Standard 10.1 – Stakeholder consultation

This Standard relates to Sections B: 3.1 and 3.2 of the National course document template.

Standard 10.1 requires course owners to:

• establish the need for the course by engaging with key stakeholders
• validate that the course content meets that need through ongoing consultation with key stakeholders
• demonstrate that any enterprise units of competency are developed in consultation with and validated by key stakeholders.

It is important to conduct research and consult with key stakeholders throughout the course development process in order to confirm and gather evidence that there is a need for a new nationally accredited course and to ensure it does not duplicate existing training package content.

The table below explains what you need to do at each stage of the process.

Table 2: Summary of stakeholder consultation for new and existing VET accredited courses.

Identifying stakeholders

Before starting the consultation process, you will need to identify a list of key stakeholders relevant to the course.

Stakeholders may include:

• Regulatory and/or licensing bodies [1]– consultation with these bodies is mandatory. If the course is proposing a regulatory or licensed outcome, it is critical that the qualification will be recognised by the relevant industry regulator
• Employers – relevant where the course has a vocational outcome
• Industry/professional associations – relevant where the course has a vocational outcome
• Peak bodies – that represent the area in which the course is being accredited
• Graduates of the course – where a course is currently delivered as non-accredited training or to support an application for renewal of accreditation
• Subject matter experts – relevant to all courses
• Experienced developers of VET courses and units of competency – relevant to all courses.

[1] Standard 2.2b of the Standards for VET Regulators 2015 requires RTOs to consult with the industry regulator where the course results in a regulated or licensed outcome.

Jobs and Skills Councils

In addition to their role in managing nationally endorsed training packages, Jobs and Skills Councils (JSCs) are also responsible for broader industry stewardship and they undertake a significant amount of stakeholder engagement through committees and project work.

ASQA recommends that you send the list of stakeholders that you intend to engage with to the relevant JSC/s to obtain their guidance on whether you have identified all relevant stakeholders. The VET accredited course Jobs and Skills Council consultation form can be used to facilitate this process. Refer to Appendix 5 for JSC industry areas and contact details.

Conducting preliminary research and consulting with stakeholders

To enable stakeholders to provide feedback on whether they support the accreditation of a  new nationally recognised course, you will first need to define the course’s intended skill and knowledge outcomes, as well as the target student group or groups.

Section B: 2.1 of the National course document template requires you to define the intended vocational outcome or job role a student will achieve on completing the course. You may also include functions associated with the job role in this section.

If you are seeking to renew accreditation for an existing course, research and consultation with stakeholders at this stage will confirm whether or not there is an ongoing need for course accreditation.

[1] Standard 2.2b of the Standards for VET Regulators 2015 requires RTOs to consult with the industry regulator where the course results in a regulated or licensed outcome.

Demonstrating an established market demand

In order to demonstrate a market demand for the course, your course document should include analysis of industry market needs, and evidence of industry trends and developments requiring new and emerging skills, supported by employers, industry or professional bodies and other relevant stakeholders.

Establishing packaging rules

VET accredited courses comprise units of competency which can be:

• imported from a current nationally endorsed training package
• developed specifically for the course (enterprise units of competency)
• imported enterprise units of competency from another accredited course (with permission from the course owner).

Before determining the units of competency to include in the course, you will first need to identify and define the intended skill and knowledge outcomes. This may be done using surveys, interviews, observation or job and functional analysis, and should consider:

• relevant industry or educational standards
• research findings, such as occupational analysis, skills audits, data on emerging technology and industry trends
• manuals, operating procedures and textbooks
• position descriptions and role statements.

Once you have defined the intended skill and knowledge outcomes, you will be able to:

• select units of competency from training packages that meet these outcomes
• identify enterprise units of competency that need to be developed
• determine the most appropriate packaging rules to achieve the desired outcomes.

When developing a course with a workplace outcome (as opposed to a knowledge-based outcome) a combination of technical and generic units of competency will usually be required. For example, a course designed for instructional staff will include generic units that relate to instruction and facilitation skills and occupational health and safety, along with units relevant to the specific/technical skill.

Ongoing consultation during course development

It is essential to continue consulting with key stakeholders throughout the development process to ensure that the course:

• provides the skills and knowledge outcomes required
• reflects current and future skill requirements
• will meet the needs of students most likely to enrol in the course
• provides the most flexible course structure to meet identified needs.

The breadth and depth of consultation and research needed will depend on the size, complexity and required outcomes of the course. For example, a course designed to be delivered for a particular enterprise and a very specific target group will likely require less consultation than one intended for broader national delivery.

While the course document remains the intellectual property of the course owner at all times and it is up to the individual how much is disclosed, it is important to provide stakeholders with enough information to enable meaningful consultation and validation.

