Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Creative Education, 2018, 9, 2070-2087
http://www.scirp.org/journal/ce
ISSN Online: 2151-4771
ISSN Print: 2151-4755
Challenges and Opportunities for
Implementing Recognition of Prior Learning
at the University of Namibia
Lydia L. Shaketange
University of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia
Abstract
The University of Namibia (UNAM)
has developed and approved a policy on
the recognition of prior learning (RPL), but the implementation thereof is
dormant. The purpose of this
paper is to present potential challenges and
opportunities that can influence the implementation of RPL at UNAM. The
paper used a qualitative approach and the phenomenological design to solicit
participants’ views, perceptions and experiences concerning R
PL at UNAM.
Semi-
structured interview schedules were employed to collect data from 12
staff members of UNAM who were purposively chosen based on their posi-
tions that are key
to providing information to answer the research questions.
The findings reveal opportunities
such as the availability of political will to
implement RPL at the institution, the availability of expertise, capability in
terms of technology and infrastructure, the availability of RPL policy, quality
assurance and the assessment policy of t
he institution. Challenges identified
are lack of ontological knowledge of what counts as RPL, how it is assessed
and its validity and integrity. The data reveal high demands regarding train-
ing on issues of assessment and raising awareness of RPL at the in
stitution.
The paper recommends that the Ministry of Education, the Namibia Qualifi-
cations Authority and the National Council of Higher Learning spearhead a
campaign to raise awareness and sensitize the nation as to the significance of
RPL. It also recommends that RPL be perceived as an assessment strategy of
which
the outcomes bring about admission, but is not by itself an admission
issue.
Keywords
Recognition of Prior Learning, Access, Assessment, Experiential Learning,
Ontology, Alignment, Learning Outcomes, Lifelong Learning
How to cite this paper:
Shaketange, L.
L.
(201
8). Challenges and Op
portunities for
Implementing Recognition of Prior Lear
n-
ing at the University of N
amibia.
Creative
Education
,
9
, 2070-2087.
https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.913150
Received:
July 19, 2018
Accepted:
October 23, 2018
Published:
October 26, 2018
Copyright © 201
8 by author and
Scientific
Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International
License (CC BY
4.0).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Open Access
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 Oct. 26, 2018 2070 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
1. Introduction
The concept of recognition of prior learning (RPL) is framed within the dis-
course on lifelong learning, access and social justice. It is a process by which un-
certified formal learning, uncertified organised non-formal learning, and uncer-
tified and unplanned informal learning are given academic recognition (Garnett &
Cavaye, 2015). The learning is referred to as
prior
because it is a form of learning
attained
before
a candidate is assessed in order to gain access to a course of
study. The issue of RPL is significant; Berglund and Andersson (2012) acknowl-
edge that knowledge and skills developed through work experience usually re-
main undocumented and unevaluated through a structured process. If such
knowledge and skills were to be formally evaluated, the outcomes could result in
upward progression in terms of employment or pursuing of further educational
qualifications. It is therefore necessary that discussions of the recognition of
learning achievements attained outside formal contexts become part of educa-
tional debates.
Access to education is a constitutional right in Namibia, guaranteed by the
Namibian Constitution. Being a member of the international community, Na-
mibia is adhering to international frameworks, which calls for nations of the
world to ensure equal access to all levels of education and to quality technical,
vocational and tertiary education (Tabatadze & Gorgadze, 2017). Equally, the
Namibian National Qualifications Authority (NQA) Act, No. 299 of 1996 stipu-
lates that it recognises all learning, irrespective of the setting where such learning
occurred, provided such learning can be verified. Experiential learning is de-
monstrative in nature and can be justified if appropriate mechanisms are de-
vised. The issue of RPL is not so much about the ability to justify the learning
acquired, but the willingness to provide opportunities to assess and justify such
learning.
Skinner, Blackley and Green (2010) point out that universities have the capa-
bility to not only generate knowledge, but also to develop documentation to
support the assessment and verification of knowledge. The RPL is one of the
processes that could support these assessments and verifications of learning ac-
quired outside classrooms. Skinner et al. maintain that most institutions that
have implemented RPL still experience barriers to implementing the assessment
and accreditation of experiential learning. Barriers identified are associated with
resistance to the RPL concept due to ontological limitations. Cantwell and
Scevak (2004) stress the ontological limitations with regard to what counts as
knowledge and who defines the validity of that knowledge. These authors are of
the view that such limitation creates fear of lowering entry requirements to in-
stitutions, thus causing resistance to the implementation of the RPL concept in
higher education. Osman (2003) indicates that in most institutions of higher
education, assessment of RPL is often aligned to and resembles methods of as-
sessment used in formal higher education.
Wihak (2006) reports doubts relating to whether prior learning has the calibre
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2071 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
of formal education and whether contextualised knowledge can match subject
knowledge. Skinner et al. (2010) report prejudices against competence-based
knowledge in that it is viewed as vocational or corporate rather than as academic
skills. Smith (2011) also reports on academics’ attitudes towards RPL as that of
“if knowledge is not invented here, then it is not credible”. Moreover, the litera-
ture highlights financial implications as another challenge in the implementation
of RPL in higher education, as RPL comes with extra load of labour-intensive
performance in relation to assessment (Smith, 2011).
