A MODEL FOR ASSESSMENT OF PRIOR LEARNING
R L PETERSON
Manukau Institute of Technology
Abstract
A Centre for Assessment of Prior Learning has been established at Manukau Institute of
Technology. The institute is located in South Auckland, a region with the largest population
of Polynesian and Maori people in New Zealand.
Mostly industrial, South Auckland is a melting pot for new New Zealanders, many of whom
come to NZ with diverse skills but lack a New Zealand qualification to assist them to gain
entry to the workforce, and to get points for immigration purposes. Motivated by pressure
from candidates needing RPL quickly, the writer began to consider alternatives to lengthy
portfolio assessments. Obstacles to progress include assessor suspicion and the theoretical
aspects of most New Zealand qualifications. Collaboration with colleagues in other technical
institutes led to observation of a group of four boat-builders making a joint 1-hour
presentation to meet the criteria for three separate 1-year courses within a Diploma. The
courses were Health, Safety and Professional Ethics; Critical Thinking and Problem Solving;
Communication and Customer Service. Development of assessor workshops was considered
key to the advancement of assessment practices for CAPL, along with co-operation from
guinea pig clients.
A MODEL FOR ASSESSMENT OF PRIOR LEARNING
R L PETERSON
Manukau Institute of Technology
Introduction
Towards the end of 2001, Manukau Institute of Technology began the process to set up a
centre, which would be dedicated to the assessment of prior learning (APL). The centre would
be one of five throughout New Zealand. Although described by the business community as
long overdue, there has been an impression that teaching staff generally have little
appreciation and even less understanding of the practice of awarding credit for learning other
than learning that takes place in a classroom or workshop.
In line with the New Zealand Government’s priorities for tertiary education as outlined in the
Tertiary Education Strategy (See Extract Appendix I), NZQA has recently announced a new
policy for credit recognition and transfer. The document contains the policy, principles,
objectives, outcomes, strategies and a timeline for implementation. The policy strengthens
the requirement for tertiary institutions to ensure that when qualifications, courses and
programmes are developed they actively promote and facilitate credit recognition and
transfer. It emphasises benefits to learners and requires providers to include credit
recognition as one of the pathways to learning that may be taken following the award of some
qualifications.
In establishing the Centre for Assessment of Prior Learning at MIT, the author has been
concerned that experiential learning, which has developed in a real-life holistic fashion, is
reduced to what is in effect a multitude of written assignments. Conversations about
integrated assessment have been around for some time. Nevertheless, when you look at
assessments set for most courses in tertiary institutions you see instruments that assess
knowledge and skills in a piecemeal fashion. It occurs to us that the facilitation of
assessments for recognition of prior learning provides an opportunity to enhance practices
surrounding assessment in a tertiary institution like MIT - this paper describes the progress to
date.
History of CAPLNZ
In 1990 the Education Amendment Act gave NZQA responsibility for developing a national
framework that is flexible enough to allow people of all ages, backgrounds, perspectives and
histories to gain formal recognition for competency already achieved.
The first reports on Recognition of Prior Learning were published by NZQA and the National
Centre for Education Research in 1990.
In 1991 NZQA affirmed its support for the formal recognition of prior learning, but it was to
be two more years before its policy on RPL was approved.
Since then a number of overseas experts on RPL have run workshops in New Zealand, and in
1993 a national conference on RPL took place in Wellington. The practice of recognising
1
prior learning has evolved slowly since then, although many tertiary education programmes of
study include a statement about RPL and most providers have policies and procedures that
include provision for RPL. Some organizations have specialist staff working as RPL
facilitators with students.
In 1999 Otago Polytechnic took up the challenge to offer a centre that would facilitate the 8step process for RPL that is now the hallmark of the Centre for Assessment of Prior Learning
operating at five New Zealand polytechnics. The unique feature of the CAPL service is that it
is designed to provide the service to a new target group, those who may not otherwise have
chosen to participate in formal education.
The CEO of Otago Polytechnic visited NZQA in 2000 and a Memorandum of Understanding
was drawn up for CAPL and NZQA to co-operate to achieve the common objective of
increasing opportunities for RPL.
In September 2001 the CAPL Manager at Otago Polytechnic came to MIT to discuss the
possibility of MIT working with other TANZ partners on Otago’s model for APL and in 2002
a Centre for Assessment of Prior Learning was established at MIT with a full-time manager
and part-time administrator.
The TANZ arrangement has the potential to project the CAPL service through all of its
partners – Otago Polytechnic, Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, the Universal
College of Learning, Manukau Institute of Technology and The Open Polytechnic of New
Zealand. The partnership gives excellent geographical coverage for clients, together with a
range of qualifications and a sizeable pool of assessors.
It must be made clear that the scope of CAPL services is not all embracing, and is limited to
NZQA qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework, other national
qualifications such as the NZ Diploma in Business, along with TANZ provider qualifications.
Despite growing enthusiasm and support for RPL, there is still a great deal of resistance to be
overcome. There is fear by some academic staff and by some clients that standards may be
compromised. The tendency to undervalue what people can learn from previous life and
work experiences is still strong, with some educators and institutions remaining sceptical of
knowledge or skills they have not taught, particularly if that learning has occurred outside an
academic setting. It has been crucial, therefore, that the people given the mandate to establish
CAPL New Zealand have the backgrounds to give credibility to the new centres.
The original Manager of CAPLNZ came from a background in hospitality. Since 1998 he
focused on training and recruitment, setting up Job Shop at Otago Polytechnic to offer
training programmes and assessment of prior learning to the hospitality sector. He was a
member of the government ministerial working party on RPL in early childhood education
and a Regional Moderator with the Hospitality Standards Institute.
At Manukau Institute of Technology, the brief to set up a Centre for Assessment of Prior
Learning was given to a staff member from the Centre for Educational Development, whose
background had been strongly linked to assessment, having been contracted by NZQA since
1994 as a marker, examiner, writer and moderator. Since coming to MIT she had been
involved in training workplace assessors and in other industry training. Her role in the CED
had largely been in the area of assessment and moderation. Her research interests lie with the
2
motivations of independent learners – a field which fits comfortably with the experiential
learning that CAPL is designed to recognise.
The Model Used
CAPL has been founded on the philosophical premise that learning takes place every day, at
home, at work and in the community. Assessment ought to be about standards of performance
achieved, not about how learning occurred, thus any prior learning ought to be potentially
capable of being awarded credit.
Several acronyms are used to describe prior learning assessment: RPL (recognition of prior
learning), APL (assessment of prior learning) and RCC (recognition of current competence).
Whatever is preferred, the following definitions are useful:
Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) is the acknowledgement of skills and
knowledge already acquired by a person from work and/or life experience or
from previous study. This prior learning may include:

