large numbers, there is less regulation of the quality of service offered by such professionals. This leads to poor consultancy services as well as individuals using this as an opportunity for exploitation.
A common misconception among consumers is that they can find out if somebody they are seeking advice from has any kind of qualification or not by searching for them online. The truth is, most unregulated individuals will not show up in searches. So it becomes even more important for Governments to regulate this profession because it serves as an opportunity for unethical individuals to prey on unsuspecting consumers.
Lack of regulation in the training and education industry has led to the exploitation of a number of clients by these so-called training and education consultants, RTO consultants, VET consultants, RTO experts or Auditors.
There are many people who work as consultants, but not all of them should be classified as “RTO experts” or “RTO consultants”. There are many people who provide services that look like training compliance support or audit support who are not qualified or experienced enough to do so.
Almost all other similar types of occupations are regulated in Australia so why not RTO experts and RTO consultants?
Benefits to regulating consultancy
The benefits of regulation are many.
Firstly, it means that businesses won’t have to worry about staying compliant with legal requirements as there will be clear guidelines and quality charters.
Secondly, this would give customers peace of mind knowing that the services provided by their consultant is legitimate, factual and compliant with industry regulatory standards and best practices.
It should also promote continued professional development for the RTO consultants.
Detailed client assistance and support charter
Regulating consultancy will protect consumers from being taken advantage of and a professionally qualified consultant will be able to provide high-quality services. The regulation would also provide a clearer and more transparent system for both clients and providers to understand how these services should be delivered.
Either a government or professional body could be the regulator and validate qualifications and enforce standards of behaviour for the consultants.

Posted in RTO

Interview with David Jepsen, Founder and Principal of RTO Accountants

With over 25 years’ experience as a practicing CA, David is the Founder and Principal of RTO Accountants. David started his career at KPMG, moving onto mid tier accounting firms and commercial roles with Citigroup, Zurich, CBA and others in Sydney and London before setting up an accounting practice in 2001. Offering commercial and practical advice, David believes the foundation for business success is built upon strong, trusted and lasting client partnerships.
David is commercially minded and works collaboratively with clients to develop strategies and solutions for complex business challenges. Having worked in accounting firms as well as public and private businesses, David has a breadth of experience in accounting, taxation, business advisory, financial control/CFO roles, ensuring his clients receive top-level, expert advice.
Specialising in the VET/CRICOS/ELICOS sector since 2016, he has extensive experience working with RTO’s. Specific areas of experience include sales due diligence work, tax advice on sales and other, business group structuring, board reporting, financial viability risk assessment requirements (FVRAR) and business advice.
David loves his sport and played rugby for many years, he still follows the game at all levels from club to international closely. He now enjoys getting outdoors all year round to train and compete in kayak races.


Sukh Sandhu: How long have you been assisting RTOs with financial viability risk assessments, and what has your overall experience been like in this field?
David Jepsen: We have been working with RTO’s since 2014 and financial viabilities from 2018, which was just prior to the introduction of the version of the FVRA Tool we still work with now. The FVRA Requirements were very basic and the introduction of the new requirements in 2018, was like moving from 2 to 9 out of 10 in terms of financial reporting complexity. The sector was not accustomed to this level of financial reporting; I still see issues with that, though I think the sector is getting accustomed to this and the need for this.
The FVRAR and its Tool are complex; as qualified accountants it took us many hours and late nights to get our heads around it and learn its nuances, this is a process for us that never stops.
Sukh Sandhu: What are the five most common mistakes people make when completing the financial viability risk assessment packs, and how can they be avoided?
David Jepsen: I will start with saying we have an initial meeting with clients prior to them starting work on financials and we prepare the Tool for our clients to avoid these mistakes. The client owns and knows the RTO and its plan, though we address and guide our clients on our area of specialisation early to make the process effective and simple for the client.
1. Business Plan or other information available to ASQA contradicts the FVRA Tool.
Solution (S): Get your signing accountant to review the business plan and directors be mindful to understand if changes in the forecast affect other documents.
2. Over emphasis on the bank balance to prove viability.
Solution (S): Provide a financial guarantee and evidence of available liquid assets to fund the RTO; proving the RTO has access to funds. Funds can easily and quickly be deposited or withdrawn from an account.
3. Over optimistic forecasting; higher revenues and lower costs to make the RTO more profitable.
Solution (S): be realistic, even conservative and consider all costs and choose a mid range of student numbers and not the best scenario. Business start ups are rarely profitable and take time to grow and make a profit; accountants and auditors are aware of this.
4. Incorrect and incomplete Tools; the various sheets do not reconcile and/or are not completed correctly; leads to a Tool with a red light and automatic rejection.
Solution (S): We only see these issues when the tool is done by the director’s or another advisor and RTO Accountants are brought into review. Working with an accounting firm experienced with the Tool is the solution, alternatively spend a lot of time and hopefully get it correct.
There is a lot to consider including future, actual, historical financial and operational information that reconciles. Forecasting the balance sheet and cash flow in software and not excel. Accurate financial reporting of this complexity is difficult even for qualified accountants using specialised forecasting software.
5. Forecasting Accuracy
Solution (S): It is a forecast of the future, no matter what you do it will not be 100% correct; consider all the information currently available to you and find a comfortable balance in the level of detail, we can guide you.
Sukh Sandhu: We understand that you also assist organisations with the selling and purchase of RTOs; could you perhaps elaborate a little more for our subscribers?
David Jepsen: For sellers we can help to clarify or prove the value of your RTO via forecasting and a valuation of the RTO. We can provide a report on this that improves the sale process for you; attracting more buyers and a higher price as you are able to articulate the RTO value via this document and discussions. The report can be presented to brokers and potential buyers.
For buyers it is usually Due Diligence (DD) work on the RTO you are considering acquiring. The potential scope of Due Diligence work is very broad as its ultimate objective is to ensure the RTO financial position is as the seller’s state in their financials; the process is like a financial audit. We want to check that you are buying the RTO you think you are. The scope of work is discussed and decided with the client and can change through the process. Many buyers don’t undertake DD as it is a cost that may be large compared to the purchase price; the potential consequences and costs of not undertaking DD when you purchase a RTO can be much larger than the purchase value as the buyer inherits the past of the RTO including any compliance, legal and financial issues, and risks. Our DD findings have saved clients millions. There are many examples including:

  • A $200k RTO purchase we discovered that the RTO had not paid tax or GST for years and the new owners would be responsible for the $150k; the buyers purchase cost is doubled once penalties are included
  • In another DD the RTO was accounting for training revenue on a cash basis prior to training delivery and therefore it looked more profitable than it was. Once discovered the sale price was renegotiated from $1m to $750k; $250k savings.

