By Suzanne Hattingh Can we do RPL in learnerships? If so, how should it be done?
I have received a number of queries from clients about Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) recently, partly due to SAQA?s draft Policy and Criteria for RPL (20 September 2012). Here are some guidelines on using RPL in learnerships.
In general, I am not in favour of RPL for learnerships because the point of a learnership is to provide a learning experience that enables learners to gain knowledge and then apply this in a real work environment. In selecting learners for learnerships, priority should therefore be given to those who lack most of the knowledge, skills and work experience that will be gained through the learnership.
1. A learnership is essentially only one way of working towards a qualification. The same qualification that will be awarded at the end of the learnership can be achieved through other types of learning programmes, e.g. a combination of skills programmes, full-time or part-time study at a training provider or through RPL.
What distinguishes the learnership from other learning routes is the practical application of learning in a real work environment. Learners who achieved a qualification through a learnership actually gain far more than learners who achieved the qualification through more traditional types of learning programmes.
2. Achieving most of the qualification through RPL should not be allowed in learnerships. Learners who are sufficiently competent to be awarded most of the qualification through RPL should not do this by enrolling in a learnership. They should apply to an RPL provider to be assessed in accordance with the requirements for RPL - or apply to another accredited provider who is willing to do the assessment against the qualification.
3. Employers and/or training providers could be abusing the system if they enrol learners in a learnership who are already competent in most of the outcomes of the qualification. They would be claiming the learnership grants and SARS tax benefits without having put any effort into enabling the learners to gain the required competence.
Training providers can similarly abuse the system. This practice also disadvantages others who need a qualification by denying them the opportunity to enrol in a learnership.
4. Having said that, there is room for some RPL during learnerships where learners can produce sufficient evidence that they have met prescribed outcomes. However, they should be required to provide evidence that covers both the theoretical and workplace learning requirements. These should be clearly described in the learnership curriculum - in particular in the summative assessments (that should be integrated into Final Summative Assessments). In such cases, SETAs could stipulate the maximum percentage of a qualification that could be achieved through RPL in a learnership.
5. I am not in favour of "automatic? RPL for fundamental unit standards - as often occurs in learnerships. In general, I believe that fundamental unit standards should never be assessed on their own - they should always be assessed in an integrated way with core or elective unit standards. For example, the purpose of the assessment of communication fundamentals should not be to determine whether the learner can write a business document in English, but whether the learner can apply those skills within the context of the learnership: to use language appropriately to write a marketing proposal in a marketing learnership or to formulate the findings of a disciplinary hearing in an HR learnership.
It makes no sense teaching maths to learners in a chemistry learnership in a classroom; they will understand maths far better by learning it through measurement and calculation of chemicals in the actual work environment.
6. The integrated learning experience of a learnership benefits the learner, the other learners in the learnership and the staff in the employer?s organisation. In cases where learners already have expertise, they should share this with others, and could even provide suggestions on improving workplace practices.
Where the pre- assessment during the learner selection process finds learners competent in some unit standards, I generally recommend that these learners should not be exempt from attending the learning sessions covering those unit standards - although they could be exempted from some assignments.
The integrated learning experience of a learnership benefits the learner, the other learners in the learnership and the staff in the employer?s organisation. In cases where learners already have expertise, they should share this with others, and could even provide suggestions on improving workplace practices.
The Learnership programme was developed in South Africa as a modern way to advance apprenticeships to meet the modern demands of the workplace. Learnerships also manage to formalise the learning and workplace experience - which is usually sadly lacking in internships offered by companies.
Another significant benefit of Learnerships over internships is that Learnerships come with a formal pay structure where learners will be paid a monthly stipend, or payment, for the time they are on the Learnership. Also, internships do not have a learning component, while Learnerships are all linked directly to a formal qualification.
