Original painting: Weathered timber and fresh pale wood meet in a carefully fitted joint, a visual reflection on bringing earlier learning into what comes next. Original illustrative painting, not a technical construction guide.
How recognition of prior learning can connect work and life experience to further education without weakening the standards that make a qualification useful
By Arbab Naseebullah Kasi, Chief Executive Officer - CEO, Feel Worldwide Foundation Inc..
A person can spend years solving problems without ever receiving a document that describes what they have learned.
They may keep a family business supplied, train new colleagues, coordinate a neighborhood activity or become the person everyone calls when a familiar process goes wrong. Their knowledge can be detailed and useful. Yet when they approach a training provider, the first question may still be about the qualifications they already hold.
There is a reasonable concern behind that question. An institution needs to know whether someone is ready for a course, whether required learning has already been achieved and whether granting credit will leave dangerous gaps. But a certificate cannot be the only possible starting point for that inquiry.
Recognition of prior learning, often shortened to RPL, offers another route. It allows relevant learning gained through work, community participation, self-directed study and other experiences to be assessed against defined requirements. Depending on the system and provider, that assessment may contribute toward credit or a qualification, or help identify the further learning a person needs.
The useful promise is modest and important: your learning deserves to be examined fairly. The outcome still has to be earned.
Start with the learning rather than the length of service
Ten years in a role tells us something about experience. It does not tell us precisely what a person knows, how independently they can work or whether their methods meet current requirements.
Someone may have spent those years handling a wide variety of demanding situations. Someone else may have repeated a narrow task under close supervision. Both deserve respect, but an assessor needs more detail before reaching a decision about equivalence.
The starting question is therefore practical: what have you learned to do, understand and explain?
For a person who manages stock, this might include checking quantities, investigating discrepancies and choosing when to reorder. For a volunteer coordinator, it could involve planning shifts, communicating responsibilities and responding when someone cannot attend. A caregiver may have developed considerable skill in organizing routines and communicating with services, while still needing formal education and supervised practice before entering a regulated professional role.
These are possible areas of learning to discuss, not automatic matches to a particular qualification. Naming the activity is the beginning of the assessment conversation.
UNESCO’s 2012 guidelines on recognizing non-formal and informal learning place value on learning acquired across different settings while calling for relevant, reliable, fair and transparent assessment. They also emphasize voluntary participation and support suited to individuals’ needs. The guidelines are not legally binding. Their principles help explain what a credible approach should try to achieve, rather than creating an entitlement to credit at every institution.
A fair hearing needs a clear standard
It is difficult to prepare for an assessment if nobody explains what successful performance looks like.
Before gathering evidence, ask the provider which course, unit or learning outcomes are being considered. Ask what level of understanding is expected and which requirements must be demonstrated directly. A broad claim such as being good with people may conceal valuable learning, but it is too vague to assess on its own.
A clearer description identifies the situation, the action and the judgment involved. Perhaps you explain a complicated service to a customer, check whether they understand and know when to refer a question beyond your authority. An assessor can then consider how those abilities relate to the relevant standard.
The same care should apply to limits. An experienced worker might complete a familiar procedure successfully while being unable to explain why it works or what to do when conditions change. A person may understand the theory but need practice with current equipment. Recognizing those differences protects both the learner and the people who will rely on their work.
Australia’s higher education regulator, TEQSA, says decisions about recognition should rest on evidence and academic judgment about equivalent learning. Its guidance on credit and RPL also connects credit decisions to the student’s prospects of progressing successfully and to maintaining the integrity of the qualification. That guidance concerns Australian higher education, not a universal rule for every training system.
For learners, the principle is reassuring. A careful assessor should be willing to explain both what counts and what remains to be learned.
Find out what the provider actually accepts
The word recognition can cover quite different procedures. An encouraging advertisement is not enough to establish what your chosen institution will do.