DD work prior to the purchase is more effective than resolving via enforcement of the share sale contract post sale. Enforcement of the share agreement is difficult and includes directors time, court costs and an unknown outcome. Our due diligence work is focussed on the financials, and we work with other specialists on the DD. Engaging RTO specialist lawyers and consultants should be considered.
DD can also be done for sellers, though is less common. It is more likely to happen if the seller is relying on the new owner’s performance; for example, if the sale includes an ‘earn out’ whereby the sale proceeds will depend on the performance post change of ownership, you want to ensure the buyer will keep the RTO profitable.
Sukh Sandhu: What are the most significant financial risks that training organisations face in today’s environment?
David Jepsen: It depends on the RTO of course, though broadly speaking COVID still looms large for me as a risk to business and the economy for some time, I hope we have seen the worst of it. The last 18 months turned out better than many RTO’s envisaged as they cut costs, received Government support for their business and education became an economic priority and recovery plan that has led to funding of training. I know many colleges have not been so lucky, especially those exposed to international students.
General Government support of the economy, such as Jobkeeper, Jobsaver and disaster payments will be withdrawn and that may also pose risks to the economy and perhaps then student expenditure on courses.
From history we know that funding of training can be withdrawn quickly and that is a risk that directors should remain aware of and have plans in place for.
The regulator has been subdued in its compliance actions since January 2020 and I think that may change as they start to conduct monitoring reviews on inactive or suspected non-compliant RTO’s.
Management and understanding of the RTO operations and financial position, to ensure that you are making a profit and are cash flow positive in the medium to long term. There can be a race to the bottom in reducing student fees against competitors and you need to ensure the fees you are charging will cover your operations and provide the owners with a return on their investment.
Sukh Sandhu: When it comes to working with the national regulatory authority, how has your experience been?
David Jepsen: I have had meetings with the regulator on the FVRAR; that took a little time to organise though they were productive meetings.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) attendance to defend a client’s financial viability against the regulators legal team and forensic accountants. The outcome for the client was favourable, though being questioned by a legal team is never too much fun, though it was challenging and satisfying to explain the financials in that environment.
Recently the regulator seems more communicative and proactive regarding its role and how they will undertake that role, hopefully we will see this in its actions going forward.
Sukh Sandhu: Are there any suggestions you would like to offer to people who are interested in getting into the RTO industry?
David Jepsen: It is a regulated sector as education is a matter of public interest and therefore there will be scrutiny on your affairs and how you intend to operate your business and maintain financial viability. This level of scrutiny will mean setup takes more time and costs more. Most sectors do not have this scrutiny; though writing a business plan and a financial forecast would help all start-up businesses and deter those not ready for the responsibilities of running a business.
Buyers of an RTO business need to get to know the sector and do your due diligence. Training is a happy and positive sector, the conferences are enjoyable, the people involved care about their students/clients.
As the accountant I have to say businesses have a responsibility to society, their clients, staff, suppliers, and other counterparts. For all the efforts and stress please ensure you make a decent return out of it. Understand your financials, risks and what you are making from the business, get regular reporting not just once a year.


For those who wish to connect with or follow David Jepsen, you can do so via his Linkedin, here – www.linkedin.com/in/david-jepsen

Interview with Peter Doukas – Managing Director, Denison Toyer Education Lawyers

Peter owns and operates Sydney based education law firm Denison Toyer.
Working in the field of Education Law and Corporate Governance since 2007 Peter has acted for over one hundred Registered Training Organisations and Higher Education Providers in various stages of the education management cycle. He routinely acts for colleges in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and provides extensive advice to RTO Management, Higher Education providers, Educational Conglomerates and Universities. His professional practice also includes providing legal and governance advice to listed and unlisted company boards. He has acted in some of the largest cases involving ASQA in the AAT.
Peter is also active in the multicultural space and acts as a volunteer director on various boards. He is the current chair of the Ethnic Communities’ Council of NSW. He also works providing pro-bono legal assistance to new and emerging communities, particularly in the establishment of associations and governance structures within NSW.
Peter was awarded Honour of Member of the Order of Australia for services to Multiculturalism on Australia Day 2020.


Here is a copy of Peter Doukas’s interview with Sukh Sandhu:
Thank you, Sukh for the opportunity to be part of the publication. I think it is exceptional that you have maintained the publication throughout the COVID period and it is in my view has never been a more critical time in the history of VET to properly liaise with the sector in all its shapes and sizes and the publication does this.
What are the top five genuine reasons for a regulatory body to take strict action against a training provider?
This is an interesting question. The word ‘genuine’ is something that has troubled representatives in the profession and around the sector for the last 10 years. What constitutes a genuine problem or a genuine reason for a regulatory body (any regulatory body) to take strict action against the Training Provider. The unique example of VET is one which we should bear in mind moving forward as it is the current question before us. In my view, strict action including sanctions should be the last resort. By sanction I mean the sanction of either cancellation, suspension or any other form of sanction which directly affects the ability of the organisation to trade. In my view, there are a number of items where such strict action should be taken. These include but are not limited to:

  • Criminal conduct by the Provider
  • Conduct that is not criminal but unlawful such as breaching the provisions of the NVR Act. If it is proven however to a criminal standard.
  • The use of the VET framework to further commercial interests. It has occurred routinely that I have seen individuals (either Providers and non Providers) use the mere fact of the highly regulated VET environment to further their commercial interests when pursuing them against an RTO.
  • When there are examples of mistreatment of students. This is an extension to the student centred approach that ASQA has taken in the recent past in which in my view students and their experience while studying in our VET Sector should be prioritised above all else.

When should RTO representatives seek the advice of a legal professional?
The question of when a RTO representative should engage a legal professional has plagued me for some time. I have too often been brought into cases that have been run or attempted to be run by Providers without the involvement of a lawyer. This ends up costing Providers exponentially more and in some cases the problems are too large to fix before a sanction either takes effect or can possibly be unwound. In my view is prudent for an RTO to permanently retain (this does not need to be on a financial basis) a lawyer or law firm for the sole purpose of providing legal advice. If you have a lawyer ‘on the books’ it would make the function of dealing with sanctions or any inquiries from the regulator more easy. We must remember, the VET Sector is a highly regulated environment and a VET Provider particularly a CRICOS Provider operates in the framework of multiple interlocking contracts, agreements and regulatory requirements. The idea that RTOs could go along without having legal advice outside of leasing and other contracts on an Ad-hoc basis is not realistic. For larger Providers I strongly recommend the establishment of a Board of Directors of which a retained lawyer and compliance expert sit as advisors to this Board (not necessarily Directors) but provide routine advice on compliance and on structures of the business of VET delivery.
This question is an extension to the previous question, in what ways can a legal practitioner, such as yourself, assist an RTO who is experiencing a legal problem with the regulatory body?
To answer the question about how a lawyer can address the problem facing a regulatory body or facing a registered training organisation is not as appropriate in my view as to when to involve that person. We in this Sector operate in a very unique regulatory framework. ASQA as a regulator has to face Providers which for the most part try to do the right thing but often find themselves on the wrong side of regulation or audits. I have seen on many occasions legal practitioners in some cases from very large firms find themselves completely out of their depth with regards to the implementation of the NVR Act and audit reports as part of regulatory functions. I have noticed the impact of regulatory decisions that have been taken by the regulator not being properly addressed either due to fellow practitioners not fully understanding the way the NVR Act works nor the way that AAT matters should be run. AAT litigation in the RTO space is unique and is very rarely dealt with by legal practitioners operating outside of the RTO space. There are a number of lawyers in Australia who have experience in these matters and I would encourage RTO owners to seek out lawyers who actually have acted in the AAT and ideally brought a matter to final hearing. It is not enough to simply ask a lawyer when shopping around ‘have you taken an RTO to the AAT?’. The real questions that need to be asked is whether:

  • The lawyer has taken a matter to final hearing
  • They have run a contested stay application; and
  • They have conciliated an outcome to the benefit of the RTO.

