Microsoft Word - bIssue75-FullJun22.docx
Journal of Education, 2019
Issue 75, http://journals.ukzn.ac.za/index.php/joe doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i75a06
Online ISSN 2520-9868 Print ISSN 0259-479X
Compliance with legislative framework in implementing
recognition of prior learning (RPL) by South African library
and information science (LIS) schools
Ike Hlongwane
Department of Information science, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa
http://orcid.org/0000 0003-2224-1238
(Received: 11 September 2018; accepted: 24 April 2019)
Abstract
RPL is defined broadly as the principles and processes through which prior experiences, knowledge, skills, and
attitudes acquired outside the formal learning programme are recognised and assessed for purposes of
certification, alternative access and admission, and further learning and development (South African
Qualifications Authority (SAQA) 2013). In this paper, I highlight the importance of an enabling environment in
the development and implementation of RPL in library and information science (LIS) in South Africa. The
SAQA RPL policy (2002) makes it explicit that “an enabling environment” (p. 18) demonstrating commitment
to RPL is essential. It is evident from the document that unless proper policies, structures, and resources are
allocated to a credible assessment process, it can easily become an area of contestation and conflict. In my
study, I adopted a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods which involved the use of questionnaires
and document analysis to collect data. I found that there are islands of good practice in terms of compliance with
the legislative framework in implementing RPL in South African LIS schools. I recommend, among other
things, that the Department of Higher Education (DHE) together with the Council on Higher Education (CHE)
and SAQA conduct regular monitoring and evaluation processes of RPL implementation in LIS schools to
encourage compliance with prevailing legislative frameworks. Further, periodic RPL accreditation processes
could also be used to great effect to ensure that LIS schools comply, failing which, their accreditation to offer
RPL services could be reviewed. This will help create an enabling environment, which is a prerequisite for an
effective and credible recognition of the RPL process.
Keywords: Recognition of prior learning (RPL), legislative framework for RPL, library and information science
(LIS) schools, South Africa, South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) RPL policy.
Introduction
RPL is defined broadly as the principles and processes through which prior experiences,
knowledge, skills, and attitudes acquired outside the formal learning programme are
recognised and assessed for purposes of certification, alternative access and admission, and
further learning and development (SAQA, 2002, 2013). RPL is a globally lauded
phenomenon that provides access to learning programmes in the Higher Education and
78 Journal of Education, No. 75, 2019
Training sector on a continuum that quantifies informal education by apportioning credit
value as applicable in the academic or formal education realm. In South Africa, SAQA’s RPL
policy (2013) advocates commitment to the principles of equity and redress and it identifies
two RPL target groups.
The first one is the access group that is made up of
• under-qualified adult learners wanting to up-skill and improve their qualifications;
and
• candidates lacking minimum requirements for entry into a formal learning
programme.
The second one is the redress group that is made up of
• workers on the shop floor or in the workplace who may be semi-skilled and even
unemployed and who may have worked for many years but were prevented from
developing because of restrictive past policies; and
• candidates who exit formal education prematurely and who have, over a number of
years, built up learning through short learning programmes.
The significance of RPL as a catalyst for career and professional development is underscored
in the literature. For instance, it has emerged that RPL can be used as a mechanism to offer
non-traditional learners such as workers, adult learners, and community workers access to
learning opportunities (Bowman et al., 2003; Wheelahan et al., 2003). In the LIS sector in
South Africa, RPL can be used for up-skilling. The benefit of this is that it promotes
professional development but at the same time enhances promotional opportunities for LIS
staff by enabling them to migrate from paraprofessional to professional roles. Owing to past
injustices, the South African Higher Education and Training sector is characterised by
inequalities of resource allocation and of learning opportunities. Recognition of RPL was
established through the National Qualification Framework (NQF), to address the previous
inequalities in this sector. LIS schools could use this approach to offer experienced but
unqualified library workers opportunities for progressive professional development and
career growth.
South Africa is recuperating from the disparities of apartheid and RPL is one of the tools that
can be used to address past inequalities. However, although the intention behind RPL is good,
there is evidence that its success can be compromised if it is not properly implemented
(SAQA, 2013). This is why I support the thesis that the implementation of RPL has to be
preceded by, or juxtaposed with, the establishment of an enabling environment characterised
by context specific RPL provision that takes into account policies, structures, and available
resources to ensure successful implementation. Based on SAQA’s Criteria and Guidelines for
Assessment of NQF registered Unit standards and Qualifications (2001), several questions
must be answered in order to determine the extent to which LIS in South Africa complies
with legislative and regulatory frameworks relating to RPL that will ensure successful
implementation. These include whether
Hlongwane: Compliance to legislative framework . . . 79
• institutional RPL policies are based on the SAQA policy (2013);
• there is an institutional will to open up access to diverse learners;
• LIS schools are committed to NQF principles of equity/redress and inclusion;
• information about RPL services is widely available to potential candidates;
• admission procedures in LIS schools are inclusive of non-matriculated learners; and
• there are formal articulation agreements within the broader LIS sector.