The few examples around the world that could be cited are from publications
by Garnett and Cavaye (2015) at the Middlesex University in the United King-
dom, and Gonzales and Tabarak (2016) in France and in South Africa. The Mid-
dlesex University has developed a policy and approved regulations for accredit-
ing learning from experience. They have established quality assurance principles
and procedures to enable the accreditation to be conducted within the main-
stream quality assurance framework of the University. They award specific
credit, which implies a direct match between the submitted learning evidence
and the learning outcomes of specific modules. General credit where no specific
match is made, is also employed despite no details having been shared on how
this is conducted. The Gonzales and Tabarak (2016) study holds that in France
RPL implementation in higher education is made on the basis of candidates’
professional knowledge. The assessment involves candidates’ ability to prove the
achievements of learning at the level of intellectual development corresponding
to the level required at the institution (Gonzales & Tabarak, 2016). They also ex-
plain that in South Africa RPL is philosophically framed in the discourse of ac-
cess, equity and redress. Most admissions made on the basis of RPL are into
professional programmes such as selected health sciences, engineering and
computer science. Gonzales and Tabarak claim that there is evidence that RPL in
South Africa is being offered across the higher education spectrum except at
doctoral level. Also in South Africa, students are admitted to higher education
through RPL by completing a portfolio. Gonzales and Tabarak argue that credi-
bility and integrity in the assessment of RPL in South Africa are inherent in the
use of well-developed and crafted principles, standards, models and procedures.
The University of Namibia (UNAM) established an alternative admission
route for entry into its programmes by adults who lack the traditional entry re-
quirements. Adults who have completed Grade 10 (ten years of schooling) and
have gained five years’ work experience relevant to the field in which they want
to study, are considered under the Mature Age Entry (MAE) system. The MAE
is one form of RPL, as it considers candidates that would traditionally not be
accommodated. However, it recognises certificated learning and does not con-
sider the assessment of experiential and work-based learning. Shaketange (2014)
holds the view that candidates who go through the MAE system only have
knowledge that resembles subject knowledge, and are not adequately prepared to
reflect and demonstrate what they have learned from their professional practices;
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2072 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
in most cases these students are often less qualified for the specific field of study
they apply for. Moreover, credit transfer is also awarded at UNAM, but this ser-
vice relates to awarding credits to similar subjects or modules passed at other in-
stitutions. It does not award credit to the learning previously acquired. In 2017,
UNAM developed an RPL policy to guide the implementation of RPL in the in-
stitution, but the policy is dormant. Given the constant resistance to the imple-
mentation of RPL at institutions of higher learning internationally, this study
aims to explore ways that UNAM intends to avoid similar ontological challenges
as identified in the literature. The study explores opportunities that could lead to
a successful implementation of RPL at UNAM. The presentation of topics in this
article follows the sequence below:
•
Presentation of the problem statement
•
Discussion of the theoretical framework
,
description of the research design
,
strategy and methodology
•
Presentation of data
•
Discussion of the findings
•
Conclusion and recommendations
2. Statement of the Problem
Whereas UNAM wished to honour its national obligation towards inclusive
education, the literature (Cantwell & Scevak, 2004; Osman, 2003; Wihak, 2006;
Skinner et al., 2010) stresses ontological limitations as the most critical chal-
lenges capable of crippling implementation efforts of RPL in higher education.
UNAM needs to employ strategies that would curb ontological limitations if
successful implementation of RPL is to be realised at the institution. This article
investigates possible challenges to opportunities available to respond to identi-
fied ontological limitations for a sustainable implementation of RPL at UNAM.
This article will address the following research questions:
• What opportunities are available for implementing RPL at UNAM?
• What are potential challenges that could hinder the implementation of RPL
at UNAM?
• What suggestions can be made to deal with ontological limitations in the im-
plementation of RPL at UNAM?
• What is the role of existing quality assurance structures in the implementa-
tion of RPL at UNAM?
• What would be the ideal location for the RPL office that may aid the imple-
mentation of RPL at UNAM?
3. Theoretical Framework
This study is grounded in critical theory, which came into existence in 1894 and
evolved due to the transformation of society brought about by revolutionaries at
the Institute for Social Research at Frankfurt University, to redress political in-
justices in Germany (Nel, 1998). Critical theory therefore emerged as a tool for
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2073 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
expressing the sentiments felt, and was an instrument for changing the future.
Equally, critical theory in this article questions the ideology and ontological basis
on which subject knowledge is anchored, to become the prestigious sole repre-
sentation of knowledge. With Skinner et al. (2010) calling for a bridge between
academic and vocational skills, questions have started to emerge expressing sen-
timents about the sole representation of subject knowledge. Garnett (2016)
clearly expresses that universities no longer hold sole supremacy of knowledge
production; they are facing stiff contestation from the workplace, which de-
mands recognition as an equal knowledge production site. This contestation is
perceived as an instrument for changing the traditional ideological view held
about supremacy of subject knowledge. The current sentiments are that knowl-
edge is vibrant, and is gathered from diverse sites. Universities should acknowl-
edge the multiplicity of knowledge production sites and admit the need for var-
ied assessment tools of such knowledge.
4. Methodology
A phenomenological design of the qualitative approach was used in the study on
which this article is based. Phenomenological design assumes that access to real-
ity and knowledge is only achieved through social interaction. Within this view,
the researcher came to understand participants’ feelings and convictions and was
able to makes sense of the expressed opportunities and challenges for imple-
menting RPL at UNAM.
