MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
SENATE LEARNING AND TEACHING COMMITTEE
RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARING FORUM
Minutes of the special meeting of the Senate Learning and Teaching Committee held on
15 April 2013 at 10.00am in C5C Forum.
Present:
Professor D Verity (Chair)
Ms D Anderson
Mr N Asher
Dr A Burrell
A/Professor J Donald
Dr M Cavanagh
Ms L Clark
Dr J Dutch
Ms L Filardo
Mrs J Franklin
Dr P Keegan
Dr I Jamie
Ms S Jeffares
Ms G Lay
Ms B McLean
A/Professor I Solomonides
A/Professor M Tani
Ms J Sparks
Mr B Roe
A/Professor M Tani
Ms G Tydda
Professor G Whiteford
Mr J Wylie
A/Professor S Young
Presenters:
Dr Stephen Billett (Griffith University)
Dr Theress Winchester-Seeto
A/Professor Susan Page
Guests:
A/Professor A Cooper
A/Professor D Coutts
A/Professor Pamela Coutts
A/Professor J Dawes
A/Professor M Evans
Professor L Fisher
Professor K Forrest
Ms R Giuriato
A/Professor M Gosper
Professor A Harbus
Dr G Hawker
A/Professor M Hitchens
Dr M Lackie
Professor P Leung
Professor B Mans
Professor I Marschner
Dr N McCulla
Page 4
A/Professor H Nevalainen
Professor A Ross-Smith
Professor N Smith
Professor P Smith
A/Professor Michael Steel
Professor B Thompson
Ms S White
Dr P Whiteman
A/Professor S Wright
Guests:
In Attendance:
Ms R Grewal
Ms H Harris
Ms Z Williams
Apologies:
Dr P Anderson
Dr N Baker
A/Professor P Beggs
Dr W Bradford
Professor J Dalziel
A/Professor C Dean
Ms G Ferandez-Paredes
Professor S Foote
Professor S George
A/Professor F Guo
A/Professor M Herberstein
Professor C Lang
Professor L Lockyer
A/Professor P Johnson
Dr N Klein
Professor C Mackenzie
Professor N Mansfield
Dr S Moore
Professor J Phillips
Dr I Plant
Professor L Taksa
A/Professor M Trudgett
Professor J Sachs
A/Professor L Wood
Dr R Yager
1.
WELCOME
The Chair welcomed presenters and invited guests to the meeting and thanked them for
their participation.
2.
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
As this was a special meeting of the Senate Learning and Teaching Committee, Minutes
of the previous meeting held on 18 March 2013 will be approved at the next meeting to
be held on Monday, 13 May 2013.
Page 5
3.
INTRODUCTION
ATTACHMENT 1
The Chair provided a brief overview of the significant work and consultations that been
undertaken in formulating the draft Recognition for Prior Learning Policy. He gave some
background to the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) and spoke to its RPL
provisions and to the implementation challenges they present. In particular, he drew
attention to the clauses of the AQF Qualifications Pathways Policy which state that “The
purpose of the policy is to maximize the credit that students can gain for learning already
undertaken” in a way that “recognize(s) the multiple pathways that students take to gain
AQF qualifications and that learning can be formal, non-formal or informal”. He pointed
out, however, that the AQF also expected all RPL processes to be designed in a way that
ensured the integrity of all of the University’s academic programs.
He touched upon recent TEQSA pronouncements that had indicated that the regulator
did not regard the AQF to be an absolute standard. He went on, however, to mention
that while the regulator had stated that it saw “some flexibility in the formulations used
in parts of the AQF” that it also expected institutes of higher education to become AQF
compliant by 1 January 2013.
He concluded by highlighting the fact that SLTC key focus in framing RPL policy over the
next 18 months would be in the areas of academic assessment, quality assurance and
operational considerations.
4.
PRESENTATIONS ON RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING
4.1
“Recognition of learning arising from experiences
outside university programs”
- Professor Stephen Billett,
Professor of Adult and Vocational Education,
Griffith University
ATTACHMENT 2
Professor Billett started by reminding participants that, while the assessment and
recognition of learning in settings outside the university have long been practised in
some disciplines, new imperatives are requiring a broader consideration of these
processes both for entry into and credit within Australian higher education programs.
His talk considered external market drivers for change and it exposed and critically
appraised the origins, purposes and processes used in a number of schemes through
which learning occurring outside of the particular university can be assessed and
recognized within it.
