Recognition is assessment, not paperwork
Done properly it is the most demanding form of assessment there is, because the assessor did not choose the evidence and cannot control the conditions.
Recognition of prior learning has a reputation problem, and the reputation is deserved in a fair number of cases. It is widely perceived as a faster route to a qualification, marketed on speed and convenience, and in some hands it has been exactly that: a document check producing a certificate for somebody who has worked in the field for a while. The damage from that practice falls on everybody, because it makes every legitimately recognised qualification harder to trust.
The confusion at the root of it is treating recognition as an alternative to assessment rather than as a form of it. The requirement being tested is identical to the requirement tested by any other route: can this person do the thing, to the standard, consistently, now. What differs is only where the evidence comes from. In a taught course the assessor designs tasks, controls the conditions and observes the performance. In recognition the evidence already exists, was generated for other purposes, and has to be evaluated as it is.
Continue reading