TAFE NSW in Australia provides a concrete example. Its recognition and credit transfer guidance describes an eligibility enquiry followed, once the learner is enrolled and eligibility confirmed, by an application and supporting evidence submitted for assessment. It lists material from employment, study and life experience, including work examples, references and community involvement. It also says an interview, practical assessment or task may be needed to establish that skills are current. Document verification requirements apply, and an unsuccessful outcome can be appealed. Fee adjustments depend on the learner’s circumstances and course arrangements.
Those details are specific to TAFE NSW and should be checked again before applying. They illustrate why the right first step is a conversation with the receiving provider, not purchasing a generic package that promises recognition everywhere.
Ask who makes the decision and which institution will issue any resulting credit or qualification. Check that the provider is appropriately recognized in the relevant education system. If professional registration matters to your goal, ask the relevant regulator separately what it requires. Academic credit and permission to practice a profession can involve different decisions.
A provider should also be able to explain application costs, additional assessment charges, likely timing, available support and what happens if the evidence is insufficient. Obtain those details before committing money or planning to leave work.
Let the assessment reveal what documents cannot
Useful evidence has a connection to the claim being made.
A job title might show that a person held responsibility. A work sample can show what they produced. A reference may help establish their own contribution. A practical demonstration can reveal how they perform now. Questions about an unfamiliar situation can show whether their understanding extends beyond memorizing a routine.
No single format answers every question. The assessor must decide which evidence is appropriate for the standard, while the learner should understand why it is being requested.
This matters especially for people whose work has not produced tidy records. Informal workers may not have formal job descriptions. A small organization may have closed. A person who moved countries may be unable to obtain an old supervisor’s signature. The absence of a convenient document should prompt a discussion about acceptable alternatives rather than an immediate assumption that no learning occurred.
That does not justify creating evidence or asking someone to endorse work they never observed. Ask whether a supervised demonstration, technical conversation or other authorized assessment method could address the missing information. Where documents are essential, the provider needs to explain that constraint honestly.
Protect other people while preparing material. A workplace example may contain customer names, employee information or confidential business records. Ask what can be redacted, what permission is needed and how the assessor will verify your contribution without receiving unnecessary private details. A strong application should not depend on breaching someone else’s trust.
For employers, a helpful reference is specific and truthful. Explain what the person actually did, when you observed it and how much supervision was involved. General praise is pleasant to read but difficult to compare with a learning requirement.
Take the research seriously without turning it into a promise
There is evidence that prior learning recognition can matter to adult learners’ progress, but the numbers need their context.
The CAEL and WICHE report The PLA Boost, revised in December 2020, studied United States postsecondary institutions. Its detailed adult analysis drew on more than 232,000 learners aged 25 or older at 69 institutions, within a broader 72-institution project. The cohort entered in 2011–2012 and was followed through December 2018. Among adult learners, 49% with prior learning assessment credit completed a degree or other credential during the study period, compared with 27% without such credit.
These were not randomly assigned groups, and the participating institutions were a targeted, self-nominated sample with existing assessment offerings. The report used statistical adjustment, but its findings should not be presented as a guaranteed causal effect for an individual. Its assessment category also covered several routes, including recognized military learning, examinations and other evaluated learning. It does not show that any work experience automatically produces credit, or that the same results apply in another country.
The practical conclusion is to investigate a legitimate route carefully. A historical association between recognized learning and completion is a reason to improve access and study outcomes, not a reason to promise a particular learner a degree.
A partial result can be useful
Illustrative example: Consider an invented learner, Nadia, who has spent several years organizing supplies for a small community organization. This is a hypothetical scenario, not a Foundation participant, a documented case or a prediction of an assessment result.
Nadia wants to enter a business administration course. She can explain how she compares delivery notes with orders, investigates missing items and updates a simple stock record. She has never worked with the accounting software used in the proposed course, and her experience of purchasing rules comes mainly from one organization.
An initial conversation helps her identify which learning outcomes may be relevant. She asks permission to use a redacted stock record and obtains a factual statement from the person who supervised her. The provider explains what further evidence it needs and arranges an appropriate practical assessment.