As you would have noticed, there was a time when RTOs were being cancelled left, right, and centre for trivial reasons that had no or little influence on students. Do you still witness the same pattern, or have the processes been improved?
I think the Regulator’s processes have improved dramatically in the last 18 months. In my view, the Regulator has made a genuine attempt to engage with the Sector and have as an outcome a collaborative and collegiate system of compliance and regulation. Also, it must be said that there were quite a few more RTOs at the beginning of 2018 than there are today. This can partly be due to the cancellation of many in between 2018 and 2019 and also of course a result of the impacts of COVID-19. In 2018 and for most of 2019 I remember running at least one stay hearing each week. This was a time when RTOs were being shut or sanctioned as a result of audit reports that didn’t really hit the mark. There are a number of factors I believe that have changed this. Some of which include some significant wins for RTOs and in final hearing before the AAT,other factors involve the change in perspective from ASQA to a more collaborative model of compliance. I think it can be said generally that the RTO space we are going into in 2022 is fundamentally different from the RTO space that we had in 2019. I am excited at how the Sector will look because I think that we now have a Regulator who can see the value of a competitive, compliant but confident VET Sector that isn’t always looking over its shoulder.
What are the primary reasons for the departure of so many people from the vocational education and training industry?
The departure of people from the Vocational Industry I believe will be reflected as one of the most dramatic and problematic events in Australian commercial history. I have a colleague who is looking to conduct a PhD in Vocational Education and is unable to find a supervisor. It is the case that people have left the VET Sector and found opportunities elsewhere for many reasons, but central is the lack of focus that has been placed at the sector at a policy level. RTO owners shutting or selling their RTO’s tell me that they have lost faith or lost confidence in the Sector. I have worked tirelessly to try to convince people to remain within the Sector and either keep their colleges open or at least keep themselves in the space in some way. I believe that we are about to embark on a significant period of growth in VET and we need as many experienced operators as possible. This is due in part to the combination of a skills shortage in Australia and the gradual opening of our borders to international students.
Any legal advice you’d want to share with people who are interested in entering into the RTO industry or who are currently operating in the industry would be greatly appreciated.
My view is that VET is about to take off. Unfortunately, I am looking to the government to support the Sector and support the entrance of people into the Sector. When I say government, I do not mean the Regulator but education policymakers in Canberra. We need to remember that international education is either our second or third largest export market depending on the context. Could you imagine what would occur if mining in Australia had experienced the nearly 30 per cent decline in people working in the Industry? This is VET since 2019. I believe government should look both into the push and pull factors affecting how people engage with the Sector. They have certainly addressed the push factors by the reforms of the Regulator and I think that now finally ASQA has the framework of a forward-thinking and flexible Regulator in a competitive international market which can finally be compared to Regulators in other Anglosphere jurisdictions such as Canada, New Zealand or the United Kingdom.
As to the pull factors, I believe that we really need to focus on trainers and RTO owners. These are the people who dedicate huge chunks of their life to the training of VET Students and it is these people who need our support and credit in what I hope will be a re-emergence of our VET Sector.


For those who wish to connect with or follow Peter Doukas, you can do so via his Linkedin, here – www.linkedin.com/in/peter-doukas/

Compliance and regulatory requirements to use video evidence

Video evidence can be used to support learning in a variety of contexts. It is becoming an essential tool for trainers/assessors and RTO administrators in order to achieve compliance with regulatory requirements.
The use of video evidence has been growing by leaps and bounds over the last few years. It is now being used in classrooms, practical assessments, institutional assessment, licensing, accreditation, assessment centres, distance education settings and more.
The three main benefits of using video are that it is able to capture all learning opportunities, provide evidence in a specific situation, and be time-efficient.
When assessing student achievement, video evidence is one of the types of proof that can be relied upon without question. RTOs can also benefit from video evidence in a number of other ways, including the following:

  1. One of the best ways to demonstrate competency: Video evidence is often used when the trainers/assessors need reliable evidence that students have achieved the skills they need to successfully complete a unit of competency. This allows trainers/assessors to focus on training rather than documenting what students have already learned through written assessments or formative tests.
  2. Demonstrates authenticity: It demonstrates that the student is in fact the student who is completing the assessment;
  3. Make the assessment process easier and effective: Videos may be simply uploaded into the LMS so that the examiner can see them at any time and from any location.
  4. Improve learner’s engagement: It can be used to improve learner’s engagement with the curriculum through creating content that fits their needs and interests. This is one of the best ways to provide evidence that the learner is engaged with the learning processes.
  5. A good teaching tool: It also enables students to see how they learn best and what areas need more practice. When learners watch their performance on videos repeatedly, they begin to understand what they are doing correctly and where they need to improve their skills. Trainers and assessors can provide a more appropriate resource for students with diverse learning styles through videos. Videos provide a way for trainers and assessors to show their learners what they did during class time and how they can improve on their learning. Learners also get to watch how other people successfully complete the course material or demonstrate their competency in a task or unit of competency.

Video can be challenging, but many online learning platforms offer tools like annotation to help learners produce high-quality content for their formative and summative assessments.
Are you aware of the compliance and regulatory requirements to use the Video Evidence?
The use of videos as evidence for compliance and regulatory requirements is rising with the increase in the adoption of online learning. In order to use videos as evidence, training organisations have to have a process in place and make sure that they comply with regulatory requirements.
There are a number of legal, regulatory and ethical requirements that you must know, including but not limited to the following:

  1. Privacy and confidentiality requirements – Privacy and confidentiality requirements are important when having video evidence from learners in the classroom or outside the classroom. Who else is part of the video, do learners and training organisations have permission to have these people in video in writing? Where is this video filmed? Is it breaching any privacy and confidentiality clauses?
  2. Permission to use the video material – You must seek permission from your learners before you use their photos or videos or anything related to them (including their personal details) on any of your marketing materials, materials that can be accessed by you or your trainers and assessors or any third party. One of the best ways to achieve this is through a question on your enrolment form, where if they have any objections, they can tick or untick a checkbox and you can have further discussions with them related to this matter.
  3. Data protection: In order to keep our learners safe, we should understand the importance of data protection and the compliance requirements that apply to video evidence from learners. Data protection requirements provide guidelines on how, where, why the learners’ personal data is stored, used and for how long?
  4. Unlawful surveillance: This includes not violating wiretap law, not infringing on any individual’s privacy rights, not being involved in any illegal activity while using video evidence and so on.
  5. Preventing misuse of the assessment materials: The training organisation must ensure that the purposes of using the assessment evidence are clearly mentioned and this evidence is not used for any other purposes.
  6. Ensuring the video has not been edited: One challenge with the use of video in training and education is accuracy in assessing learner performance. While this may be difficult because videos can be edited, many still think that videos are not reliable enough to assess learner progress accurately.
  7. Compliance with internal policies and procedures framework: It is important for training organisations to adopt a comprehensive approach to managing their video evidence, including policies, processes, governance models, and technology solutions that support compliance.
  8. Copyright and intellectual property rights: Who has these rights? What are the rights of learners for their assessment evidence? What are the rights of the training organisations for this assessment evidence?

So, what systems, processes, practices do you have in place to ensure you comply with all these requirements? If you need assistance setting up compliant evidence-gathering procedures and practices, please do not hesitate to contact CAQA today.


