Reimagining lifelong learning conference

Cultivating pedagogic agency for the practice of RPL through an exploration of the values and beliefs of RPL assessors Phil O’Leary and Ann Ledwith Abstract Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), allows for all forms of learning to be identified and given value in the context of a destination award within the formal learning system. RPL is increasingly significant for lifelong learning provision in higher education. Recent European policy recommendations have called for higher education institutions to have policies and procedures in place for RPL by 2018. The resulting impetus has increased the focus on developing and delivering RPL provision. This research queries the influence of some of the factors surrounding the cultural acceptance of RPL by academic assessors.

Some of the literature reports on a low take up of RPL and queries its effectiveness in broadening participation through the formal recognition of non-formal and informal learning. The literature also reports on the idea of pedagogic agency (Cooper & Harris, 2013), for RPL practice as supported by individual champions of RPL within institutions and contrasts this with the ‘gatekeeper effect’ which in effect acts to discourage RPL applicants and hence influence the cultural acceptance of RPL practice across an institution. This research explores aspects of Cooper and Harris’s notion of pedagogic agency with a view to determining if there are common values and beliefs underpinning an assessor’s attitude towards RPL. Thirty-one assessors were interviewed about their values and beliefs around the assessment of RPL material in a cross sectional study within a third level college in Ireland. Thematic analysis was supported through the creation of a conceptual framework drawing on the work of Bernstein (2000), including the classification and framing of knowledge, and the field of recontextualisation.

Analysis resulted in two major themes. The first presents the viewpoints of RPL assessors as primarily defending and maintaining the standards of the formal learning system. However the second theme ‘balancing,’ diverges from this and provides further understanding as to positions taken with the assessment of RPL cases. This second theme lends support to Bernstein’s notion of ‘prospective pedagogic identity’ and the academic assessor’s readiness to engage with novel practices such as RPL.