Evidence for RPL

Version 1.0 | 20-06-2018

This information applies to all students enrolled in (or applying for) our tertiary / VET courses

You will need to gather evidence that demonstrates how your prior learning or current skills meet the requirements of the unit/s of competency you are applying for. Only include what you think is relevant to your claim for recognition. The evidence should provide a holistic view of your ability to meet the requirements of the unit/s of competency, and therefore a combination of different types of evidence is recommended.

Evidence can be obtained from various sources including (but not limited to):

  • Formal qualifications, licences, ratings and endorsements
  • Attainment of units of competency
  • Workplace / industry professional development
  • Non-accredited training
  • Informal learning
  • Work experience
  • Life experience

Evidence can be presented in various forms including (but not limited to):

  • Samples of work completed
  • Position descriptions
  • References
  • Testimonials from supervisors or employers
  • Qualification certificates
  • Licences
  • Assessment work and results
  • Statements of results / attainment
  • Work records
  • Log books
  • Diaries

Copies of official documents used as evidence must be copied from verifiable original documents. We may verify a document with the producer of the document. You will need to be able to show us the original documents if we request you to do so.

The evidence that you submit must be:

  • Valid – This term refers to the accuracy of the evidence presented.  Does it cover the full scope and depth of the unit, including the assessment guide?  If only some of the elements are represented in the evidence or it lacks detail, then its validity must be questioned.
  • Reliable – This term refers to the assessor’s ability to consistently judge the evidence accurately. For example, if the material is vague, poorly presented and not well referenced to the unit content, it is likely to be judged more subjectively than would otherwise be the case.  Reliability can be enhanced when evidence is clear and concise, well referenced, uses more than one technique and comes from different locations and time.
  • Current – This term refers to the age of the evidence.  For example, the knowledge and skills gained in a course that was completed 15 years ago may no longer be current if the holder has not practiced in the relevant profession.  This term is highly subjective, as it is based on personal opinion as to whether evidence is current or not.  As a general rule, evidence that was gained within the last few years should, in general, be considered current – depending on the qualification / units you are applying for.
  • Authentic – Authenticity refers to the ownership of the evidence.  It mainly relates to a qualification which can be fabricated, especially given the availability of modern computer software.  If a qualification presented is likely to carry enough weight to provide the applicant with evidence of their currency, and there is doubt about its authenticity, we may need to contact the issuer.
  • Sufficient – Sufficiency is an all-encompassing term that, in part, overlaps the other terms.  The assessors need to decide if there is sufficient evidence to justify the claim of competency.  The assessor first needs to ask if the evidence is corroborated.  For example, is there more than one source of evidence, or does it all depend on one testimonial from a single supervisor?  If there are several types of evidence which support each other, then the assessor is likely to have more confidence in it.  For example, if two supervisors provided independent evidence of the applicant’s competence, and the evidence was consistent, then the assessor might judge this evidence as sufficient.  Alternatively, if an applicant provided a work record without providing details about levels of responsibility and work undertaken, then this evidence could be considered insufficient.