 

Posted in RTO

CAQA Online forums, CAQA Info for maintaining your compliance and regulatory knowledge

CAQA Online forums provide information for RTO professionals. The purpose of the forums is to support compliance and regulatory knowledge with the help of other professionals in the field.
Some of the benefits of subscribing to our online forums are that it provides access to knowledge sharing and networking opportunities among peers in the vocational education and training industry. You can also get information on what’s new in the industry through the online community.
The following is an example of how discussions in CAQA online forums can help:
When you are looking for answers to questions on topics like compliance, regulation, red tape etc., you can search for them on online forums or look at similar threads on different platforms. The best part is that all these discussions are available to a number of VET experts so you will get answers from real people rather than bots or system-generated answers!
The other benefits include:
-Receive timely notifications when important information is posted.
-Get access to exclusive content and offers from the sponsors and members of the forum.
-Post comments and create discussions with other members in order to build your knowledge base and stay current with current trends in the industry.
So, again, why not subscribe? Online forums provide an opportunity for you to stay up-to-date with the latest compliance and regulatory news. It also ensures that you make use of your knowledge by discussing different topics with other professionals in real-time.
To access CAQA Online Forums, please visit http://www.caqa.info

Interview – Andrew Shea – CEO, Builders Academy Australia

Andrew is an educational and business professional and known intrapreneur who specialises in leading high performing teams, optimising business processes and quality assurance and compliance frameworks. He is a proven transformational leader and has successfully fulfilled managerial and leadership positions across a range of industries.

Areas of specialisation include:

♦ C-Suite executive across ASX and non-ASX businesses
♦ Experienced Chair
♦ Conference speaker
♦ Governance, audit and risk specialist
♦ Not for Profit Board member
♦ Business improvement and compliance advisor
♦ Tertiary Education digital marketing advisor
Over the last 15 years, Andrew has managed and/or consulted with a number some of Australia’s best known Registered Training Organisation’s. As a teacher by trade, he for has personally delivered training and coaching sessions to over 2000 individuals over this time.
In addition to his organisation development and leadership capabilities, Andrew is well recognised in relation to his instructional design and course development capabilities having developed high quality training and assessment materials in the fields of Hospitality, Security, OH&S, Construction, Training and Assessment, Business Management and Leadership.
Andrew has a thorough knowledge of both challenges experienced by training organisations and also industry best practice having led a number of award winning training providers.


