In the session we explored the differences between the traditional Elements and Performance Criteria (EPC) format and the newer Application, Skills and Knowledge (ASK) format, and considered what the change means for RTOs designing training and assessment.
The key message was that ASK requires a slightly different approach to unit unpacking. It provides greater flexibility, but that flexibility also places more responsibility on RTOs to clearly define what competent workplace performance looks like.
This is important for anyone training and assessing within VET as well as anyone completing Certificate IV in Training and Assessment to be aware of.
In case you missed the session you can catch the replay below!
The EPC format provides a procedural “spine”. Knowledge and skills are generally anchored to elements and performance criteria that often reflect the way work is actually performed.
ASK takes a different approach. Rather than using elements and performance criteria, the unit is organised around three main areas:
ASK units still include assessment requirements such as performance evidence, knowledge evidence and assessment conditions.
The important difference is that there is no explicit set of performance criteria describing the sequence of a task or the standard expected at each step.
ASK may be particularly useful for work that is creative, dynamic or less predictable, where there are several legitimate ways to achieve an outcome. This could include industry areas such as business, community services, leadership and creative industries.
EPC likely remains better suited to safety-critical or highly procedural work, such as electrical work, civil construction and the operation of plant and equipment, where consistency and prescribed processes are particularly important.
Jobs and Skills Councils determine the most appropriate format when developing units and there is no requirement for all units to move to ASK.
During the webinar, I suggested a practical six-step process.
1. Print and annotate the unit
Read the whole unit and start visualising what competent performance would actually look like in the workplace.
2. Start with the performance evidence
Treat the assessment requirements as the non-negotiable starting point. Before designing training, establish exactly what the learner will ultimately need to demonstrate.
3. Identify realistic workplace tasks
Identify the authentic tasks that a competent worker would actually perform.
For example, rather than designing separate activities around isolated skills, an electrical unit might involve assembling a switched 12V LED circuit or identifying and reporting faults.
4. Build a mapping matrix
Map the Skills, Knowledge, Application statements, Performance Evidence and other requirements against those workplace tasks.
Expect some repetition. The same task may provide opportunities to develop and demonstrate several parts of the unit.
5. Bring in workplace instructions and procedures
This becomes particularly important when there is no procedural spine (performance criteria) in the unit itself.
These might be formed by:
These documents help establish how the work should actually be performed and the standards that apply.
6. Describe the required performance
RTOs need to document more clearly what satisfactory performance looks like.
This means making the expected workplace standard sufficiently clear so that trainers, assessors and learners understand what competent performance involves.
The flexibility of ASK also creates some challenges.
Different RTOs could interpret the same unit differently. Without a clearly documented performance standard, assessment can also drift towards simply confirming that a learner “did the skill,” rather than determining whether they performed it to the required workplace standard.
For this reason, RTOs should be able to explain and defend the decisions they have made when designing their training and assessment.
Industry consultation has always been important, but ASK makes it even more essential.
Industry can help determine what competent performance actually looks like, which procedures should be followed, what standards should apply and whether the assessment activities genuinely reflect workplace practice.
Good consultation also provides evidence supporting the RTO’s design decisions.
The important point is that consultation needs to be meaningful. A brief record showing that an industry representative was contacted is much less useful than documented feedback showing how industry input influenced the training and assessment approach.
This also means RTOs have defensible assessments backed by industry, which may be important if the assessment is subject to regulatory scrutiny.
With EPC units, much of the structure is already provided through the elements and performance criteria. With ASK units, RTOs need to do more work to connect the Skills, Knowledge and Application requirements to authentic workplace tasks and clearly describe the standard of performance expected.
ASK units do bring about greater flexibility and more options for RTOs however.
Thoughtful unit unpacking, workplace documentation and genuine industry consultation more important than ever.
Training Package Organising Framework (DEWR)
Qualification Reform Fact Sheet (DEWR)
Example of a UEEFS2004 ASK formatted unit (Training.gov.au)
A more thorough and detailed approach to unpacking units of competency by Alan Maguire / On Target Work Skills:
We have a thriving community where you can participate in free events, get certificates and demonstrate leadership among your peers.
How Accellier helped senior zoo keepers from Taronga gain their Certificate IV in Training and Assessment.
Accellier was approached to assist over 50 highly skilled professionals within the organisation achieve Certificate IV in Training and Assessment.
Department of Planning, Industry and EnvironmentMarion, a successful Accellier Certificate IV in Training and Assessment graduate tells her story.
Qualified visual arts trainer video