Post-1994, the LIS profession has been dramatically affected by the restructuring of the South
African Higher Education and Training sector because of changes to national policy
regarding primary, secondary, and higher education (Ocholla & Bothma, 2007; DAC, 2010).
In particular, the drop in student numbers resulted in a reduction in the number of institutions
offering programmes in LIS from 18 schools in 2000 to the current 10 (Ocholla & Bothma,
2007; Department of Arts and Culture (DAC), 2010). The University of Johannesburg (UJ)
and Stellenbosch University (SU) refocused and rationalised their qualifications by moving
away from traditional library-oriented education into information technology (IT) and
information and knowledge management fields (DAC, 2010). There are currently 10 LIS
schools in South Africa.
• Durban University of Technology (DUT),Department of Information and Corporate
Management (Library and Information Studies & Office Management and
Technology)
• University of Cape Town (UCT), Library and Information Studies Centre (LISC)
• University of Fort Hare (UFH), Department of Library and Information Science
• University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), Department of Information Studies
• University of Limpopo (UL), Department of Information Studies
• University of Pretoria (UP), Department of Library and Information Science
• University of South Africa (UNISA), Department of Information Science
• University of Zululand (UZ), Department of Information Studies
• Walter Sisulu University (WSU), Department of Library and Information Science
• University of Western Cape (UWC), Department of Library and Information Science.
Different institutions offer different entry routes to the LIS profession (Ocholla & Bothma,
2007; Nassimbeni & Underwood, 2007). Institutions such as UNISA, UFH, UP, UWC, and
UZ offer an undergraduate qualification at entry level. Other institutions such as UCT and
UKZN offer a postgraduate diploma towards a professional career in the LIS sector. UZ, UL,
UNISA, UWC, and WSU also offer both an undergraduate degree and a postgraduate
diploma.
LIS schools in South Africa are struggling to survive as a result of declining numbers in
student enrolment because of less interest in librarianship as a career and the impending
retirement of incumbent scholars (Ocholla & Bothma, 2007; Stilwell, 2009; DAC, 2010). In
their struggle for survival, South African LIS schools are making changes to their courses and
positioning themselves in various schools, departments, and faculties (Ocholla & Bothma
2007).
80 Journal of Education, No. 75, 2019
Using RPL, LIS schools can tap into a large pool of many library practitioners who are either
unqualified or under-qualified (Davids, 2006, cited in Hlongwane, 2014, p. 2). When these
people achieve recognised status “at a level of assistant, paraprofessional or professional”
(Underwood, 2003, p. 53), the shortage of qualified staff in the LIS sector, as noted by
Stilwell (2009), can be alleviated and this will also increase, in part, opportunities for the
survival and viability of LIS schools in the South African Higher Education and Training
sector.
Problem and purpose of the study
One of the key drivers for RPL is its capacity to act as a mechanism for social inclusion by
improving opportunities for people to use their informal learning to gain recognised
qualifications (Young, 2001). To effectively implement the RPL mechanism in higher
education and training, an enabling environment demonstrating commitment to relevant
legislative and regulatory frameworks with regard to admission policies, structures and
resources including willingness to open up access, commitment to NQF principles of
equity/redress and inclusion, availability of RPL services and formal articulation agreements
within the broader LIS sector, needs to be created (SAQA, 2002; 2013). Several studies have
been conducted on RPL in the LIS field in South Africa. However, no study appears to have
been conducted to determine compliance with the legislative framework in implementing
RPL in the LIS sector. This is, therefore, what I sought to determine in this study.
The main objectives of the study were
• to examine the use of SAQA policy (2013) in the development of institutional RPL
policies;
• to find out whether there was an institutional will to open up access to diverse
learners;
• to establish the commitment of LIS schools to NQF principles of equity/redress and
inclusion;
• to determine the availability of information of RPL services to prospective candidates;
• to examine admission procedures in LIS schools; and
• to determine the existence of formal articulation agreements in the broader LIS sector.