1. When it comes to your work as the Chief Executive Officer of two Registered Training Organisation’s that have been recognised with multiple awards, what lessons are there for other providers in what you have learnt in your role?
I am really proud of the recognition that our team at Builders Academy Australia and CWBTS has received across a number of years including being recognised multiple times as the Victorian Training Provider of the Year, NSW finalist for Training Provider of the Year, and last year as the Australian Small Training Provider of the Year at the Australian Training Awards.
Despite our growth and recognition for innovation, quality and great outcomes, we have not necessarily focussed on building our business, but instead on building the capacity of our people, and in-turn, our fantastic team has then helped to grow our business and help more students across Australia through embedding innovative practice whilst maintaining quality outcomes.
We are pleased that we have been able to sustain quality outcomes for our students and employer partners for a number of years, despite the challenges from Covid-19 restrictions and these outcomes have been supported by maintaining a deep understanding of who our students are, the motivations they have towards completing their studies, and embedding industry engagement, and current and future industry skills into all content that we deliver. Through utilisation virtual reality and 3-d walkthroughs of actual building sites as part of our virtual classroom delivery model, we were able to continue to support students despite Covid-19 related limitations for periods.
My team has been proud to showcase that a focus on people, while being a for profit organisation, are not mutually exclusive measures of success in the training system. In 2020/2021, our agile business model, responsive staff and well-developed virtual learning platform has meant that not a single student has missed a training session due to COVID-19. Even the most kinaesthetic of learners has benefitted because of our real commitment to replicating on-site experience, student success and quality outcomes.
I think that maintaining a focus on what industry needs, and reverse engineering our learning and assessment strategies around how we can best support students to achieve those outcomes has had us well placed. We also deeply respect the impact we can have outside of the formal learning environment and dedicate much focus on initiatives such as diversity across the building and construction sector, supporting disengaged youth towards employment opportunities, men’s mental health awareness initiatives and reducing homeliness across our community.
We are as proud of our involvement in these areas as all other achievements and our genuineness in this focus, I believe, is respected and appreciated by both our fantastic staff, students and business partners.
2. You personally have also been recognised for your leadership in your organisation and across the sector with multiple awards such as the Professionals Services and Educational Executive of the Year at the CEO Awards. What lesson have you learnt about the importance of strong leadership in our sector?
In the 6 years I have been in my current role, and my previous senior executive roles, I have focussed on embedding a values-based culture that invests in student success – with enthusiastic staff, robust systems and innovative platforms.
I believe in a human-centric leadership approach and have attempted to build a culture of trust within my team, with a clear vision, and regular and open communication that drives greater empathy among employees and overall improves performance across the divisions of the business. This was particularly important during the uncertain periods that Covid-19 resulted in.
This focus flows through to the relationships we have with our students, as we ensure that we engage personally with people as individuals, utilise stories and marketing as tools for transformation, and engage actively in the macro-level conversations of our industry and the broader VET sector. This collectively shapes our delivery and development, which leads to outstanding outcomes and career pathways for a diverse range of students and staff.
I am a passionate ambassador for the VET sector and am proud to be part of a sector with such dedicated professionals who focus on helping students achieve their learning and career ambitions.
Over the previous 17 years, I have worked across public (TAFE), enterprise and independent training organisations, holding Senior Management and Executive level positions, delivering across diverse cohorts including to domestic students, onshore to international students and offshore to international students. This is a sector that I believe is integral to Australia being able to meet its current and future skilled labour requirements and maintain efficient and productive workplaces.
It is a sector that I look forward to continuing to take part in and positively impact for many years to come.
3. Could you briefly elaborate on your role and responsibilities at ITECA as well as how ITECA is assisting the RTO industry?
I have been actively involved with the Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia (ITECA) (previously the Australian Council for Private Education and Training (ACPET)) over the last 12 years, and I am pleased to have been able to play a role supporting the Peak body for independent tertiary education providers.
With ITECA, I am proud to be currently a Non-Executive Director and Board member, as well as Chair of the National VET Steering Group, Chair of the Governance Committee and Chair of the Victorian State Community. ITECA is supported by a strong executive team, highly respected Board members, and passionate VET professionals who represent strongly on State and National Committees.
With Independent tertiary education providers delivering the majority of training across Australia, ITECA plays such an important role as a strong voice representing the interests of its members, as well as the broader independent sector. This representation and the community of practice that ITECA has created has become even more important over the last 18 months where a range of providers have faced significant challenges aligned with Covid-19 restrictions.
The role of Peak Bodies such as ITECA is integral through the functions they complete including research, policy development, advice to government and sector advocacy and representation. ITECA plays an important role in championing the great outcomes being achieved by independent provides across Australia, and through research papers such as their ‘State of the Sector Report’, they help to ensure that government policy is, as much as possible, aligned with real outcomes and data rather than more ideological reasoning.
Whether it being with ITECA, other Peak Bodies or industry associations, I would recommend to all that they look to join and become active in helping to drive positive changes for our sector.
4. You are one of the very few recognised quality industry experts and leaders that we have in Australia, so how has your experience been working with the regulatory body ASQA to assist them in the transition process that they are currently undergoing?
I think that we have a range of quality representatives and consultants in Australia who add much value across the sector.
My pathway towards becoming a CEO is one that is potentially unconventional for our sector having followed a pathway from training delivery, into Training Management, into managing Resource Development and Curriculum Design, into Quality Assurance and Compliance Management and then as a VET Quality Consultant across public and independent providers.
I do remember speaking at a conference many years ago and being introduced as one of Australia’s first Compliance CEO’s which to me seemed a strange thing to be noted due to how highly regulated our sector is and the significant importance of a CEO being intrinsically involved in ensuring quality and compliance across their organisations.
I have always seen a strong focus on quality and compliance in our sector as a business enabler and to this stage of my career I believe the investment into understanding the VET landscape including all aspects of regulation and compliance has been highly beneficial in my role as CEO as well as someone who often speaks at industry events and conferences, with a focus on providing helpful guidance to others in our sector.
I believe that a short number of years ago, the disconnect between the National Regulator and the regulated community was something unhealthy for our sector and the uncertainty for RTO’s on what they could expect at audit and how to ensure their own operations where compliant with respect to each aspect of the Standards was to the detriment of our sectors reputation.
With significant changes to the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) to adapt its culture and relationship with the sector, including a move away from their previous audit model to a performance assessment framework, I think that genuine change has been occurring and across a number of areas the rubber has been genuinely hitting the road.
I was pleased to be appointed to the ASQA Stakeholder Liaison Group (SLG) and I have been impressed about ASQA’s openness to take on feedback from members of the SLG, using this feedback to update key documents including their Corporate Plan and Regulatory Model to reference areas such as the importance of education and consistency in audit activity and outcomes.
One of the significant changes that ASQA has implemented has been its launched educative function which I believe has added great value to RTO’s in understanding their obligations, as well as hearing from industry representatives on how they implement best practice in their own organisations.
I have been glad to be able to work with others to positively support ASQA’s launching of this educative function, and their initial content production, having taken part myself in 6 education sessions so far covering topics such as regulatory practice, audit expectations, online education quality and compliance expectations and trainer capability.
I look forward to further ASQA webinar sessions over the coming months where I will be presenting on teacher/trainer capability and the upcoming review of the TAE Training Package.
All involvement in these groups, working committees and conferences I speak at, I do unpaid, and volunteer my time in order to positively support the VET sector.
5. You are Chair of the Education Industry Reference Committee and the Foundation Skills Industry Reference Committee through PWC – Skills for Australia, what changes to Training Packages can we expect to see over the coming period.
I was humbled to be nominated by my peers as Chair of these IRC’s that have such high quality and respected VET sector representatives on them. I don’t take lightly the importance of getting Training Packages right for training providers, students and the industries which employ graduates, and this will be particularly the case for an upcoming new version of the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment.
The Industry Reference Committee has on three previous occasions requested to the Australian Industry and Skills Committee (AISC), that a review of the TAE Training Package take place to ensure that any disconnects with industry needs can be addressed. It has been the view of the IRC for an extended period that the Training Package does not fully address modern workforce needs including the Certificate IV’s insufficient flexibility regarding packaging rules.
Pleasingly, the AISC has now approved the review, and redevelopment can take place and the IRC is looking forward to receiving robust feedback from providers to ensure that improvements can be made.
The review itself will take part in two stages, with an initial e-learning and e-assessment development project to be completed by December in 2021, and a full review of all qualifications within the TAE Training Package to be completed by late November 2022.
One important point is that it will be the strong recommendation of the IRC, that any new version of the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment, be recognised as the successor to the current (under clause 1.14 / 1.15 in the Standards for RTO’s) so that the current workforce who hold the TAE40116 will not be required to upgrade their qualifications.
I have already delivered a number of webinars on these topics and for those who wish to take part in helping with the review and redevelopment I would encourage to go to the PWC – Skills for Australia website and sign up for their newsletter which will provide information on upcoming sessions and working groups. Readers are also welcome to follow me on Linkedin where I will be sharing updates on the project.
6. What are your opinions on all of the changes that will occur in the VET sector in the near future, including the new regulatory framework, the new TAE certificate, the new AQF framework, the cessation of ISCs and SSOs, the redesign of units of competency, and everything else that will occur?
In 2020, the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) released a research paper identifying that the VET workforce includes some 246,000 representatives with another 177,000 who work in volunteer roles. I think the significance of our sector, and its importance in helping Australia meet its current and future labour needs can’t be understated.
There are a number of VET Quality Reforms underway at present, with a focus on ensuring that our sector is fit for purpose and is regulated and supported in a way that will help achieve the outcomes required.
In addition to a current review of the Standards for Registered Training Organisations that is underway, earlier this year, Skills Ministers agreed to establish new industry-based clusters (Industry Clusters) with broad roles and responsibilities for skills and workforce development by December 2022. Industry Clusters will replace Industry Reference Committees (IRCs), Skills Service Organisations (SSOs) and Skills Organisation Pilots (SOs).
The establishment of Industry Clusters is intended to enhance the role of industry in the national training system with a broader role and greater accountability to industry.
I am part of a number of consultations on this review activity through the different hats that I wear, and in each I do raise my concerns regarding the potential to not intrinsically involve Registered Training Organization’s as part of the process of Training Package design and implementation. I think to not do so, is not only disrespectful to a sector that employs or engages a workforce of over 400,000, but would also be counter-intuitive to achieving positive outcomes that draw on the knowledge from strong relationships that RTO’s have with the industries they help serve with graduates.
With the approved review of the TAE Training Package now underway, I was pleased that aligning with this a TAE Strategic Advisory Committee has been established with myself being an invited member. This Committee will act as a sounding board for the Education IRC throughout the TAE Training Package re-development project, with the key goal of ensuring appropriate linkages between the review and broader VET workforce policy and regulatory directions and settings.
This will allow for input on topics such as clauses 1.17 to 1.20 within the Standards for RTO’s to ensure that the Standards continue to allow for the provision of supervision of trainers where needed, even where the standards and training package may be updated, with an additional skill set that may be agreed to be recognised under this clause being developed.
7. I clearly remember that we first spoke in 2010 when you were the CEO of a different training organisation and I was a Director of Studies somewhere else; what do you believe has changed in the VET sector in the last 10-11 years and what do you believe we will see over the coming years?
I have enjoyed seeing your journey as a highly respected VET sector representative, and it does feel like a long time since then.
It is important to remember the significant role our sector plays in supporting Australian workforces with our VET sector made up of over 3500 registered training organisations (RTOs) delivering nationally recognised VET, and a number more delivering micro-credentials and non-accredited training. In 2020, 3.9 million students were enrolled in nationally recognised vocational education and training (VET) despite challenges faced over the period including a significant reduction in international students.
Increased and inconsistent regulatory activity; reduced and/or inconsistent State and Federal investment into the sector; changes to visa and related conditions for international students; and delivery impacts caused by Covid-19 restrictions have all challenged providers in their continued support of student learning outcomes and this has seen a significant reduction in training provider numbers over the last decade.
I think that our sector has also taken a number of years to recover from the reputational damage caused by a small number of unscrupulous providers related to the use of VET-FEE Help who took advantaged or a poorly structured and regulated scheme.
Despite this, the very large majority of training providers of all types, continue their focus on student centric, high quality delivery and student and employer satisfaction rates continue to show that largely positive outcomes continue to be achieved throughout the sector.
I think what we will see over the coming years is a much greater focus on collaboration, and organisations either working as part of a consortium or as a minimum as part of a strong community of practice. This will support the sharing of ideas, and quality practices across organisations, and make benchmarking easier for the betterment of all. Consultants also play an important role in conducting reviews across an RTO’s operations and giving insight into best practice and innovation they have seen in other areas of the sector.
I think that the importance of RTO’s being part of their Peak Bodies, or other quality and practitioner networks will continue to increase, and, in a post Covid-19 environment, the importance of the VET sector will be more so than ever. This will include the return of international students with Australia able to continue to build on its strong reputation in supporting students who wish to study both onshore and offshore.
Despite the challenges that Covid-19 created in limiting face to face delivery for periods, the online learning workforce capability this fast-tracked will be of great benefit to providers and the sector moving forward. From a recent paper released by ASQA, survey data from over 3000 participants at a webinar series that I was part of regarding online learning, showed that over 90 per cent had started or increased delivery via an online mode over the last 18 months. Although online learning is not suited to all student cohorts, or all qualifications, and rarely can it meet the needs of delivering full qualifications, this capability will better aid the sector in meeting student needs and expectations moving forward.