The intent of his presentation was to engage with and advance discussions about RPL
matters at Macquarie. He encouraged SLTC to give careful consideration to the nature
and quality of learning arising outside of educational programs and to the kinds of
learning that might reasonably be recognized under its RPL policy.
Professor Billett provided some examples of how informal and non-formal learning
gained outside of university programs can be appraised for entry into, and even credit
towards, such programs. He also spoke to a ‘Qualifications Passport’ approach, which
had been applied by his Department to great effect as a mechanism for assessing the
suitability of prospective students on the basis of their vocational experience. He
emphasised the importance of effective systems for recording and reviewing benchmarks
and precedent.
Page 6
4.2
“RPL - practical and pedagogical dilemmas”
-
ATTACHMENT 3
Dr Theresa Winchester-Seeto,
Senior Lecturer Higher Education Development,
Learning and Teaching Centre
Dr Winchester-Seeto’s presentation discussed the various forms of the Recognition of
Prior Learning already applied by Macquarie,. The presentation highlighted a renewed
focus on RPL, courtesy of TEQSA, and looked at practical and pedagogical realities that
would need to be considered when implementing the RPL provisions of the AQF.
While the actual numbers of students availing themselves of RPL for entry to the
University’s programs may remain relatively small, they are still likely to present us with
novel pedagogical challenges. While this cohort will contain many that respond readily to
university teaching, it will also contain a substantial group who will struggle with this
transition for a variety of reasons. Practical issues and pedagogical challenges faced in
the sphere of RPL were outlined generally and related to specific recent experiences in
Participation units. Ethical dilemmas and support mechanisms were touched upon and in
conclusion Dr Winchester-Seeto remarked that with the right balance, a renewed focus
on RPL could present students, staff and the University with exciting new opportunities.
4.3
Open Wide, Come Inside:
The Warawara approach to RPL in Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander student entry to university
- Associate Professor Susan Page,
Associate Professor of Indigenous Studies, Warawara
ATTACHMENT 4
A/Professor Page commenced her presentation with an acknowledgement of the Darug
as the traditional owners of the land upon which Macquarie University is situated. Her
presentation gave an overview of trends and challenges in RPL with a particular emphasis
upon its application to indigenous students.
This presentation outlined some of the entry characteristics of Indigenous students, and
provided an overview of the Warawara Alternative Entry Programs, including the existing
structures for ongoing support. It highlighted evidence of some of the positive outcomes
when Indigenous students do 'come inside' an institution. Potential for broader
application was raised along with the possible challenges of the approach in the wider
context.
5.
WORKSHOP
Assessment: Evidence and Methodologies
Discussion centred on the following topics:
• Fair and equitable assessment of course content for both external and internal
applicants – raising prospective students awareness through a clearly articulated
and accessible framework and guidelines.
• Operational implications of resourcing
• Targeted intake (departments to identify where the ‘low hanging’ fruits are)
• Concurrent focus on internal quality (all RPL must be ‘academically defensible’)
as well as benchmarking against competition in the market place
Overall the feedback from Members and the Heads of Departments was overwhelmingly
positive, although the meeting cautioned that the development of a cohesive and
strategic approach to RPL was vital the University’s success in this important area.
Page 7
6.
WRAP UP
The Chair thanked all attendees for their participation and the speakers for their
insightful and engaging presentations. He acknowledged that the day’s proceedings and
constructive discussions had been extremely valuable and would aid to formulate next
steps and shape future discussion prior to the revised Recognition of Prior Learning Policy
being finalised.
The meeting concluded at 12.10pm.
Professor D Verity
Chair SLTC
Page 8
ATTACHMENT 1
Recognition of Prior Learning
Policy: Discussions, decisions and drafting
Page 9
RPL: The 4 Biggest Changes
1. Having a Policy: A framework to make consistent and
confident decisions
2. Recognising Informal and Non Formal learning
3. A new approach to ‘Credit Caps’
4. Evidence-based assessment mechanisms
Page 10
Consultation
•
What defines a Macquarie University award?
‘The higher education provider ensures that it maintains processes to provide for the
recognition of prior learning [and] credit transfer... These processes are designed to maximise
the credit students may gain for learning already undertaken, subject to preserving the
integrity of learning outcomes and/or discipline requirements of the award to which it applies.’