4.1. Population and Sampling
The purposive sampling strategy was used to select respondents from the popu-
lation of 1200 UNAM employees on the main campus. Purposive strategy was
significant to select informants who by virtue of their duties were perceived to
possess rich information to answer the research questions. Twelve (12) staff
members were purposively sampled from the office of the Pro-Vice Chancellors,
the office of the Registrar, Quality Assurance Unit, and Deans of Faculties. This
sample population occupies offices that are strategic to the implementation of
RPL at UNAM. The Pro-vice Chancellors’ offices have the management will re-
quired for the successful implementation of RPL. Quality Assurance is needed to
monitor and assess quality in every step of RPL implementation. The Registrar
office deals with admission of students and Deans of Faculties are critical to
agree with the implementation strategies since the faculties will implement RPL
in practice. Therefore, the sample comprised respondents who would influence
the implementation of RPL at the institution positively or negatively. Patton
(1990) clarifies that qualitative inquiries are more concerned about quality of
information collected, than the quantity of informants.
4.2. Research Instruments and Data Collection Procedures
Asemi-structured interview schedule was employed to solicit the experience,
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2074 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
knowledge and opinions about favourable opportunities to implement RPL and
potential challenges that may hinder its implementation at UNAM. All partici-
pants were asked to answer research questions one to three, while inputs on
quality assurance issues and the location of the RPL office were solicited from
CEQUAM and offices of the pro-vice chancellors and the registrar respectively.
The semi-structured interview was significant as it allowed new ideas to emerge.
For comprehensive data-capturing and triangulation purposes, participants
granted permission for the use of a tape recorder during interviews.
4.3. Data Analysis
Since interview questions were recorded and data were transcribed into text,
content analysis became relevant to analyse the data. Data analysis started with
the transcription of interviews and the organisation thereof according to ques-
tions. Related answers were marked, grouped, labelled, compared and induc-
tively generated into categories. For the purpose of reduction, the process of
comparisons between properties in different categories was followed to form
broad themes (Creswell, 2009). Data from categories were linked and aggregated
across broad themes until themes of a manageable size emerged.
4.4. Ethical Considerations
Permission was sought from the UNAM Research and Publications Unit to in-
terview the relevant UNAM staff members. Written informed consent from in-
dividual participants was prearranged. Participants were clearly informed of
their right to withdraw from the research at any time, and were assured that
their identities and privacy would be protected through anonymity and confi-
dentiality of the collected data.
5. Presentation and Interpretation of Data
5.1. Opportunities Available for Implementing RPL at UNAM
The opportunities available for implementing RPL at the institution are pre-
sented in Table 1.
Table 1 shows that some of the respondents felt that UNAM was ready, and
that RPL was long overdue. Others were ambivalent in that there are issues that
UNAM must address to become ready to implement RPL. These respondents
explained that although the majority of UNAM staff agree that RPL should be
implemented, there was a lack of RPL formal structure, resources and capac-
ity-building opportunities. Most respondents maintained that RPL could be im-
plemented provided that issues such as the integration of programme delivery
and admission requirements pertaining to the respective department pro-
grammes were addressed. If the system for programme development and NQF
registration was linked to the RPL and if UNAM puts formal structures in place,
trains implementers, and avails resources, then it could be ready. One respon-
dent stressed that the RPL process requires more manpower than that which
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2075 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
Table 1. Responses as to whether UNAM is ready to implement RPL.
Respondents
Responses
R1 UNAM could be ready, provided system for programme development
and [if] NQF registration is linked to RPL process.
R2 We are ready, but before we implement RPL, we need to be sure that
everybody understands what RPL is about.
R3 Yes, we are committed to implementing it.
R4 UNAM is committed, not ready until formal commitment is made.
R5 Yes, definitely-RPL is long overdue.
R6 Definitely, Yes. RPL is long overdue at UNAM.
R7 Yes, I think we are ready.
R8
Yes and No.
Yes, in terms of desire as most people are in agreement
with the implementation of RPL.
No, in terms of carrying out activities such as the full-fledged
implementation, unless if we pilot it first.
R9 Not ready. People/Implementers need to be trained
before implementation.
R10
Yes and No.
Yes, we have the expertise to run the RPL.
No, the experts are few-RPL requires more people
than we have on the ground.
R11
Yes, the University is ready. Just like all other entry requirements,
once it is effected into the system, it falls in just like it is when
other changes of admissions are introduced.
R12 Yes, UNAM is ready in terms of academic offerings.
UNAM currently has on the ground. UNAM needs to raise awareness about
RPL, develop and understand the guidelines, and clarify the criteria for assessing
experiential learning before the implementation of RPL. The assertions demon-
strated above show that the institution in its present state does not seem to be
ready to implement RPL.
5.2. Opportunities Available to Implement RPL at UNAM
The respondents indicated that UNAM has both international and national im-
peratives which call for RPL implementation and that Agenda 2030 is an inter-
national authoritative tool which the Namibian nation needs to apply to ensure
equal access to education. The respondents made references to the Namibian
Constitution which stipulates the right to education, and the NQA Act that rec-
ognises all learning, irrespective of its setting. Respondents also made reference
to the National RPL policy, the UNAM-RPL policy as well as the Vision and
Mission of UNAM. As stated by one of the respondents:
“
The international and internal imperatives
,
Agenda
2030,
the Namibian
Constitution
, the NQA Act which
calls for the need of RPL
,
the UNAM policy
are all instruments that UNAM is responding to
.
