Are Units of Competency assigned an Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) level?

No. Units of Competency do not, nor have they ever been assigned an AQF level.

What about the AQF level number in the unit code?

There is no AQF level number in a unit of competency code.

The Training Package Products Policy is where the specifications for a unit code come from. Training Package developers have to follow these specifications when assigning a unit code. See Page 5, item 2.1.2 which says (summarising):

“Each unit of competency must have a unique code that conforms to the following:

• training package identifier – 3 characters
• no more than 12 characters
• cross-sector units must have ‘X’ as the final character – non-cross-sector units must not use ‘X’ as the final character.”

That’s it. There’s nothing about AQF levels in there.

“But!” …you might hear some people say… “the unit TAEPDD 4 01 Work effectively in the VET sector is a core unit from the TAE40122 Certificate IV in Training and Assessment! And ICTPRG 3 02 Apply introductory programming techniques is a core unit from the ICT30120 Certificate III in Information Technology!”

Some Training Package developers may try to add some meaning to a unit code by setting the first digit in the code to the qualification level it was mostly intended for.

Indeed the old Training Package Development Handbook, which previously informed Training Package developers from 2007 says it represents “the AQF qualification in which the unit was first packaged” on page 15 at 2.1.1 (Coding and Titling of Units of Competency).

So you will see this convention being used sometimes (for example in TAE and BSB training packages) but it has little meaning other than representing the AQF level of the qualification in which it first was packaged.

You will also see many hundreds of examples of units of competency that do not use this convention at all.

Should I ‘apply’ a unit of competency at the AQF level of the qualification I’m teaching or assessing?

Let’s be clear. The AQF is a qualifications framework. It’s for qualifications, not units. It describes the knowledge and skills of a graduate of a qualification between levels 1 and 10.

Units of competency are a specification for a standard of performance of a work function. So the complexity, “level” or “difficulty” of a unit is determined solely by the unit itself.

Attempting to impose an AQF level on a unit of competency may distort, narrow, or over-complicate the intent of the unit.

Furthermore, imposing an AQF level on a unit ‘breaks’ the credit transfer system and causes problems with the assessment principle of fairness. It could also raise compliance issues under the Standards for RTOs which require that RTOs offer credit transfer.

Of course, there are many hundreds of use-cases for a unit of competency where an AQF qualification is never even considered. Skill-sets and single-unit courses are perfect examples of this (think First Aid courses or Responsible Service of Alcohol).

Summary

It is important that the wording of the unit of competency itself is the chief guide of how challenging or complex a unit is, regardless of what qualification it might end up in.

Some good further reading is Western Australia’s Training Accreditation Council’s fact sheet “The Australian Qualifications Framework and Units of Competency.”

What are your thoughts?