Presentation on theme: "RPLO Development Event Welcome to York St John University Tony Wall and Dr Penny McCracken Independent Consultants."— Presentation transcript:
RPLO Development Event Welcome to York St John University Tony Wall and Dr Penny McCracken Independent Consultants
Objectives Share key developments in the field Debate the assumptions that drive our policies and practices Change our policies and practices
Innovation in quality assurance perspectives Dr Penny McCracken and Tony Wall Independent Consultants
Issues you raised Limits on APEL credit ‘allowed’ Understanding ‘learning’, not trusting ‘learning from work’ as equivalent to ‘learning’, “teaching to fill the gaps not teaching the whole lot again” Staff buy-in, acceptance outside traditional areas Time for assessors, funding Complexity of process
‘First’ Principles HEIs are in ‘the business’ of accrediting learning Securing publicised award outcomes Learning, not experience/achievement Guided by external reference points, e.g. the AI, where appropriate: –Subject benchmark statements (SBSs) –the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) Assessments based on academic judgement Open to internal/external scrutiny See QAA (2004) and CEDEFOP (2009)
Flexible curricula design Shell award frameworks –Negotiated: content, modules, award, award title –Generic level outcomes –Reference the AI (FHEQ and SBSs) –Institutional, subject or short awards Modules... –Generic (rather than specific) credit? –What is the difference, in terms of teaching, learning and assessment? See Wall and McCracken (2010); Wall (2010a)
Related ‘Pedagogies’ A ‘Meticulous Accountant’ type –Closely aligned to Specific Credit –Mapping experiential learning to outcomes A ‘Creative Sculptor’ type –Closely aligned to Generic Credit –Exploring and articulating informal experiential learning, in partnership –How different to taught modules? –A case for... See Wall (2010b)
Experiential learning awards? In ‘the business’ of accrediting learning Within AI (FHEQ, SBSs) But... facilitated ‘extraction’ and articulation of learning through an award So... no distinction between “APEL” and “Taught” – in both, there is the facilitation of the articulation of learning So... funded through the same mechanisms... So... no limit, because no distinction See Wall (2010a, 2010b)
Workshop Discussion (30 mins) From what you have heard, discuss: –What might be possible in your context? –What may the barriers be? Agree the following to share at 2.30pm: –2 ideas of what could be possible –1 key barrier and 1 possible solution Facilitators to capture key ideas
References CEDEFOP (2009) European guidelines for validating non-formal and informal learning, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,. QAA (2004) Guidelines on the accreditation of prior learning, available at http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/apl/guidance.asp http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/apl/guidance.asp Wall, T. (2010a) Prefiguring higher education as action inquiry, ALARA World Congress, September, Melbourne. Wall, T. (2010b) APL Pedagogies: Meticulous Accountant vs Creative Sculptor, Council for Adult & Experiential Learning’s International Conference – Creating The Wave: Workforce, Education and Change, November, San Diego. Wall, T. and McCracken, P. (2010) University Models for Validating Work Based Learning, in Mumford, J. and Roodhouse, S. (Eds) Understanding Work Based Learning, London: Gower.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.