courses provided by professional bodies, voluntary associations, enterprises,
private educational institutions, trade unions, government agencies and/or
other providers recognised by the university.
 work or other forms of practical experience; and
 life experience.
(Victoria University, Melbourne)
RPL is a form of assessment used to determine whether a person has achieved,
through informal and formal learning and experience, the required competence
for entry and/or credit in a recognised course or training program (Rumsey,
1994:15).
It is important to note that RPL/APL/RCC is not about awarding credit for experience, the
number of years a person has been in a job, workshops attended, level of position, patience or
effort. RPL/APL/RCC is solely about awarding credit for learning related to qualifications.
The major barriers to a successful RPL/ACC/RCC application are the economic fears of
traditional academics, concerns about quality assurance, student resistance to rigorous
procedures, cost and insufficient facilitation and administration support. In December 2002
the New Zealand Qualifications Authority Supporting Learning Pathways: Credit
Recognition and Transfer Policy declared “credit recognition and credit transfer are the litmus
test of confidence in quality assurance arrangements for education”.
The key principle on which CAPL is founded is that if applicants can satisfactorily
demonstrate that they already have the specific knowledge and skills required by the
unit/module/course then credit should be awarded. A candidate must be able to



apply related theories and concepts
analyse data, theories and concepts where applicable
demonstrate conciseness, and precision in transmitting the required evidence
3
The processing of RPL/APL/RCC involves an examination of the claim by a candidate to
possess the outcomes that are expected from a course. It is the task of the candidate to
document or otherwise demonstrate these outcomes to the satisfaction of the institution. It
remains the candidate’s responsibility to present a convincing case to justify each claim.
Candidates need to understand and recognise the knowledge and skills they have. They also
need to be able to:




demonstrate the depth and range of appropriate skills and knowledge
verify their skills and knowledge
identify any weaknesses
demonstrate analytical abilities
Of interest in this paper is the method used to enable the candidate to achieve this. Portfolios
have been a large part of the business of CAPL to date. Workshops have been held to assist
clients to construct appropriate portfolios for assessment. In the portfolio workshop
candidates are taught how to match their learning with the learning outcome provided for each
course. Following the evidence guide provided, the portfolio is organised and crossreferenced. Candidates must explain how individual pieces of evidence relate to learning
outcomes.
The average candidate submits portfolios at the rate of approximately one per month. A
person claiming to have learning equal to a national diploma can spend up to a year
submitting portfolios for assessment. Throughout this period, the CAPL facilitator works
closely with the applicant motivating, guiding and checking before the completed document is
submitted for assessment. It is a very time-intensive process and clients have rightly observed
that it is like completing a succession of major assignments. Frequently documentary
evidence is not available for a range of reasons and the clients end up treating the exercise like
a written project where a fictitious scenario is devised and documents created to prove their
learning.
A different model explored
Andrew Gonczi (2003) has identified the major conceptual problems in competency-based
assessment. He maintains that the idea of competence is based on two views of learning. The
first is the behaviourist view which looks at the individual tasks a person can carry out. The
second assumes that generic skills can be transferred to various tasks. Gonczi’s model
incorporates both of these - he calls it the ‘relational concept’, based on situated learning. In
this view competencies should not be separated from other things because outcomes only
make sense within a context. He proposes a holistic assessment system based on
a) assessment of performance as opposed to abstract tests of knowledge
b) multiple sources of evidence obtained through multiple assessments in multiple
contexts
c) recognition that judgements of evidence are only judgements
d) recognition that judgements need to be based on standard tests.
A case study
Bob first appeared a year ago when CAPL was launched at MIT. He believed his experience
in business was sufficient to equal learning he would gain from enrolling in a business course.
Under normal circumstances, Bob would be expected to acquaint himself with a unit standard
4
from the compulsory and elective units in a qualification and gather suitable evidence. He
would then assemble a portfolio, including a description showing how he had gained skills
and applied theories. Documents to prove each aspect would be included. The portfolio
would be submitted for assessment, the assessor would ‘turn it around’ within two weeks and
the result would be given to Bob – either congratulating him (unofficially) on his competence,
or requesting further evidence, in which case there would be a resubmission in several weeks,
followed by further feedback.
This could represent up to 10 credits towards a 120-credit diploma. The exercise may have
taken 2-3 months. Each further claim by Bob would extend the process by a similar
timeframe.
Integration
In assessing prior learning the evidence will perhaps describe whole tasks and achievements that
encompass outcomes from several units/modules/courses.
Integration provides an opportunity to reduce assessment time and make assessment activities
complement and reinforce learning. Assessment Guidelines for the drilling industry in
Australia
include
this
statement:
…. it is the intention that the ability to perform the unit of competency as a whole
be the key criterion in any assessment process.
Careful planning can minimise the number of assessment occasions and provide for a more
holistic approach. NZQA’s guide to learning and assessment recommends:
To develop an integrated assessment activity one needs to identify what the
course or unit requires of the learner, devise an activity that requires a complete
performance, go back to the unit and check off the learning outcomes and
criteria, and if necessary expand the activity to cover more. Better still;
consider whether more than one course can be combined in assessment (NZQA,
2001).
Two CAPL pilots are underway to investigate ways that integrated assessments could work to
speed up yet retain the rigour of the process. In the first, a straightforward NQF unit is
selected and the traditional method of portfolio assessment is used to establish confidence by
the assessor in the candidate. For subsequent units a series of meetings is held with the client
where the client tells their ‘story’ and identifies key areas of knowledge gained from their
work. They link this knowledge with the learning outcomes of the selected unit standard. The
CAPL facilitator talks with them to ensure they are comfortable about what they will include
in a presentation.
Meeting with the assessor, the CAPL facilitator then discusses the objective of the unit and
keeps the assessor in the picture about what has been planned with the client.
The client prepares some overheads and talks with the assessor about their work – fully aware
that they must meet the learning outcomes of the particular unit/module/course.
5
In the second, a similar process is followed. Key areas of knowledge and skill are identified
and matched to the components of a qualification during an initial interview. In this pilot
study however, the integration is based on several units/modules/courses.
A discussion between facilitator and client clarifies the unique features of both portfolio
assessment and an integrated model where perhaps two or three assessors from different
subject areas will be present at a presentation. Briefing includes explaining criteria from
assessors and the client considering how they might meet the criteria, for example:

Verbal presentation to assessors and possibly an audience, using
OHT/Video/PowerPoint to demonstrate presentation/communication skills;

Handout prepared to demonstrate written communication skills and to cover
content unsuited to the presentation, or to check the quality of academic writing
and use of references, ability to develop a coherent argument and to confirm
critical evaluation of ideas;

Interaction with audience to demonstrate skills in training or communication areas;

Activity to demonstrate further training skills;

Content prepared and points covered to demonstrate prior learning in relevant
areas;

A debate could be used to demonstrate adequate knowledge of the subject in
sustaining a considered argument;