Some course owners choose to share the entire proposed course document with stakeholders while others may limit what they share to the course structure and enterprise units of competency.

As a minimum, key stakeholders should receive sufficient information to provide feedback on:

• course entry requirements
• course packaging rules
• specific assessment requirements
• the appropriate qualification type from the AQF or whether the proposed course will be delivered as a ‘Course in…’, i.e. a course that does not achieve an AQF qualification.
• pathways into the course and after course completion.

When applying to renew of accreditation of an existing course, you will also need to consult with key stakeholders to validate that all aspects of the existing course meet current needs.

Validating the final course

It is important to give key stakeholders an opportunity to comment on the completed course document, in order to demonstrate that they agree the course content and structure (including any enterprise units of competency you have developed) meet an established need.

Evidence of consultation and validation activities

Section B: 3.1 of the National course document template requires you to describe stakeholder consultation and validation activities, and demonstrate how these contributed to the development of the course, its structure and any enterprise units of competency.

Your application will need to include evidence to support these activities, such as:

• verifiable evidence of the established need for a nationally recognised qualification
• enrolment projections for a 3 to 5 year period
• details of any current training package qualifications and/or accredited courses with similar outcomes, together with an explanation why those qualifications or accredited course do not meet the identified need. Or, in the case of a similar accredited course, why that course cannot be provided through licensing arrangements with the existing course owner.)
• letters of support (preferably not duplicated generic statements)
• minutes of meetings or memos
• copies of relevant email communication
• if stakeholders are identified in the course document by name, the application should also include their written permission to be named.

CBT Institute was set up in 2016 by clinicians who delivered the Beyond Blue NewAccess pilot, to continue to roll out low intensity cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) services across Australia. This involved training to competently assess and treat common mental health problems using evidence-based low intensity cognitive behavioural therapy. CBT Institute identified a need to develop a validated course to meet the demands of the expanding workforce of Australian low intensity practitioners.

To determine the need, course developers consulted with a variety of public and private sector services, including Beyond Blue, Darling Downs West Moreton PHN, several Australian service providers and low intensity practitioners.

Consultation with stakeholders confirmed there is a need for a nationally recognised course. It was unanimously agreed that the training should be in the VET sector due to its focus on units of workplace competency. This apprenticeship approach exceeds limitations of a graduate model for this field while offering recruitment and career opportunities to a larger and more diverse section of the Australian community. Research also concluded this need could not be met through any existing training package qualification.

An advisory group including subject specialists and key stakeholders was formed to discuss the course and draft enterprise units of competency during course development. After several meetings and emails, the advisory group agreed that the final product met industry needs, and the application for initial accreditation was submitted.

After receiving the initial evaluation of the course document, the advisory group discussed the draft units and determined that additional enterprise units of competency were required to ensure all vocational tasks and outcomes were captured appropriately. The course developer identified some units of competency from existing training packages that could be included in the course structure.

The advisory group were encouraged to contribute and provide feedback to the proposed updates to the course structure and enterprise units.

Evidence of consultation activities were provided in the form of copies of emails, minutes of meetings, letters of support, marked-up copies of the course document, including suggested changes to proposed enterprise units of competency.

Positive feedback was provided, and the course was submitted by CBT Institute for final review for initial course accreditation.

Note: This case study is modelled on the current accredited course 10965NAT Diploma of Low Intensity Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. The course owners, The Trustee for Cromarty Family and The Trustee for Gallagher Family Trust, granted permission for ASQA to use information from this accredited course.

Monitoring an accredited course

Once a course has been accredited, course owners are required to monitor and evaluate their courses on an ongoing basis. This may result in:

• updating training package units of competency to current versions
• updating enterprise unit of competency content
• changes to course structure that do not impact the course outcome
• changes to assessment requirements
• the course owner cancelling the accredited course
• changes to the course contact person
• changes to course owner.

When seeking to renew accreditation, Section B: 3.2 of the National course document template requires course owners to include information on the outcomes of these reviews.

Specifically, you should provide information on:

• what monitoring and evaluation processes have been undertaken while the course has been accredited
• a full review of the course outcomes and course document (including all enterprise units of competency)
• how the reviews confirmed that the need for the course and its outcomes are still current
• a summary of the main feedback gathered from key stakeholders
• how this feedback informed the review and development of the course
• any changes made to the course since it was initially accredited
• enrolment figures throughout the accreditation period
• the number of providers that have delivered the course
• the number of graduates who gained employment upon completion of the course
• whether the course submitted is equivalent to the existing course
• how the existing course structure compares to the new course structure
• how continuing students from the previous accredited course will be transitioned to the new course in accordance with the transition and teach-out arrangements from the Standards for Registered Training Organisations (RTOs) 2015.