For those who wish to connect with or follow Andrew Shea, you can do so via his Linkedin, here – www.linkedin.com/in/andrewjshea

Interview – Matthew Dale – Director, Audit Express and Educonomy


With more than a decade experience working across the VET Sector, Matthew brings a wealth of skills, knowledge and experience to Audit Express & Educonomy. Matthew has had extensive experience in managing the quality & compliance of various state funding contracts and in leading RTOs through the complex process of re-registration. Matthew’s passion is with ensuring that training organisations can adapt to change and ensure the continuing quality of training while also ensuring compliance with the relevant contracts and standards.


Sukh Sandhu: What are the primary challenges and core issues of operating in the VET sector?
Matthew Dale: The VET sector is currently at a real crossroad and is facing numerous challenges and issues. The key challenges being faced by most RTOs is the volume and pace of changes to training packages, which is providing to costly and time consuming for RTOs to adapt to. The relevance and responsiveness of training packages to the needs of industry is also posing a real issue, this is particularly the case as we enter into the post-covid economic recovery. Many industries and sectors are unable to commit to enrolling their workforce into full qualifications to meet the training needs of their organisations, and many are shifting away from traditional accredited training solutions, opting for more innovative and agile non-accredited training solutions, including micro-credentials. For more information on micro-credentials, be sure to check out the educonomy micro-credential and digital badging virtual summit.
Sukh Sandhu: You are one of the very few quality RTO and VET consultants with extensive vocational education and training sector knowledge and skills, according to you, what are the five skills that a significant number of consultants in the VET sector lack and what RTO clients should be careful about?
Matthew Dale: That’s a big call and is very kind of you to say. In my experience, the RTO and VET consultants that I have encountered, each have their area of specialist knowledge and expertise. I’m not sure that I could narrow it down to five skills that RTO clients should be careful about, rather what I would note is that consultants should be clear on what their area of expertise is, and they should work to their strengths, rather than seeking to be a ‘jack of all trades, and master of none’, that they work to their strengths and that RTO clients are really clear when engaging the services of a consultant, that they are really clear on the scope of work they are wanting to be completed and that they recruit suitably qualified and experienced consultants accordingly. It is also a really good idea to always seek professional references before making the decision to engage a consultant.
Sukh Sandhu: You’re involved in a variety of activities in the online and training education space; so perhaps you could discuss a few of them for our subscribers?
Matthew Dale: For a number of years now, we have been supporting our clients to shift their traditional classroom and workplace-based training programs to blended and online delivery modes, which are supported by engaging online content. In 2018 we expanded our work in this space with the launch of Educonomy, a consultancy firm with a big vision of positioning Australia as a global EdTech leader by transforming the current economy of learning and ensuring that every learner is recognised for their skills, regardless of how or where learning takes place. Our team have spent the past 5 years researching global trends in education. We have observed a pattern and trends across the globe as institutions step away from traditional education systems & opt for newer, more innovative options for learning, including micro-learning & micro-credentials. At Educonomy, we drive the future of education by transforming the way we learn. Combining strategy, latest EdTech and expertise, we help education providers to shift into the future and meet the needs of tomorrow. For more information on creating engaging learning content, be sure to check out the educonomy digital learning virtual summit.
Sukh Sandhu: What, in your opinion, are the key distinctions between a quality training provider and a poor quality training provider?
Matthew Dale: Put simply, the key distinctions that set aside quality training providers from the rest are a genuine commitment to the following points:

  • Learner experience
  • Learner support
  • Maintaining a strong connection and links to industry
  • Establishing and maintaining strong governance processes and quality controls, that drive the quality of learning and assessment content
  • Continuously reviewing the products offered, seeking genuine feedback and input from learners, trainers, assessors, management and external stakeholders, including employers

Sukh Sandhu: What, in your opinion, is effective or ineffective in the current regulatory environment?
Matthew Dale: The VET regulators (ASQA, VRQA & TAC) seem to have turned a new page and all seem to be taking a more reasonable and consultative approach to the way in which they have regulated over the past five years, which is great! I tend to look on the positive side and do what I can to effect change where I can, rather than focussing on that which is outside of my control.
Sukh Sandhu: What message would you like to send to training providers who operate in a regulated environment?
Matthew Dale: Focus on what you are good at, know your niche and stick to it. Commit to improving the quality of your learning content and user experience in the areas that you specialise in, and stick to that. Rather than trying to be everything to everyone, just focus on the areas that you want to succeed in and focus on being the best in the market in that! 2022 is the year for refocussing and consolidation, make it a year worth remembering.


Matthew Dale can be contacted through the LinkedIn profile. https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthew-dale
 

Mapping document of assessment resources – do you need one?


A question that has been asked over and over again is “do we need a mapping document”? We hope you will find this information relevant.
A mapping document is a detailed blueprint, required for all assessment tasks. It is used by the trainer and assessor when they are mapping the assessment with training package requirements. The mapping exercise enables RTOs to identify gaps in the assessments, which in turn helps the RTO administrators improve the delivery and assessment of training products.
What is assessment mapping and how does it work?
Assessing the effectiveness of an assessment against each component of a unit of competency is the basic concept behind assessment mapping. The goal and objective are to ensure that the assessment can effectively collect evidence from learners when they complete the unit of competency.
The assessment mapping process requires you to:

  • Understand and write down all the training package criteria that should be assessed
  • Include all the types of assessments required to assess learner’s knowledge, skills and ultimately competency
  • Assess the validity of the assessment against the assessment conditions

The assessment is mapped to the following aspects of the training package:

  • Assessment conditions
  • Elements and performance criteria
  • Performance evidence
  • Knowledge evidence
  • Foundation skills

An assessment mapping document should be able to answer questions such as:

  • What does the unit assess?
  • How long will the assessment take?
  • Are there any pre-assessment requirements?
  • What is the intended outcome of this assessment?
  • How many assessment activities and tasks are there to assess the student’s knowledge and skills in this unit of competency?
  • Has each of the criteria been assessed more than once (if once is not explicitly specified)?
  • What are the strategies to address any gaps where something is only assessed once?
  • How has the assessment been customised or which AQF level is the unit of competency used for?
  • Does the assessment address and operate under the assessment conditions?
  • What is the sequence in which these tasks are to be completed?

Mapping is the most effective way to assess the effectiveness of one assessment against each component of a unit of competency.
When mapping documents are used correctly, they can be an invaluable tool for development and review. Mapping documents provide a framework for understanding how assessments work, who will be using them, what skills are being assessed by each component of the assessment, and how those skills are grouped across disciplines and levels of difficulty.
Additionally, mapping documents provide an opportunity to show auditors how assessments work from start to finish. If done correctly this helps to demonstrate that all aspects have been covered in the assessment development and implementation processes.
Checking that your assessments cover the requirements of the unit and also that you are not over-assessing or under-assessing is an important step in completing your assessment.
Assessment mapping is an industry-standard practice for course developers, RTO administrators, trainers and assessors and auditors. It documents the assessment requirements for qualification and how unit requirements have been mapped against them. The assessment mapping is therefore used as a tool to show how assessment aligns with a set of skills or competencies as required according to training package criteria. It provides evidence that a unit meets regulatory requirements if it includes an appropriate number of skills from each category, which will vary according to AQF competence level, training package requirements and course types.
What are the regulatory guidelines about assessment mapping?
In order to meet the requirements of applicable standards, training packages, and approved courses, registered training organisations (RTOs) must employ a methodology to ensure assessments are complete and cover what is required, however, ASQA does not dictate or specify any particular template with its regulatory guidelines and practices.
While RTOs must demonstrate the validity of their assessment methods, they have a wide range of options for how they choose to accomplish this.
A mapping document can help you identify all the skills and knowledge that are needed for the training product. It can also help you identify the level of complexity of each skill, which is important for course planning, development revision, and implementation.
What are our views from our industry practices and experience?
One of the most important documents in the compliance process is a comprehensive and correct mapping document. We strongly believe that irrespective of what is the regulatory point of view we should always have and maintain a mapping document.