Also
,
RPL fits well within the
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2076 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
vision
,
mission of UNAM
.”
The respondents clarified that the RPL provision fits well within the vision
and mission of UNAM as both are framed within the government’s agenda of
economic development and quality of life. Another respondent mentioned the
strong political will for RPL at the university:
“
The political will
.
Management at UNAM are in agreement with the imple-
mentation of RPL
.”
One respondent explained that UNAM has the capabilities in terms of re-
sources and technology.
“
UNAM has the capability
,
available technology
,
skilled people
,
resources
,
an
approved RPL policy
,
all these create
[
an
]
enabling environment for the imple-
mentation of RPL at the institution
.”
These viewpoints on RPL underscore support for the implementation of and
belief in the high probability of RPL succeeding at the institution.
5.3. The Challenges that Can Hinder the Implementation of
RPL at UNAM
The challenges that might hinder the implementation of the RPL concept at
UNAM are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Challenges that might inhibit the implementation of the RPL concept at UNAM.
Respondents
Responses
R1 Lack of knowledge on assessment of learning and the
validation of the competences possessed.
R2 Lack of understanding what RPL is about and negative
preconceived ideas about RPL.
R3 Lack of trained manpower to handle the RPL process.
R4 Resistance from Faculties, academics that may not be
fully aware of why RPL is important.
R5 Lack of trained people such as assessors, implementers.
R6 Lack of knowledge in assessing portfolios at Department level.
R7 Difficulties to fit RPL into Faculty programmes.
R8
Lack of experience in dealing with RPL, availability of resources both
human and financial, candidates not knowing how to compile a portfolio,
and assessing the portfolios.
R9
Overflow of applicants might overwhelm the institution, difficulty in
selecting relevant students, inability to recognise informal knowledge,
inability to identify the required knowledge–what constitutes
the knowledge that deserves recognition?
R10
Integrating the mature students with graduates of Grade 12,
comparability of experience against Grade 12. How can knowledge
from Shoprite be compared against knowledge from NAMDEB.
R11 Lack of awareness.
R12 Lack of knowledge on how to assess RPL.
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2077 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
According to Table 2, all respondents concur with three critical challenges,
namely the
ontological limitations of RPL
, which include the
lack of knowledge
in assessing experiential learning
and the
lack of resources
at the institution. The
ontological limitation
refers to knowledge of RPL: What constitutes RPL
knowledge, and how is informal learning identified and recognised? What credi-
bility or worth does RPL knowledge have in comparison to subject knowledge?
The
assessment of RPL knowledge
includes: The ability to identify sufficient
evidence for assessment; how is the actual assessment done? What constitutes
the knowledge that deserves recognition? How is the validation of the compe-
tencies done? Who constitutes the assessment team? Respondents felt that lack
of answers to these questions has the potential to culminate in negative precon-
ceived ideas about RPL. Respondents therefore call for the training of all those
who would be concerned with the implementation of RPL at UNAM.
Another challenge identified was the
lack of resources at the institution
.
De-
spite indications by some respondents that UNAM does have the resources, the
majority of respondents pointed out human and financial resources as chal-
lenges that may derail the implementation of RPL. The concern here was that
experts in RPL are too few to launch RPL and meet its demands. Apprehension
was raised regarding academic support to older students where needed; the team
of implementers of RPL needs to be adequate to implement a successful innova-
tion. Financial resources were stated as a concern in view of the few available
experts who might need the assistance of additional staff, resulting in extra re-
muneration.
5.4. Suggestions to Facilitate the Implementation of RPL at UNAM
The respondents’ suggestions about interventions to aid the implementation of
RPL at UNAM are outlined in Table 3.
Table 3 shows that awareness campaigns to educate the UNAM community
about RPL and its significance werestrongly suggested. It appears that different
role-players need to take responsibility for marketing the RPL concept. For ex-
ample, the Communication and Marketing Division at UNAM could mobilise
and inform the UNAM community about RPL. It was also suggested that RPL is
a national issue and would require national intervention. Therefore, the Ministry
of Education and the NQA, which is the custodian of this endeavour, together
with NCHE should launch a national campaign advocating for the implementa-
tion of RPL. It was also suggested that UNAM should be the initiator of this na-
tional advocacy campaign. Such a campaign would boost the significance of RPL
and avoid any form of stigmatization that may be attached to RPL out of igno-
rance. Another suggestion pertained to benchmarking the Namibian RPL with
similar institutions that have implemented RPL, so as to ascertain what situa-
tions and challenges might block the RPL progress. A suggestion to begin RPL
services at postgraduate level was also made. This would avoid the inflow of ap-
plicants for undergraduate programmes. Ontological questions need to be an-
swered to facilitate understanding and give clear guidance as to how evidence of
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2078 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
Table 3. Suggestions for implementing RPL at UNAM.
R1 RPL should be done through and with the requirements of
programme development and NQF registration.
R2, R4 Awareness campaign to unlock people’s preconceptions of RPL.
RPL should be piloted before full implementation.
R3 To have clear instructions of how to assess RPL and a
template of portfolio and how assessment is done.
R5 Establishment of the RPL Unit be given priority.
R6 Train implementers. UNAM to raise awareness about RPL to ensure ownership.
We have the Directorate of Communication and marketing.
R7 Special care given to adult learners.
R8 Start RPL with postgraduates rather than undergraduates.
R9, R12 Benchmarking with related Universities.