Literature review
The fundamental prerequisite for an effective and credible implementation of an RPL
programme is the establishment of an enabling environment (SAQA policies, 2013). As in
other countries such as Australia and New Zealand, the development of a national
qualifications systems has been a driver of RPL (Australian qualifications framework, AQF,
Advisory Board, 2002; New Zealand Qualification Authority, NZQA, 2003). However,
despite widespread interest and activity in RPL in higher and further education sectors in the
US, there is no national RPL policy in their national education system or framework
(International Labour Organisation, ILO, 2005). In addition, in the UK, there is no national
Hlongwane: Compliance to legislative framework . . . 81
RPL policy as such but the Quality Code (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education,
QAA, 2013) covers the assessment of RPL. Furthermore, the implementation of RPL or Prior
Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR), as it is known in Canada, is within existing
educational, professional, and employment systems (Van Kleef, 2011).
In South Africa, and, as mentioned earlier, in Australia and New Zealand, various laws and
regulations have been promulgated in order to support the establishment of an enabling
environment for the development of a comprehensive RPL policy.
The South African Qualifications Authority Act 58 of 1995 was the key driver in assisting
individuals who were previously denied access to higher education and training because of
the apartheid system. In the main, this Act was established with a view to develop and
implement the NQF, which inherently includes RPL. The RPL principle is fundamental to the
development of new education and training systems based on the NQF (SAQA, 2002) so that,
following Harris (1997), national qualifications and outcome-based unit standards can be
registered. Through RPL, the NQF is intended to give previously disadvantaged individuals
much needed opportunities for lifelong learning. According to Du Pré (2004), these
individuals are increasingly gaining access to higher education and training through this RPL
mechanism.
The Skills Development Act of 1998 was intended to provide an “institutional framework to
develop and improve the skills of the South African workforce” (Department of Labour,
1998b, p. 2). The importance of improving the employment prospects of people who were
previously disadvantaged by unfair discrimination and to redress those disadvantages through
training and education is explicitly stated in this act. This Act also formed the foundation for
the establishment of Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs). Among their other
functions, the SETAs facilitate the development and implementation of RPL policies in all
economic sectors. As Education, Training and Quality Assurance (ETQA) mechanisms, the
SETAs are also responsible for ensuring quality RPL outcomes in these sectors.
The Employment Equity (EE) Act 55 of 1998 (Department of Labour, 1998a) stated that
employers have a duty to eliminate unfair discrimination. The Act also provides a framework
through which the employer can attract, develop, advance, and retain his or her human
resource talent. This Act recognises that
• as a result of apartheid and other discriminatory laws and practices, there are
disparities in employment, occupation, and income within the national labour market;
and
• these disparities create pronounced disadvantages for certain categories of people and
these disadvantages cannot be redressed simply by repeating discriminatory laws.
The purpose of the EE Act (1998) is to achieve equity in the workplace by
• promoting the constitutional right of equality, and the exercise of true democracy;
• eliminating unfair discrimination in employment;
82 Journal of Education, No. 75, 2019
• ensuring that employment equity is implemented to redress the effects of
discrimination;
• achieving a diverse workforce that is broadly representative of the South African
population;
• promoting economic development and efficiency in the workforce; and
• meeting the Republic of South Africa’s obligations as a member of the International
Labour Organisation (ILO).
In the Further Education and Training (FET) Act of 1998, RPL is seen as a mechanism to
gain access to programmes in the FET band. This Act is underpinned by principles of redress
and access in education. However, the 2009 report by the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD) raised cautious optimism about the implementation of
RPL in the FET sector. Among other things, the report asserted that RPL was practised only
on a limited scale, and that there was no formal policy governing RPL in this sector.
The Department of Education White Paper (1997) was promulgated with the aim of
transforming the education landscape in South Africa. It was hoped that by eliminating social
imbalances through higher education, South Africans would be empowered to engage
effectively in globalisation (Kistan, 2002). The Council on Higher Education (CHE) report
(2001) emphasised the importance of this White Paper by stating that it created a system in
which “higher education could provide greater access to learning opportunities at various
levels, across a range of programmes and entry points” (p. 9). As a basis for social justice,
this will lead to the creation of opportunities for individuals who have been educationally
and/or academically disenfranchised by the previous apartheid dispensation.
To standardise the implementation of RPL in the Higher Education and Training sector
SAQA, in consultation with CHE and the Department of Higher Education, developed an
RPL national policy. This national policy underscores the need for universities to establish
discipline specific RPL policies for various academic departments or schools. Given that the
development of RPL in South Africa is sector specific to allow for institutional autonomy and
contextual practices, the establishment of an enabling policy environment in LIS schools will
not only improve efficiency in RPL provision but will also enhance the credibility of the RPL
assessment process.