•
How do we express this?
‘Minimum Requirements at Macquarie University’: Allows for a focus on unique Macquarie
qualities, including completion of Capstone units; could stipulate that students undertake the
higher-level thinking (300-lvl units and above) at Macquarie, and can indirectly imply a ‘credit
cap’ by requiring students to complete a minimum amount of study at Macquarie.
•
How much?
Less than 3 year programs: ‘...student completes a minimum of the equivalent of 50%/half of
the award at Macquarie University.’
3 year program: ‘...student completes a minimum of the equivalent of 1 full-time year of the
award at Macquarie University.’
4 year program: ‘...student completes a minimum of the equivalent of 1.5 full-time years of the
award at Macquarie University.’
5 year program: ‘...student completes a minimum of the equivalent of 2 full-time years of the
award at Macquarie University.’
Page 11
mq.edu.au
3
Next Steps
•
Academic Assessment
• Evidence and Methodologies
• Taxonomy: Formal, Informal & Non Formal
•
Quality Assurance
• QA Framework
• Approval, validation, monitoring & review
•
Operational Considerations
• Defining the roles of Central vs. Faculty
• Systems: Workflow & data management
Page 12
ATTACHMENT 2
Recognition of learning arising from experiences outside
university programs
Page 13
Stephen Billett, Griffith University
Progression
Assessment/recognition of learning
outside the university
Processes used to assess this learning
Issues arising
Learning – process and sources
How should we proceed in the era of AQF
Workshop
Plenary
Page 14
Assessment of learning outside of university programs
Origins of Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)/
Assessment of Prior Learning (APL)
Equity! - Australia
Social justice - South Africa
Democratic – meritocracy - France
- ‘republican elitism’ – academic results used widely
- “only one kind of competition matters in France:
academic, after which everything is pretty much
determined” (Dubet 2010)
Yet, legislation introduced for APL to be used to secure
all kinds of ‘diplomas’.
Page 15
Processes used to assess this learning
Longstanding arrangements here
• Tradespersons’ rights
• Recognition/Assessment of Prior Learning
• - origins and experiences in Australia
• Recognition of overseas qualifications
• Credit (direct/indirect)
• Advance standing
Page 16
Issues that have arisen
Pilot case study was not helpful
Benchmarks (availability and utility)
Process of assessment (paper based)
Resource intensiveness (cost)
Evidence (what and how assessed)
Validity and reliability of the process
Alignments between benchmarks and assessment
Page 17
Learning – processes and sources
Learning occurs all of the time and wherever we are engaged
in conscious thinking and acting
- part of human cognition (new, refining, enhancing, honing)
- also the remaking and transformation of cultural practices
Quality of learning dependent on i) the kinds of activities and
interactions afforded individuals and ii) how they elect to
engage with them
Robust learning arises across a range of circumstances, not
just those in educational programs
Informal, non-formal and formal learning are unhelpful
descriptions – acceptance that learning through practice
Person-dependence
This is not an anti-educational polemic – pro-learning
Page 18
How to proceed?
Recognising learning for the
purposes of:
i) advance standing for candidates
entering; and
ii) credit for units within degree
programs
Page 19
How should we proceed in an era of AQF?
Case study – advanced standing
BAVE – Qualifications passport provides two
years’ advance standing as part of entry
requirements
Is this a way of looking at the volume of
learning?
Volume of learning
“In terms of e-learning and work-based learning training delivery, there should be scope in the
definition of nominal hours to deal with these methods of delivery, rather than just tying the
definition to traditional teacher supervised delivery” (Skills Australia)
“We would also like to reinforce a point made in our submission to the Australian Qualifications
Framework Council, in August last year, cautioning the need for an approach to “notional
duration” that can embrace the multiple avenues of learning that may vary in intensity, theory
and practice. Time spent is not the only indicator of learning. For example recognition of prior
learning awards credit for learning independent of time spent in formal learning.” (Skills Australia)
Page 20
11
QUALIFICATIONS PASSPORT
Dear Applicant
To assist you in determining your eligibility for entry into this course, we ask that you complete this section of the application.
This Skills Passport outlines the Qualifications and Experiences that we will consider for your entry into the Bachelor of Adult
and Vocational Education. You require at least 100 points to qualify for entry. You need to score points in each of sections A,
B, and C. You may also score points from section D. Please ensure that all supporting documentation is certified (that is,
sighted by a Justice of the Peace to show it is a true copy) and attached. Please arrange your documentation according to
the categories A-D below.