R10 Allow candidates to write a test to determine competences.
R11 National awareness campaigns initiated and spearheaded by UNAM and supported
by the Ministry of Education, NQA, and NCHE.
learning is identified, assessed and validated. There is a need for rubrics and a
clear rationale to facilitate smooth implementation. It was suggested that the as-
sessment of RPL be made through and with programme development and NQF
registration, and that a simple entrance test be introduced to measure the entry
capability of candidates.
5.5. The Role of Existing Quality Assurance Structures in the
Implementation of RPL at UNAM
The officials from CEQUAM were solicited to state CEQUAM’s role in the im-
plementation of RPL at UNAM. Below are their responses:
R1 UNAM has a quality assurance policy and a policy on curriculum development,
these policies are there to guide and assure quality.
R2
CEQUAM will ensure that the assessment that will be done through RPL is in line
with the principles of assessment. There must be RPL guidelines that will guide
the practice of assessment.
R3 We are guided by [a] quality assurance policy at UNAM, this policy is generic, it
accommodate[s] all academic programme[s] and RPL will be included.
CEQUAM officials stipulated their role in the implementation of RPL as en-
suring quality in the assessment process of RPL, and to guarantee that RPL pro-
cedures follow the principles of the UNAM assessment policy.
5.6. Location of the RPL Office to Aid the Implementation of
RPL at UNAM
Respondents from the offices of the Pro-vice Chancellors and office of the Reg-
istrar had different views as to where the office of the RPL should be located to
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2079 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
aid the implementation of RPL at UNAM. Some respondents felt it should resort
under the office of the Registrar because RPL is an admission matter. Others re-
spondents indicated that it should fall under the office of the Pro-vice Chancel-
lors-Academic Affairs because this would give RPL a respectful profile. Another
opinion was that it should be independent, given that RPL is an assessment issue
and not an admission matter. It was emphasised that only the outcome of the
RPL assessment leads to admission, therefore, it should be independently ad-
ministered in conjunction with the various faculties. Some respondents thought
it should be under the Quality Assurance Unit since it deals with NQA frame-
works and standards, which are quality matters.
6. Discussion of the Findings
The discussion of findings will reflect on international and national imperatives,
the need for political will at UNAM and the capability and constraints of UNAM
to implement RPL. This section will also reflect on the potential challenges that
could hinder the implementation of RPL at UNAM and attempt to answer the
ontological questions raised during data collection.
6.1. International and National Imperatives
The implementation of RPL at UNAM is said to be anchored in both interna-
tional and national imperatives. Namibia, being a member of these international
treaties, is responding through its educational institutions. UNAM’s intention to
implement RPL is based on fulfilling its national duty to bring about social jus-
tice. Equally, the UNAM Act, Act 18 of 1992, section 18directs that it may not
confer a degree upon any person
unless
he or she has
attended
or
attained the
standards of proficiency in an examination or tests as determined by Senate
. The
Act paves the way for the provisions of RPL assessment. Equally, UNAM’s vision
and mission promote the development of individuals capable of driving public
and private institutions towards a knowledge-based economy.
6.2. The Political Will at UNAM
The matter of political will at UNAM was mentioned as an opportunity which
favours the implementation of RPL. The policy was developed, together with the
implementation guide. The political will in the context of RPL was justified by
the institution’s highest decision-making body, the Senate, who in 2017 adopted
a resolution to approve the RPL policy. However, the implementation thereof is
latent. The dormancy of the implementation of the approved policy contradicts
the will unanimously expressed during data collection. Osman (2003) and Gon-
zales and Tabarak (2016) emphasise that policies and the managerial will of RPL
are best understood in terms of practices, rather than in terms of idealistic
statements of intentions. The proclaimed will by respondents at UNAM to im-
plement RPL appears to be only idealistic statements of intention, with no com-
mitment to put the implementation plan into practice. If implementation of RPL
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2080 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
at UNAM is to be sustained, it certainly requires much stronger commitment
than the idealistic intention exhibited by respondents during data collection.
6.3. RPL Capability and Constraints at UNAM
The data reveal that despite UNAM’s possession of technology, expertise and
resources that were seen to provide a conducive environment for the implemen-
tation of RPL, the implementation of RPL at the institution is still being ignored.
There appears to be a lack of felt need at UNAM to devote sufficient effort to
RPL. Petersen and Osman (2013) call for higher education to realise that con-
ventional classroom learning emphasises learning of subject matter and litera-
ture, which might be one-sided knowledge, and inadequate for practice. Petersen
and Osman stress that just as university students need
service knowledge
through internships and practical attachments to balance their learning, candi-
dates from workplace backgrounds would equally need academic learning to
balance their service learning. Peterson and Osman caution that one-sided
learning, irrespective of context, remains inadequate, insufficient, and often ex-
ternal to the local context. Therefore, UNAM should use the capability revealed
in the data to embrace mobility between workplace and education as a way to
contribute to the country’s competent and productive human resources, capable
of shifting Namibia from a resource-based to a knowledge-based economy.
Therefore, the policy should be functional to convey the purpose of its develop-
ment.
7. Potential Challenges that Can Hinder the Implementation
of RPL at UNAM
Challenges to implementing RPL were divided into two main categories:
lack of
resources
and ontological
limitations
.