We at CAQA always create a mapping document first before planning the design and development of any assessment or learner resources. Please contact us via email at info@caqa.com.au if you require any additional information about our quality processes.
 

Posted in RTO

Fact Sheet: Transition and teach out

Compliance requirements and guidelines:
This Fact Sheet has been developed and produced to assist Registered Training Organisations (RTOs) in understanding the transition and teach out arrangements stated in Clauses 1.26 and 1.27 of the Standards for Registered Training Organisations (RTOs) 2015.
Clause 1.26
Subject to clause 1.27 and unless otherwise approved by the VET Regulator, the RTO ensures that:

  • where a training product on its scope of registration is superseded, all learners’ training and assessment is completed and the relevant AQF certification documentation is issued or learners are transferred into its replacement, within a period of one year from the date the replacement training product was released on the national register
  • where an AQF qualification is no longer current and has not been superseded, all learners’ training and assessment is completed and the relevant AQF certification documentation issued within a period of two years from the date the AQF qualification was removed or deleted from the national register
  • where a skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course or module is no longer current and has not been superseded, all learners’ training and assessment is completed and the relevant AQF certification documentation issued within a period of one year from the date the skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course or module was removed or deleted from the national register
  • a new learner does not commence training and assessment in a training product that has been removed or deleted from the national register.

Clause 1.27
The requirements specified in clause 1.26 (a) do not apply where a training package requires the delivery of a superseded unit of competency.
Source: https://www.asqa.gov.au/standards/training-assessment/clauses-1.26-1.27
Interpretation of the regulatory requirements
This Fact Sheet outlines the options and responsibilities of registered training organisations (RTOs) in the event that training products advertised on training.gov.au have changed.
There are two types of modifications that could occur:

  • A training product is superseded by a new version of the training product, for example, a new version of qualification, skill set, or unit of competency that is more up to date and current. Or
  • A training product has been removed or deleted from the system, and it has not been replaced by another training product. Teaching out times for a qualification or approved course differ from those for a skill set, unit, or competency, and the rules for each are different.

Important bits of information

Criteria Explanation Comments
The time period to transition to a new training product if a training product (qualification, skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course or module) gets superseded One year period from the date the replacement training product was released on the national register If the training period is not extended by the regulatory body according to their discretion>
The time period to complete all training and assessment and issue AQF qualification certification or statement of attainment if a training product (qualification, skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course or module) gets deleted or removed from the national register Two years period from the date the replacement training product was released on the national register If the training period is not extended by the regulatory body according to their discretion
When the enrolment should terminate in a training product (qualification, skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course or module)? A new learner should not begin training and assessment in a training product that has been removed from or deleted from the national register.
Are these requirements applicable to the core or elective units of competency that is mentioned in the training package? No Clause 1.27 clearly states that the requirements specified in clause 1.26 (a) do not apply where a training package requires the delivery of a superseded unit of competency.
Do you need to apply to add on scope again if a course is deemed superseded and not equivalent? Yes
Can I market the superseded training product? Not recommended
Can I enrol students in qualifications that are superseded from the national training register Not recommended You are permitted to do so, but we do not recommend that you do so.
Can I enrol students in qualifications that are removed or deleted from the national training register? No If a training product has been removed or deleted from the National Training Register, you cannot enrol a student in that product.

Description:
Students should be given adequate opportunity to complete the course of study in which they are enrolled, and training organisations should be committed to ensuring that this occurs. However, there may be instances in which it is deemed necessary to discontinue a course and place students in a “transition and teach-out” mode as a result of the circumstances.
A clear and equitable strategy should be implemented when it is determined that a course needs to be discontinued and students are placed in a transition and teach-out mode by the training organisation. The overarching principle guiding the plan and its implementation should be to guarantee that students are not disadvantaged by the choice to terminate a course or to discontinue enrolment in it.
Transition and Teach-Out Planning should be included as a responsibility to all training managers and trainers and assessors.
It is an important task to understand and identify what is in the best interests of your learners.
To make sure that the transition or teach-out process is successful, training providers should plan it in advance.
What should you consider?
There are a number of things that you must consider when planning the transition and teach out periods, they are:

  • The responsibilities of who is accountable for what should be discussed in detail.
    • Awareness of when a training product gets superseded, deleted or removed and their implications
    • The transition period applicable to each training product
  • What actions do you need to take?
    • Have you considered the impact of superseded training products?
    • Have you conducted the industry consultation on revised/updated/new training and assessment strategy, training materials and practices, facilities, equipment and resources required or trainer and assessor competencies?
    • Have you updated the continuous improvement register with all these changes and who is responsible for what and when?
    • Do you need to RPL students or credit transfer their completed units of competency?
    • Prepared and lodged the application to get the new training product on your RTO’s scope of registration
  • Gap analysis exercises
    • Comprehensive analysis of what changed in the training product
    • Learners who are at risk of not finishing their training product within the transition period should be managed appropriately.
    • Learners who will be genuinely disadvantaged if transferred from the superseded training product.
    • What gap training and/or gap assessment is required?
    • How will this gap training and/or gap assessment be carried out?
  • Maintaining open lines of communication with all stakeholders, including your management team and students
    • Provided students options that either they can leave with a statement of attainments for the units successfully completed or transition to the new training product.
    • Informing the current and prospective learners about the changes implemented and their effects on them
  • Requirements for documentation
    • Subscription to information sources (from the National Register, training.gov.au and Australian Industry Skills Committee (AISC) (Skills for Australia or its successor) to keep you notified of any changes.
    • Learner details for those who have been impacted by a superseded or deleted and removed training product.
    • Evidence of mapping from the superseded training product to the current training product
    • When to cease enrolments in the superseded training products
    • When to commence enrolments in the new training products
    • What to update and who and when to update the marketing materials and all other RTO materials
    • All records of the transition process should be kept securely with a sample of student files affected by transition arrangements.
Posted in RTO

Validation Demystified – Part I

Validation is arguably the central pillar of the VET practice and has a valued place in the education system. It is one of the few compliance requirements that influence and is accountable for more than a dozen standards within the Standards for RTO 2015. As such, validation is the much-studied, crammed and piloted concept of educational practice in Australia and globally.
Yet, there is much misunderstanding, interchangeability of meaning and objective with other concepts and inconsistency of interpretation and practice of validation. Most often than not, there is confusion in the understanding of Pre-validation (now termed by ASQA as Verification), Moderation, and Validation. 
The confusion goes beyond the terminologies. There is a wide range of inconsistency in the implementation of the requirements of the Standards for RTO 2015, figuring out the objectives of validation, choosing the methods of its best practice, prioritising its role in the governance and continuous improvement etc. Despite the big appetite of RTOs to appreciate and use it, validation remains the most bewildering standard of SRTO 2015.
This article will try to clarify the misperceptions and debunk the myths and mysteries
Why does validation remain challenging to understand and implemented inconsistently across RTO practice? The puzzling questions include:

  • What are the areas that RTOs misunderstand?
  • What are the frequent mistakes made by practitioners?
  • Which part is found non-compliant during audits?
  • What are the darkest areas of validation that are leading to obscurity and process inefficiency?
  • What is blurring is the distinction between validation, moderation and pre-validation, and why do they become intertwined in current practice.
  • What does independent validator mean, independent from what is considered as independent? Why only in 1.25 and not in 1.9 – 1.11.
  • Why is moderation not mandatory but essential?