Types of Entry Skills
Max Avail
A: Qualifications or equivalent and Experience
Formal Qualifications (fully accredited VET courses or equivalent
Vocational (Certificate III)
Vocational (Certificate IV)
Para-professional (Associate Diploma/Diploma)
Professional (Bachelor’s degree)
50
60
75
85
B: Learning from Work Experience (demonstrating significant skill development)
5 to 9 years of experience)
10 to 14 years of experience)
15 years + of experience
30
45
60
C: Instructional/Workplace Trainer Skills
Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (or equivalent)
Diploma of Vocational Education and Training (or equivalent)
20
60
D: In addition you may wish to seek credit for:
Demonstrated Life-Long Learning (maximum 20 points)
A portfolio of Short ACE/TAFE/or Industry courses
Community work experience and a reflective account of learning from this work experience
up to
20
Equity (maximum 5 points)
Are you a member of one of the University equity target groups?
(eg people who are indigenous, or with disabilities, or of non-English speaking
backgrounds)
up to
5
Minimum Score required for entry: 100
(You need points in sections A, B, and C)
Page 21
Your Score
Recognition for credit
Going beyond direct and indirect credit
Assessment only Challenge testing Granting exemptions APL/RPL Block credit – partial credit etc
Page 22
Workshop
What forms of assessment of learning secured outside
of Macquarie University can be helpful to provide:
i) advance standing for candidates entering
and
ii) credit for units within degree programs?
How can these meet the volume of learning
requirements for the courses in which you teach?
Page 23
Plenary
Sharing, conclusions, means of progressing ……
Page 24
ATTACHMENT 3
RPL – practical and pedagogical
dilemmas
Theresa Winchester-Seeto
Learning and
Teaching Centre
Page 25
Reid et al
MQ Experience with RPL
• Various guises and forms
• Not systematic
• Common in some
departments
Page 26
“Information concerning
your personal abilities,
skills, achievements and
experiences which you
believe will support your
case to be admitted to
study a bachelor degree at
Macquarie University”
Jubilee Scheme
Application Form
Reid et al
Rationale and Promise of RPL
• social justice and social
inclusion
• economic – costs to
individual, institutions,
government and
community (inc.
opportunity costs
foregone)
• lifelong learning – inc.
changing careers
(Dismore et al, 2011; Hamer, 2010;
Scott, 2010)
Page 27
Reid et al
Realities
“those who successfully access RPL are
typically literate, familiar with formal educational
language and concepts, and have significant
skills in negotiating the complexities of the
assessment process” (Hamer, 2010, p. 2)
“limited direct evidence is available that
supports the view that widened participation
could be attributed to APEL-type activities”
(Scott, 2010)
Page 28
Reid et al
Realities (cont)
Cleary et al (2002) found in France, England,
Scotland, Finland and Spain that “most were young,
often middle-class, from the majority ethnic population
and who already had a good education”
Study in US found many were “middle aged deferred
beginners” (Cleary et al, 2002)
Has been useful where there are structural and
educational changes e.g. nursing – effect of APEL is
unclear
Page 29
Reid et al
What kinds of students?
Page 30
Reid et al
Challenges of these students
• Mature adult learners bring
experience, different motivations
and needs, competing priorities
• Many do very well, others struggle;
lack of research
• Struggle includes:
– gaps in knowledge
– articulating their knowledge in a
way that academics will
recognise
Page 31
Reid et al
Small step vs big leap
Story 1:
• Tradesman gained RPL to enter teacher
training program
• Asked to explain major purpose of a lesson
where students built a toolbox
• Slightly baffled look and explained it was to
“carry tools around” (Cantwell & Scevak,
2004)
Page 32
Reid et al
Small step vs big leap
Story 2:
• Potential student who applied through RPL for
education program
• 17 years teaching experience, ran a successful
education and research company, written
extensively on education, used critical reflection
on a daily basis
• Refused entry and found that to “imply that
[critical reflection] was unique to university
experience, I found just unbelievably offensive”
(Taylor & Clemans, 2000)
Page 33
Reid et al
Practical dilemmas – Participation units
“all genuine education comes about through
experience” (Dewey, 1938, p.25).