7.1. Lack of Resources at the Institution
There were conflicting responses to the question of resources’ availability to aid
the implementation of RPL at UNAM. Some respondents maintained that re-
sources are available, while others stated the lack thereof. The conflicting views
insinuate the extent of devotion to the implementation of RPL at UNAM. There
seems to be no felt need for the RPL implementation at the institution. If there is
no agreement as to whether or not resources are available to accommodate RPL,
it conveys a serious lack of interest on the institution’s part in the RPL process.
Most institutions that are not committed to the course often tend to base their
arguments on the lack of resources in order to delay the implementation process.
7.2. Ontological Limitations
The question of ontological understanding is divided into subgroups: 1) what
constitutes RPL knowledge, its credibility and integrity in the academic milieu,
and 2) how is it assessed, the identification of sufficient evidence, the ability to
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2081 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
know which knowledge deserves recognition, validation of evidence and who
constitute the assessment team.
1)
What counts as RPL Knowledge
?
Academics in many institutions worldwide have always questioned what con-
stitutes RPL knowledge, its integrity, legitimacy and validity to penetrate the
academy. RPL is grounded on the belief that there are other ways of creating
knowledge, and there are various sites at which academically credible knowledge
can be created. Kolb’s learning circle, John Dewey’s vision of egalitarian educa-
tion and his call for a relationship of experience and learning have not only au-
thenticated this argument, they have also given a theoretical legitimacy to expe-
riential learning. What counts as knowledge is the level of learning evidence
submitted by the candidates, and the extent to which such learning fits the entry
requirements of a specific course. It is clear that the question of RPL in higher
education has not doubted the ability of other sites to create knowledge, as
higher education encourages internship and attachment programmes in work-
places. The issue in higher education appears to have been a discussion of power,
and the traditional role of higher education which perceives itself as “the gate-
keeper of knowledge” (Conrad, 2010).
One critical condition of accepting and authenticating work-based knowledge
in higher education has been the demand to align such knowledge with subject
knowledge. It appears that aligning work-based learning against subject knowl-
edge on its own, creates the authenticity of knowledge gained in the work-place.
This becomes difficult to understand, since what counts as knowledge in RPL is
not necessarily the extent to which the evidence of learning resembles the subject
taught in the programme. It is not possible for a candidate to have known the
subjects in the programme’s entry level which the candidate is seeking. Knowl-
edge is measured by the level of complexity acquired by the candidate and the
ability to exhibit that knowledge. Academics are usually the assessors of subject
knowledge against the complexities of the NQF levels that are pitched at certain
levels; it should apply the same principles with the assessment of RPL. In the
RPL tradition, the supremacy role of academics is limited. Academics have little
influence on the evidence of learning submitted. The candidate compiles the
portfolio and submits the supposed learning for marking. This procedure differs
from the way in which it is done in traditional higher education, during which
students are taught and required to reflect on the content they have been taught.
Conrad (2010) acknowledges that academics have always held on to the idea of
knowledge ownership and the sole right to disseminate and defend that knowl-
edge. If the traditional procedures are interrupted, academics might hardly ac-
cept changes. The issue of credibility and legitimacy of RPL in higher education
is really about power. If the content is not created in the institution, it is per-
ceived less credible and should be restricted. Peterson and Osman (2013) advise
that a university is not only an environment which defines and constructs
knowledge, but one which examines and engages with knowledge created in
other sites of practice. The same sentiments are shared by Garnett and Cavaye
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2082 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
(2015) who also caution that the discussion of higher education should focus on
how foreign knowledge ought to be assessed, rather than arguing against its
credibility and validity which research can identify. Missions of institutions of
learning, including UNAM, are devoted to research; ontological issues should
therefore not be allowed to constrain the implementation of RPL at the institu-
tion whose mission is invested in research. The critical theory used in this study
advance the sentiments felt by the community of practice, concerning the mar-
ginalisation of knowledge created outside the formal settings of learning. Critical
theory questions the basis on which the supremacy of subject knowledge over
experiential knowledge is anchored. Ontological understanding is invested in the
individual’s perceptions of the form of knowledge created outside the formal set-
tings of education.
7.3. Assessment of Experiential Learning
Lack of knowledge in assessing experiential learning dominated the responses
from interviewees. How experiential learning is assessed, the ability to identify
the kinds of knowledge assessed, its scope and complexity were some of the
doubts in the minds of most respondents. Interviewees expressed the need for
clear instructions and a possible template of a portfolio which spells out explic-
itly how the assessment is to be conducted. These demands from respondents
portray fear of the unknown and reveal that RPL assessment is foreign to the in-
stitution and to the lecturers expected to conduct it. Skinner et al. (2010) and
Gonzales and Tabarak (2016) warn against this fear, that despite institutional
policies, most institutions are still faced with fear and a lack of knowledge about
RPL. Correspondingly, interviewees in this study demonstrated a similar fear
regarding how experiential learning is assessed. Given this fear, the following
question comes to mind in an endeavour to understand the assessment of expe-
riential learning at UNAM:
• How does UNAM plan to assessexperiential learning: how is the assessment
done, identification of sufficiency of evidence, which knowledge deserves
recognition, validation of evidence and who constitute the assessment team?
