In early 2006 the LSC commissioned Credit Works to undertake research to examine the feasibility of employing APL to support progress towards the achievement of full level 1, 2 and 3 qualifications. A report
Full Report
Executive Summary was published in June 2006 which recommended that the LSC should consider further work in this area, once tests and trials of the QCF had begun. The emphasis in the 2006 report recommendations was on taking forward the research to provide workable models of funding and operating APL and Exemption within the QCF.
In 2007 Credit Works was commissioned by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) to examine the implications of Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) for recognising and measuring progression, in the context of accreditation of prior learning in a qualifications and credit framework.Full Report
Executive Summary
The 2007 report models recognition of prior learning achievements as a point on a continuous learning journey and suggests that:
- the experience of having your prior learning recognised should be owned by the learner and facilitated by the provider
- that there are skills needed (by the learner) to do this and these skills are needed and are useful for managing your learning as you go on.
- the provider needs to be organised from the outset to do this and needs the right skills to facilitate RPL (and not just offer a service).
So the learner gains two things from the process – recognition of their prior achievements (which is their right) and learning how to do this. So having your prior learning recognised is a valid and important learning experience in itself, should be integral to the curriculum (at any level) as should be funded as such.
QCA is currently developing guidelines for recognising prior learning (RPL) in the QCF with the intention of encouraging the use of the QCF for RPL and expects to publish these in Summer 08.
There is no doubt that for most stakeholders interviewed, historical and many current approaches to APL and Exemption were considered ineffective, difficult, dull and bureaucratic. However as this project progressed clear evidence of demand for APL and Exemption emerged, providing the current weaknesses and failures were addressed and workable solutions were put in place within the QCF.
Interviewees suggested APL and Exemption (in the QCF) needed to be demystified and made as accessible as possible, and suggested that evidence of potential demand and examples of potential use would be crucial, as would a clear explanation of the relationship to policy drivers, planning and funding in EWNI. A set of common principles for APL and Exemption, within which stakeholders could test new practice was also requested and draft principles are included in the report for consideration.
Interviewees wanted the research to address all these factors, and for the report to suggest a way forward for operation of APL and Exemption within the QCF.
The policy contexts examined in this report presented a set of quite different challenges – from understanding how prior learning might be recognised within an inclusive entry 1 in the QCF, to getting recognition at all levels for achievements from informal learning at work. For example, the report suggests that design principles for ‘full level 2’ qualifications, as currently drafted for QCA, allow much scope for recognising prior learning and achievement and the report comments on the design principles accordingly.
However Progression Pathways for the Foundation Learning Tier are eventually defined, a model for integrating the recognition of prior learning into the FLT curriculum is suggested, where the benefits of working with others to reflect on, value and describe prior learning is seen as an integral part of a structured learning programme. The provider needs to be organised to support the learner through a reflective learning process from the outset of the learning journey, needs access to appropriate units in the QCF to recognise achievement and understand how such achievement of such units contribute to progression along a validated progression pathway. The importance of Initial Assessment and Ongoing Review (IAOR) cannot be overstated here; and Credit Works’ parallel study, published at the same time as this report, examines this in detail.
The starting point for this study was the identification of potential demand for APL and Exemption followed by identification of what needed to be put in place or to change for APL to succeed. In many respects the report presents an overall ‘business case’ for the place of APL and Exemption in formal recognition of achievement within the QCF. The contributions from sector bodies were invaluable, proving that there is clear demand and a need to come up with straightforward means to satisfy it.
Examples of positive current APL practice were identified that could be used to exemplify possible ways forward.
Some of the principal conditions for success exist already; for example the QCF specification is neutral on ‘APEL’ and intended to be positive on how Exemption could work within (qualification) rules of combination for units in the QCF. However the report questions whether the rules for exempted achievements will affect transferability and progression in the QCF and recommends review of the specification accordingly.
Other conditions for success will need long term changes; for example providers currently operating linear learning programmes are already considering the logistical implications for moving to modularised delivery, with multiple starting points for learners throughout the year.
Conclusions are intended to inform understanding of the implications for implementation of APL and Exemption. A single recommendation is made; to act on the report’s findings and conclusions within the phase 2 tests and trials of the QCF in 2007-8 and - through managed implementation - respond to the demand from stakeholders for workable and clear ways forward.
