Part 2 - How an LMS Can Assist RTOs in Managing Compliance

Key terminology has been covered in Part 1 of this series, and this next stage is going to build on that terminology to explore what Registered Training Organisations (RTOs) need to look for in the systems that they select for use.

Image by Manitou

We now know the difference between a Learning Management System (LMS) and a Student Management System (SMS). It is important to note that in some cases these systems may be combined and integrated into one system. If this is the case with the platforms your RTO is looking at using, it is important to ensure that the functionality across the learning management and student management meet your needs in both spaces. Otherwise, you will be compromising, and it is a massive job to move systems later, especially if you’re on a platform that has both roles integrated together. This article is going to assume the systems are separate.

Key Features of an LMS for RTOs

There are so many different Learning Management Systems (LMS) available across the planet…there is no way of really knowing exactly how many systems are out there. This huge amount of choice means a huge variation in features and pricing, and subsequently, the ability to meet compliance requirements. It is important to note that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ in terms of meeting an organisation’s requirements. Your RTO is different to the RTO down the road, and you will have different processes and ways of assessing. Therefore, the LMS that you will need may be different to the RTO down the road. This is important to remember when selecting the right system.

Version Control

How many times have RTOs come across the issue of trainers having their own version of an assessment on their computer, but it has been updated since and they are still using the old one? Students subsequently end up submitting and using different versions of documents…

Ideally, your LMS will provide you with one central location to store all files and content that need to be accessed by both trainers and students. Even better if these resources are not downloadable PDFs, but content that is on the system as this provides additional control over the information and makes sure what is being accessed is the most current and up-to-date version approved by the RTO. Once a file is downloaded or printed, it is uncontrolled, and cannot be recalled or changed. An LMS provides a platform for hosting this information and retracting information when necessary.

A key feature to look for in an LMS is the ability to ‘roll back’ content pages to view previous versions and see the changes that have been made, and to be able to ‘lock down’ pages so trainers or others cannot change the content without the appropriate approval processes taking place.

Multiple Submission Formats

One of the Principles of Assessment is Flexibility. This is reflected in what we need in our LMS – flexibility in the types of assessment that can be conducted. Many systems will restrict the assessment to be based on quiz tools or other automated assessments. Sometimes there is the ability to have students upload a file for assessment, and this is imperative as many VET programs will include the provision of documented evidence such as projects and portfolios. An ‘upload’ option provides the flexibility to manage quite a few different formats of assessment.

However, also what needs to be considered is the ability to provide feedback to the learner and incorporating marking checklists/decision making tools. Not all systems will allow this, and this is where the ‘cheaper’ public sign-up sites differ to the more expensive Software as a Service (Saas) platforms that have a full onboarding system.

When it comes to compliant assessment, you should look at ensuring:

• Range of assessment types, such as:

  • Quizzes which may include multiple choice, single choice, hotspots, categorizing, ordering, table completion, matching, open text, stimulus.

  • File upload that allows for multiple files to be supplied (such as for a portfolio, or multiple logbooks.

  • Video assessment (or upload that will take a large enough video file) – do not rely on externally hosted video evidence as assessment. If this is to be kept as evidence of assessment, then the RTO needs to have control over the storage of the video. Therefore, students putting a video on YouTube and providing a link is not going to be suitable as the student can remove at any time without the RTO having any control over the retention of the evidence.

  • Observations which may be a non-submit assessment (no submission required by the student, but the assessor can grade it) along with a way for the assessor to either upload a decision-making tool (observation checklist) or mark this on the system.

• Option for multiple submissions (of all assessment types) so the student can’t have multiple attempts. Alternatively, additional assignments may be set up for subsequent submissions.

• Decision-making tools are either built into the system or as a file that the assessor can upload as a document to support the assessment.

• The ability for the assessor to provide specific feedback (preferably annotate the assessments) with the ability to provide overall written, audio or video feedback to the student.

• Flexibility to remove students from some assessments as they may have credit transfer or RPL for some units.

Validation and Retention

Getting ready to undertake systematic validation activities should be a simple and straightforward process in terms of gathering the evidence to be reviewed. With a paper-based system, it can be the case that the RTO Manager is chasing trainers to get their scanning or filing up to date to make sure the evidence is available for validation. I have been to RTOs and witnessed piles of documents waiting to be scanned and uploaded to student files. What is wrong with this?

• Scanning pages and saving them to the incorrect student file. At validation when the file is reviewed only part of the evidence for a particular student can be located as the wrong one has been filed (and impossible to sort through every other student folder to find the correct one).

• Pages being missed through the scanning process, and therefore critical evidence missing within a submission.

• Piles being missed altogether and evidence not being available at all.

• Scanning is slow and expensive. The cost of admin wages for scanning and printing are probably higher than the cost of the LMS subscription!

What should happen when getting ready for validation? The RTO Manager (or lead validator) should be able to log on to the system, search the student’s name, access their portfolio and all evidence, and validate what is there. By submissions being made directly on the system and assessor decisions recorded on the system means that there is no downtime between the completion of assessment and the storing of evidence.

Evidence should also be available for a minimum of 6 months from the judgement being determined (longer if there are funding arrangements involved). Paper-based systems take up space, and these records need to be kept. RTOs are left with the choice between expensive floor space or scanning and saving. By assessing directly on an LMS both items are eliminated, and records are stored indefinitely, instantly searchable.

Stay Tuned!

These three areas of version control, assessment and validation are only a few of the overall features to look for when selecting an LMS. Part 3 of this series will go further into the monitoring of student progress and administrative information.