In the introduction section of the UNAM Assessment Policy (2013) it is
stipulated that UNAM does not constrain the development of alternative or ad-
ditional forms of effective assessment, and that the policy would consider a wide
range of relevant performances information, be it formal, informal, standardised
or non-standardised assessment (UNAM, 2013: p. 5). If UNAM does not con-
strain the development of alternative forms of assessment, then the development
of assessment tools for RPL would be embraced. Similarly, UNAM’s assessment
policy further stipulates that it perceives students as individual beings, with
broad spectrums of abilities, skills and knowledge. The understanding of this
statement implies that UNAM recognises the individuality of candidates to the
extent that the assessment of their proficiencies would follow this noble percep-
tion. Therefore, an assessment that examines individuals’ claim of knowledge is
in agreement with the assessment policy of the institution.
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2083 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
RPL knowledge is different from subject knowledge. RPL knowledge is expe-
riential; it is not encoded in media, books and articles in the same way as subject
knowledge. It is reflective; it resides within the individual’s skills or expertise. It
involves action and is context specific. Since this knowledge is embedded within
individual subjective thinking and is not coded in books, it appears to present
stiffer challenges to articulate and eventually to assess. However, assessment of
RPL is possible with the use of the alignment of evidence against the NQF levels
descriptors.
The use of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) level descriptors is
advocated in this paper as the assessment criteria, which are supposedly the
measure of national and international comparability of achieving proficiencies.
University departments have the responsibility to describe learning achieve-
ments at particular levels of the NQF that indicate the types of learning expected
at specific learning outcomes. In the same way, these departments would de-
scribe the assessment criteria framed within the descriptors at the level required
to access various programmes in the department. Assessment in RPL implies
examination of knowledge as extracted from experience. The author of this arti-
cle concurs with the explanation by Gonzales and Tabarak (2016) that the credi-
bility and integrity in assessment are inherent in the use of well-developed and
crafted principles and standard procedures of RPL.
This article proposes the assessment of RPL to take the following into consid-
eration: Departments at Faculties will devise assessment criteria which conform
to the entry requirements of their various programmes. Candidates aspiring to
register with specific programmes are asked to present their learning evidence in
a portfolio of evidence. The learning evidence is measured against the assess-
ment criteria as set by departments. The use of assessment criteria derived from
NQF level descriptors is significant as level descriptors do not precisely measure
the content achieved, but they provide an indication of the amount of learning
acquired; the scope, in-depth and complexity of what is learnt. Although the
level descriptors do not measure the content of what is learnt, because candi-
dates have different contents derived from different contexts, the common de-
nominator is the learning achieved, its scope, and complexity of learning.
The NQF levels are currently used at UNAM as directives that express the
relative size of qualifications. They can thus be used as assessment criteria for
experiential learning. The community of practice in the area of subject matters is
essential in constituting the assessment panel. Since higher education graduates
are trained for the world of work, it is significant to partner with employers in
assessing the complexity of knowledge required in workplaces. Candidates who
are assessed through RPL are better prepared for the academic road ahead, they
understand what they know, and they are also aware of what they would need to
reach the expected standard of academic readiness.
7.4. Quality of RPL Assessment
This paper advocates that NQF level descriptors be employed as the assessment
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2084 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
criteria to determine the scope and in-depths of learning. The design of the
portfolio should meet the outcomes or level of difficulties specified in the NQF
level descriptors for a given level. The questions or instructions in the portfolio
must prescribe what it is that needs to be assessed and indicate the criteria upon
which assessment judgement is made. CEQUAM, being the body that controls
quality in the institution, has the responsibility to advise academics on issues re-
lated to NQF level descriptors where extra assistance is required.
7.5. Location of RPL Office
The data show that respondents had different views as to where the office of the
RPL should be located. Smith (2011) advises that when an RPL unit resorts un-
der another establishment it is usually doomed to fail. Smith strongly advises
that unless the head of the section under which RPL is placed understands RPL
and its functions, such head would allocate other duties to RPL officials, sup-
pressing and eventually killing the work of the RPL unit. An independent office
is advocated by literature so as to give RPL autonomy in its functions.
8. Conclusions and Recommendations to Enhance the
Implementation of RPL at UNAM
The main reason why institutions of higher learning are reluctant to implement
RPL appears to be a lack of understanding by academics of what RPL is, and
how such knowledge is assessed. The credibility and validity of RPL in compari-
son to subject knowledge come with more perceptions than the reality of the
knowledge presented. However, this study has recognised these perceptions and
has advocated for the National Qualifications Framework level descriptors,
which are the national classification system used to classify the scope and de-
scribe the complexity of learning achievements at every level of learning (NQF,
2006) to strongly spearhead the assessment of RPL at UNAM.
The author of this article extends the current knowledge base by arguing that,
irrespective of expressed challenges and opportunities, the assessment of RPL is
feasible when an alternative route is employed, one that aligns learning evidence
with NQF level descriptors as assessment criteria. This route demands that can-
didates seeking entry to UNAM through RPL demonstrate the acquired learning
to fit a complexity of learning outcomes on the NQF levels. Although the level
descriptors do not exactly measure the content of learning evidence, they pro-
vide an indication of the required amount of learning to be attained at each level,
which compares the weight of learning to any of the ten levels on the NQF. If the
learning indicates equivalence to NQF level four, for instance, such a candidate
would be admitted to the NQF level five in the field for which the candidate has
applied. The fact is that UNAM has the capacity in terms of infrastructure and
skills; it has the advantage of competing for a wider academic space in terms of
students using appropriate alternative routes. This provision would encourage
lifelong learning and inclusivity in education.