Interactive questioning to draw out and relate applicants skills.
A meeting may be held with the assessor/s and client to clarify issues raised or to review the
scope and depth of learning. This may be particularly useful where values are important.
Quality Assurance Mechanisms
Accredited providers are required to establish and use quality assurance mechanisms. MIT’s
Quality Management System includes the following:





Programme Committees have the task of monitoring assessments
Assessment procedures of courses/programmes are scrutinised by the Programme
Committee and the Academic Standards Committee
Appropriate staff training is undertaken on assessment and moderation
New or revised assessments are moderated and adjustments made where appropriate
Appropriate external moderation and accreditation requirements are met
One of the unexpected outcomes of the establishment of the Centre for Assessment of Prior
Learning has been the heightened awareness of the range of assessment practices throughout
the Institute, some attached to the performance criteria checklist, others believing, with
Gonczi, that outcomes only make sense within a context. Working closely with staff in the
Centre for Educational Development enables workshops to be planned especially for
assessors who are working with CAPL. These workshops will enhance assessors’
6
understanding of APL and develop best practice guidelines in assessment, which will be
distributed throughout the Institute.
Conclusion
In establishing dedicated Centres for Assessment of Prior Learning a new client group is
being targeted which may not have enrolled otherwise. Assessments using portfolios have
raised awareness that a checklist approach may not be the most effective.
An integrated approach, which considers the kinds of tasks that need to be performed in a
workplace and the knowledge required to perform those tasks, could improve the efficiency
and affordability of assessment by reducing time involved in providing evidence and by
combining the competencies of several courses.
Trialling integrated assessments will require a paradigm shift for a number of staff and
training will be necessary to increase understanding of APL as well as an holistic approach to
assessment.
Getting buy-in to the philosophy of APL from academic staff is at times difficult but provides
an opportunity for enhancing assessment practices. Working collaboratively with other staff
in a developmental way will lead to establishment of best practice assessment guidelines.
7
References
Australian Drilling Industry Training Committee, (2002). Assessment Guidelines for the
drilling industry. Sydney: Australian National Training Authority.
Campus Review, March 6-12, 2002, p7 Reshaping the learning curve for the future.
Gonczi, A. (1997). Competency-based Assessment: Can We Assess What We Don’t
Understand? News from the Forum, Vol 4 No 3, September 1997. Retrieved 18 June 2003:
http://www.nceltr.mq.edu.au/FORUM/sep97.htm
Gonczi, A. (ed.) (1992). Developing a competent workforce: adult learning strategies for
vocational education and training. Adelaide: TAFE National Centre for Research and
Development.
Gonczi, A. (1993). An integrated approach to professional education and assessment: a
consideration of arguments for and against. Sydney: University of Technology Sydney.
NZ Qualifications Authority (2001). Learning and Assessment: a guide to Assessment for the
National Qualifications Framework. Wellington: NZQA
NZ Qualifications Authority (2002). Supporting Learning Pathways: Credit Recognition and
Transfer Policy. Wellington: NZQA.
Manukau Institute of Technology (2002). Quality Management System 5th Edition.
Meldrum, R. & Richardson, L. (2001). In Sickness and in Health: Learning and Assessment
Inside and Outside the New Zealand Qualifications Framework. Paper presented at the
International Vocational Education & Training Association (IVETA) Annual Conference
2001, Montego Bay, Jamaica, 2001.
Ministry of Education (2003). Education Priorities for New Zealand. Retrieved 30 May 2003
from:
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/mallard/education/index.html
Rumsey, David (1993). Practical issues in workplace assessment in National Assessment
Research Forum: A forum for research into competency-based assessment (VEETAC
Competency Based Training Working party Assessment Steering Group), NSW TAFE
Commission, Sydney.
Rumsey, David (1994). Assessment practical guide. Australian Government Publishing
Service.
Toop, L, Gibb, J and Worsnop, P. Assessment system designs. Australian Government
Publishing Service, Canberra.
Wilson, P. (1993). Integrating workplace and training system assessments. Testing Times
Conference, NCVER, Sydney.
8
Appendix I
Extract from Tertiary Education Policy Directions for 21st Century
1.3 THE WAY FORWARD FOR THE TERTIARY SECTOR
The Green Paper identified four objectives for the
tertiary sector:




expanding opportunities for participation for all;
improving the participation and achievement of
currently under-represented groups;
creating incentives to improve the quality of
qualifications, research, and teaching;
encouraging value for both the students’ and
taxpayers’ financial contribution.
From:
TERTIARY EDUCATION IN NEW ZEALAND
Policy Directions for the 21st Century
White Paper
Published on behalf of the Government of New Zealand
by the Ministry of Education