In this imagined example, the assessor recognizes some relevant learning but finds that other requirements have not yet been demonstrated. Nadia needs instruction in the unfamiliar software and further study of the applicable procedures. The provider gives her a written explanation and a plan for completing the remaining work.
That result respects what she has learned without treating every responsibility she once held as equivalent to a whole course. It also gives her a more accurate starting point than either repeating everything or skipping essential preparation.
Now imagine the provider simply sends a rejection notice with no explanation. Nadia knows less about her next step than she should. Or imagine it grants extensive credit without checking the gaps. She may enter later coursework unprepared. Both outcomes waste the opportunity that a well-designed assessment creates.
The valuable result is a defensible decision and a usable onward route.
Plan the next learning step before celebrating the credit
The International Labour Organization’s guidance on effective RPL systems treats assessment as part of a wider process. It includes guidance, quality assurance, appeals and training to address skills gaps. Its discussion makes a practical point: recognizing earlier learning needs to connect with opportunities to learn what is still missing.
For an applicant, this means asking a second set of questions after the decision. Which requirements remain? When are those classes or assessments available? Are there prerequisites? Will the timetable work around employment and care responsibilities? Does the credit fit the intended qualification, or is it being recorded in a way that will not reduce the required study?
There may be minimum study requirements at the awarding institution. Another provider may make its own decision about accepting the resulting credit. An employer may still require an interview, a demonstration or a particular credential. Check the destination before assuming that recognition will travel unchanged.
Costs deserve the same attention. A shorter list of required units does not always produce a proportionate fee reduction or a shorter calendar journey. A remaining unit might run only at certain times. Ask for a written study plan and an explanation of the financial effect in your own circumstances.
Sometimes completing the ordinary course will be the more useful choice. A learner may want structured practice, updated methods or the confidence that comes from reviewing a subject thoroughly. RPL should expand informed choice rather than pressure people to seek the largest possible exemption.
Make recognition accessible without making it careless
Institutions have responsibilities that go beyond posting an application form.
Describe the process in plain language. Give applicants an example of how evidence relates to a learning outcome. Explain when support is available and how to request an accessible assessment arrangement. Avoid judging a technical skill through unnecessarily elaborate writing when writing at that level is not part of the requirement.
At the same time, preserve the abilities the qualification is supposed to represent. If accurate written records are essential to the work being assessed, the assessment must still establish that competence. The design question is how to measure the actual requirement without adding unrelated obstacles.
Assessors also need time and preparation. A rushed conversation can overlook genuine learning or accept a confident answer that has little substance behind it. Consistency improves when staff discuss difficult cases, review decisions and make the reasons for outcomes understandable.
Community organizations can help people find trustworthy providers, identify relevant experience and prepare questions. Employers can make it easier to obtain accurate records and arrange appropriate opportunities to demonstrate skills. Neither needs to promise an award to make that support valuable.
For funders, a useful question is what happens after an assessment. Consider whether proposed support reaches people who need advice, affordable assessment and access to the remaining learning. Count progress carefully. Enquiries, applications, granted credit and completed qualifications describe different stages and should not be presented as interchangeable achievements.
Begin with one worthwhile question
If you are considering further education, ask your chosen provider how it assesses learning acquired outside a classroom. Describe your goal and a few specific things you can do. Find out whether RPL is available for that course and what a realistic application would involve.
You do not have to turn your entire life into a claim. Start with the learning that genuinely relates to where you want to go.
For institutions, the responsibility is equally clear. Take experience seriously enough to assess it properly. Explain the decision. Help the learner understand the next step, whether the result is credit, further assessment or additional study.
People should not have to pretend they are beginners when they have already learned something valuable. They should also be able to enter further learning with an honest understanding of what they still need. A fair hearing makes room for both.
Education providers, employers and community organizations interested in exploring a clearly scoped collaboration around learner guidance or access to further learning can submit a partnership inquiry to Feel Worldwide Foundation Inc. Any proposal would need defined responsibilities, appropriate expertise and an agreed purpose. This invitation does not announce an RPL service, an awarding partnership or a guarantee of recognition.
To support the Foundation’s broader mission, you can make a donation.