1. RPL for whole unit
“experience alone is not necessarily educative”
(Andresen et al 1999, p. 228)
• are we short-changing students by not insisting
on the whole educational experience e.g.
debriefing, scaffolding of skills and knowledge
• one solution might be to have a backwards
looking unit
Page 34
Reid et al
Practical dilemmas (cont)
2. RPL for part of a unit
• not currently allowed
• equivalence of
experiences?
• where is most learning
likely to occur?
• what should be
considered? – currency,
relevance, worthiness,
cultural disjunct,
articulation of learning
Page 35
Reid et al
Practical dilemmas (cont)
Participation activities are regulated &
need prior approval
– WHS risk assessment
– show mutual benefit
– partners align with MQs ethical
standards
– meet learning outcomes of unit
– comply with research ethics
protocols
What risks are there to the student,
staff and MQ if bypassed?
Page 36
Reid et al
Ethical dilemmas
How do we balance our
obligations to:
• community
• students already at
university
• potential students
– we know will be fine
– we suspect will struggle
and we are surprised or
sadly correct
Page 37
Reid et al
Additional support
Support might include someone who:
• has monitoring, review and oversight
• represent their interests on relevant committees
• offers assistance for the cohort e.g. academic
literacy (e.g. previously Dean of Students role for
Jubilee)
• has oversight of individual progress
• provides additional classes/support – e.g.
preparation BUT targeting sometimes unhelpful
Page 38
Reid et al
Conclusion
• “need to identify selection criteria and practices
that are good predictors of student success,
without inadvertently selecting also for relative
social advantage” Palmer et al (2011)
• RPL is likely to provide benefits and challenges
• With the right balance there may also be
opportunities for students, academics and the
university.
Page 39
Reid et al
ATTACHMENT 4
‘Open Wide, Come Inside’:
The Warawara approach to
RPL in Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander
student entry to university.
Associate Professor Susan Page
Warawara – Department of Indigenous Studies
Page 40
Snapshot of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander HE
• 2012 Berendt Review of Higher Education Access &
Outcomes for Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander People
• Over 10,000 Indigenous students enrolled in higher
education across Australia (DEEWR, 2009)
• Indigenous students represent less than 1% of all
students (DEEWR 2009)
• Indigenous staff represent around 1% of all staff (IHEAC 2008)
Page 41
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Student Post Secondary Aspirations
• 47% enter university on the basis of their prior
educational attainment (cf 83%) (DIISRTE 2012)
• More than 50% enter university though enabling or
special entry programs (Behrendt et al, 2012)
• Low aspiration to continue to university study (Craven
et,al. 2003, Hossain et al, 2005)
Page 42
Warawara Alternative Entry Program
• On-campus Testing & Assessment
•
CME, Numeracy centre
•Individual follow-up - speak to families
•Advice re accommodation, scholarships, Abstudy
•Offers made in collaboration with Coursework
Studies
•Enrolment assistance & orientation
Page 43
Promoting Indigenous Student Success
‘Inside’ the institution
‘Access without effective support is not opportunity’
(Tinto 2008).
•Integrative Vs adaptive models (Zepke & Leach, 2005)
Warawara Indigenous Student Learning Enhancement
•Indigenous student support & advocacy
•Monitoring student progress
•Indigenous student common room/computer lab
•Elder-in-Residence
•Provide advice to university on Indigenous issues
Page 44
Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander
Student Outcomes
• The attrition rate for first-year Indigenous
students is over 35% (IHEAC, 2006)
• The completion rate for Indigenous
students is less than 50% (Radloff & Coates,
2010)
‘Indigenous students are
• Indigenous students areengaged
as ‘engaged’
as at a
with learning
similar
or slightly
(Asmar,
Page &higher level
their non-Indigenous peers
than their nonIndigenous
Radloff, 2011)
peers, and report levels of
overall satisfaction equal to or
higher than their peers.’ (Asmar,
Page 45
Page & Radloff 2011)
Does support matter?
There is a strong relationship between students’
perceived level of institutional support and their
departure intentions:
‘Indigenous students who have seriously
considered departing their institution are also
less likely to feel highly supported.’
(Asmar, Page & Radloff 2011)
Page 46
Broader Application??
• What are the key features of the
WW program which could be
replicated?
• What are the barriers to instituting
the program in the broader
institution?
Page 47