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2085 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
Within the confines of the aforementioned discussions, the author recom-
mends the following:
• Since RPL is a new strategy that openly challenges traditional subject knowl-
edge, it can easily be misunderstood and negatively misconstrued. Therefore,
to protect its credibility and validity, the Ministry of Education, the NQA and
the NCHE should sensitize the nation about RPL and its significance to society.
• The UNAM Directorate of Marketing and Communication should initiate a
national sensitization campaign, and then mobilise the UNAM community to
acquire a general understanding of RPL.
• The University should live up to its intended drive to remain a national uni-
versity by contributing to the government’s national agendas in terms of cre-
ating a knowledge-based economy. Therefore, UNAM should realise its obli-
gation to implement an RPL framed in social justice, lifelong learning and in-
clusive education.
• Ontological understanding of what counts as knowledge in RPL and the as-
sessment thereof have the potential to derail the implementation of RPL in
higher education. Therefore, the academic community at UNAM must be
made aware of what counts as RPL, and its assessment procedures.
• The literature highlights that in universities where RPL has been attached to
other divisions, such activity has failed, unless the head of the division un-
derstands the duties and functions of RPL. It is therefore recommended that
an independently located RPL unit be established, which reports directly to
the Pro-Vice Chancellor-Academic Affairs (PVCAA).
• RPL is an assessment strategy of which the outcomes bring about admission.
It is not an admission strategy and it is not fitting to be placed directly under
the office of the Registrar.
• The implementing process must be clearly spelt out, debated by Faculties and
agreed to by stakeholders involved in the assessment of RPL.
• Quality of assessment of the RPL must be assured by CEQUAM as guided by
Quality Assurance and UNAM assessment policies. Therefore, a panel of as-
sessors must be created, constituting all people concerned in specific fields of
assessment.
• All modules at UNAM and assessment criteria must be aligned to NQF level
descriptors.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
References
Berglund, L., & Andersson, P. (2012). Recognition of Knowledge and Skills at Work: In
Whose Interest?
Journal of Workplace Learning, 24,
73-84.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13665621211201670
Cantwell, R. H., & Scevak, J. J. (2004). Engaging University Learning: The Experiences of
Students Entering University via Recognition of Prior Industrial Experience.
Higher
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2086 Creative Education
L. L. Shaketange
Education Research and Development, 23,
131-145.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000206627
Conrad, D. (2010). Building Knowledge through Portfolios. Learning in Prior Learning
Assessment and Recognition (PLAR).
The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9,
139-150.
Garnett, J. (2016). Work-Based Learning: A Critical Challenge to the Subject-Discipline
Structure and Practice on Higher Education.
Journal of Higher Education
,
Skills and
Work-Based learning, 6,
305-314. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-04-2016-0023
Garnett, J., & Cavaye, A. (2015). Recognition of Prior Learning: Opportunities and Chal-
lenges for Higher Education.
Journal of Work-Applied Management, 7,
28-37.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-10-2015-001
Gonzales, R. D., & Tabarak, U. I. M. (2016).
Development of Implementation of RPL
Policies and Principles in Selected Countries: Implications and Lessons for Bangladesh
.
Manila: University of Santo Tomas.
University of Namibia (2013).
Recognition of Prior Learning Policy
. Windhoek: UNAM.
University of Namibia (1992).
University of Namibia Act 18 of 1992
. Windhoek: UNAM.
Nel, B. (1998). Critical Theory: Origins, Central Concepts and Education. In P. Higgs
(Ed.),
Metatheories in Philosophy of Education
(pp. 123-137). Johannesburg: Heine-
mann.
Namibia Qualifications Authority (NQA) (2006).
Regulations of Setting up a National
Qualifications Framework for Namibia
. Windhoek: NQA.
Osman, R. (2003).
The Recognition of Prior Learning and Emerging Field of Enquiry in
South Africa
. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand.
Osman, R., & Petersen, N. (2013).
An Introduction to Service Learning in South Africa
.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990).
Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Town or City
?
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Shaketange, L. N. (2014).
Prior Non-Certificated Learning: A Criterion for the Assess-
ment of Experiential Learning for Access to Namibian Institutions of Higher Learning
.
Windhoek: Namibia.
Skinner, H., Blackey, H., & Green, P. J. (2010). Accrediting Informal Learning: Drivers,
Challenges and Higher Education Responses.
Higher Education Skills & Work-Based
Learning, 1,
52-62. https://doi.org/10.1108/20423891111085393
Smith, E. (2011).
The New Kid on the Block Has Come Tostay: Lessons from Twelve
Years of Recognition of Prior Learning and Implementation in South Africa
. (Paper
presented at the SAQA National Conference, Johannesburg.)
Sutherland, L. (2006).
Challenges and Opportunities for Implementing Recognition of
Prior Learning (RPL) Policy in Higher Education Place
? Richards Bay: University of
Zululand.
Tabatadze, S., & Gorgadze, N. (2017). Affirmative Action Policy in Admissions System of
Higher Education of Post-Soviet Georgia.
Journal of Applied Research in Higher Edu-
cation, 9,
363-377. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-03-2016-0020
UNESCO (2007).
Recognition of Experiential Learning: Prospects for Development in
African Countries
. (Paper presented at the French National Commission for UNESCO
Conference). Paris: UNESCO.
Wihak (2006).
State of the Field Review
:
Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition
(PLAR) University of Calgany: A Study Report Submitted to the Canadian Council of
Learning, Learning (CCL).
DOI: 10.4236/ce.2018.913150 2087 Creative Education