Problem 1. The problem starts in the foundation of the concept of validation, its definition and denotation.
Many RTOs use Moderation, Pre validation and Validation interchangeably. The Standards for RTO 2015 mention validation in different sections with different requirements which sometimes invokes different connotations to different people. Due to this and other reasons some people find it difficult to understand what standards are relevant to which part of the Validation, Pre-Validation or Moderation.
Many RTOs have the impression that Pre-validation and Moderation are not as important as Validation and think they do not have intra-relation as they are very different from each other.
Let’s start with the basic definitions.
Pre-Validation (Verification) is the practice of validation that occurs before using the assessment tools. This validation happens after either developing the assessment tool or purchasing it from providers, and you want to validate them. The objective of pre-validation (Verification) is to ensure that the devices meet the requirements of the training package and ensure they are a valid tool that ascertains the assessment will be conducted according to the principles of assessment and rules of evidence. Whether you develop your own tool or purchase them from providers, RTOs are required to verify they are fit for purpose and valid assessments.
Validation is the quality review of the assessment process and is generally conducted after the assessment is complete. Validation involves checking that your assessment tools have produced valid, reliable, sufficient, current and authentic evidence, enabling your RTO to make reasonable judgements about whether training package (or VET accredited course) requirements have been met.
Moderation is a quality control process aimed at bringing assessment judgements into alignment. Moderation is generally conducted before the finalisation of student results as it ensures the same decisions are applied to all assessment results within the same unit of competency.
How are they aligned to SRTO 2015, and what are their commonalities?
The standards that affect each concept are different. The below table will give you a clear understanding of the representation of standards per each concept.
 

Concept Objectives When takes place Relevant Standards
Pre-Validation (verification) Ensure they are a valid tool that ascertains the assessment will be conducted according to the principles of assessment and rule of evidence Prior to using the tools. 1.5, 1.6, 1.8
Moderation Bringing assessment judgements into alignment Before the finalisation of student results 1.8 and 3.1
Validation A quality review process that confirms your RTO’s assessment system can consistently produce valid assessment judgements. After the assessment tool is implemented and student assessments are completed and marked. 1.5, 1.6, 2.2, 3.1, 1.13, 1.1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, and 1.25

Though their definition and purpose are diverse, Pre validation, Moderation, and Validation have one shared goal. They are destined to ensure the best practice of effective assessment, mainly assessment practice and judgment.
Problem 2. The ‘two units 50% in three years and five years cycle’ syndrome and compliance mentality.
Many RTOs believe that the validation must be conducted at 50%, and this is done because of compliance requirements. For this reason, the RTOs wait until the last day and are not able to identify the problem at an early stage. These results in finding themselves in the unfortunate position of non-compliance with standard 3.1. They have to revoke the certificates and redo all assessments again because they have awarded certification documentation to learners whom they have NOT assessed as meeting the training product requirements specified in the relevant training package.
RTOs must see the Standards as a document that describe what outcomes an RTO must achieve, not how they must be achieved (policed).
‘50% three years and five years cycle’ is the minimum but risky requirement.
Scheduling and adhering to 50% of qualifications in three years is equivalent to planning for failure and non-compliance. The best time to validate your resources is today, not tomorrow.
RTOs need to develop a validation schedule the day they receive their registration to validate each training product (AQF qualification, skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course and module) on its scope of registration. The validation clock starts to tick from that day, and the quality requirements increase with each clock tick.
Problem 3. Many RTOs believe they have conducted their validation; however, they are deemed to be non-compliant with Standards 1.10 – 1.11 and 1.25.
Several RTOs do the validation but are not followed by any rectification plan, and that makes their validation part of a problem instead of part of a solution.
Many RTOs opt to cut corners—by developing a generic validation tool strategy from a template and asking validators to ‘sign off’, which most often than not, results in a yes ticks and flicks.
Some RTOs also conduct the validation by one person, usually a compliance officer/manager, without considering the requirements of the validation team. Many RTOs make mistakes in sampling and choosing their assessment to be validated. Because they use a sample of their best students or trainers who have been deemed competent, their validation produces a bad validation outcome.
For many RTOs, the main reason can be described as “validation conducted for the sake of conducting’ not for an effective outcome and meaning full action. The absence of systemic, documented process and assessment tools and guides is customary in many RTOs.
Most RTOs have validation policies and procedures. However, the method does not articulate and demonstrate in detail what they must do, how they will do it, when they will do it, who is responsible for doing what, the mechanism for monitoring them, and the evidence they can provide.
RTOs must develop and implement a system with evidence (that can be seen, touched and heard) to ensure assessment judgements are consistently made on a sound basis and validation of assessment judgements is carried out regularly.
Next is the validation tools, far from a ‘sign me up’ checklist with close-ended yes and no answers that lead validators to say yes. For example, asking validators to tick ‘the principles of assessments are good’ will not be effective and does not demonstrate that the assessment practice and judgment was informed by validators.
Though there is no specific method or approach that you must follow, you must demonstrate that:

  • You have developed a schedule to validate each training product (AQF qualification, skill set, unit of competency, accredited short course and module) on your scope.
  • You adjusted the validation schedule when adding a new training product. When making adjustments, ensure your plan continues to meet the timeframe and completion requirements discussed above.
  • The training products must be validated as per the schedule; putting a validation schedule without implementing it is worse than not having a plan.
  • Select your validators and ensure at least one subject matter expert ‘industry relevance’ requirements.
  • The assessment tool must contain an open-ended and meaningful questions that can check the assessment practice and judgment from different angles

The ‘two units from qualification’ pattern.
Part of the validation failure is when RTOs stick into the ‘two units per qualification’ approach. The number of units and the selection criteria must not insist on the minimum requirement as one size does not fit all.
Statistically, valid sampling is essential in the process of validation.
A statistically valid sample is:
· large enough that the validation outcomes of the model can be applied to the entire set of judgements, and
· taken randomly from the collection of assessment judgements being considered.
Calculating sample size
You must validate enough assessments to ensure that the results of your validation are accurate and are representative of the total completed assessments for the training product.
To determine appropriate sample sizes, you can use ASQA’s validation sample size calculator.
Whatever model or method you use, you must ensure your sampling will provide you with a very low error level and high confidence in assessment practices and judgements.
Random selection
Many RTOs use the sample of their best students or trainers who have been deemed competent, which produces a lousy validation outcome.
Randomly selecting your sample will ensure adequate coverage of varying levels of learner performance. You may also supplement the random selection by adding additional completed assessments (for example, to include both competent and not competent assessments, or to include multiple assessors’ decisions, various delivery modes and locations) to ensure the validation process is representative of all assessment judgements.
(Reference, ASQA and NCVER)

One Of the Best Online platfrom

Get A Free Sample Of Our Resources

35+

Experts

20K+

Products

120K+

Conferences

41K+

Subscribers

100%

Assurance

Contact Us

Send Us a Message

Questions? Concerns? We’re here to listen and respond!