Research methodology
In this study, following Creswell (2014), I used a combination of quantitative and qualitative
methods to collect data from all the 10 LIS schools in South African Higher Education. The
data was collected from the respondents through a survey questionnaire based on the list of
statements (themes) taken from the SAQA RPL policy document (2013), and content analysis
(Bryman, 2011) of the institutional RPL policies. I triangulated the results from the survey
questionnaire with content analysis results in order to supplement the survey results and thus
provide greater richness and depth to the findings of the study. The respondents included the
head/chair of departments/schools, senior lecturers, lecturers, junior lecturers, and RPL
Hlongwane: Compliance to legislative framework . . . 83
officials because of their knowledge and experience of RPL practices. The documents that
were analysed included policy documents from the Higher Education and Training National
Department as well as related institutional documents. A total of 76 respondents were
targeted; these consisted of 10 RPL officials and 66 academic staff recommended by the
heads/chairs of the schools/departments. Of the RPL officials, five did not respond along with
three academic staff. As a result, there were 68 respondents: five professors; one associate
professor; 44 senior lecturers; 13 lecturers; and five RPL officials.
Findings
This section presents in a thematic mode integrated findings yielded by questionnaires and
the content analysis of institutional RPL policies. The variables measured by the study are
key constructs for facilitating or enabling an RPL policy environment. Table 1 below
indicates the percentages of respondents who agreed with each statement and the number of
institutions that had policies that reflected these statements.
Table 1: RPL Policy environment
Statement
Institutional
policies
Respondents
Use of SAQA RPL policy (2013) in the development of
institutional RPL policies
100.0% (10) 94.1% (64)
Institutional will to open up access to diverse learners
100.0% (10) 88.1% (59)
Commitment of LIS schools to NQF principles of
equity/redress and inclusion
100.0% (10) 70.6% (48)
Availability of information of RPL services to prospective
candidates
100.0% (10) 60.3% (41)
Admission procedures in LIS schools that included RPL
70.0% (7) 55.9% (38)
Formal articulation agreements regarding RPL within the
broader LIS sector
- 13.2% (9)
Discussion
Use of SAQA RPL policy (2013) in the development of institutional RPL policies
There was an indication in this study that RPL policies in the different universities where the
LIS schools are located were based on the SAQA policy (2013) as required by the SAQA Act
of 1995. The analysis of the institutional RPL policy documents further indicated that, in
84 Journal of Education, No. 75, 2019
addition to the SAQA Act of 1995 and related Acts, six out of ten institutional policy
frameworks make reference to several regulations and Acts that capture the importance of
RPL in the South African Higher Education and Training sector. These Acts and regulations
include the Employment Equity Act (Act 55 of 1998), Skills Development Act (Act 97 of
1998), Higher Education Act of 1997, and the National Plan for Higher Education (2001).
Using SAQA policy (2013) guidelines in the formulation of institutional RPL policies and the
inclusion of related Acts and regulations not only aims to help standardise RPL practice in
the LIS sector but also creates an enabling environment for effective and efficient RPL
practice in LIS schools in South Africa. Standardisation of RPL practices is essential if we
are to avoid ad hoc procedures that will compromise academic standards, articulation
opportunities, academic ethos, throughput, and pass rates.
Institutional will to open up access to diverse learners
As indicated earlier, one of the main purposes of RPL in South Africa is to open up access to
education and training and to effect the redress of past injustices. In the legislation,
regulations, and criteria and guidelines documents (SAQA, 2013), RPL is put forward as one
of the key strategies to ensure equitable access to higher education and training. In addition,
RPL is seen as one of the mechanisms with the potential to ensure redress of past unjust
educational practices in South Africa. The findings of the study indicate that 88.1% of the
respondents acknowledged that there was institutional understanding, leadership, and will to
support LIS schools to open up access to diverse learners who display diverse needs and
capabilities. The commitment of institutions was reflected in all the institutional RPL policy
documents and this was also confirmed by most respondents (88.1%) from the different LIS
schools. There seemed to be greater acknowledgement (88.1%) in the LIS schools of RPL as
a tool of access to learning in higher education. However, a few respondents (11.9%)
indicated that the institutional standpoint on RPL was not very positive.
Commitment to the principles of equity/redress and inclusion
The content analysis of the institutional RPL documents found that, in principle, there was
reference to equity, redress, and inclusion in all the documents. However, when asked about
commitment to the principles of equity, redress, and inclusion, approximately 70.6% of the
respondents indicated that RPL procedures, processes, and practices complied with SAQA
RPL policy (2013) requirements. This show of commitment to the principles of
equity/redress will benefit potential RPL candidates in terms of access to higher education
and training.
Availability of information of RPL services to prospective candidates
RPL providers such as universities and/or academic departments are required to provide
potential RPL candidates with information relating to the general overview of RPL services,
details of costs, guidelines for collecting evidence, and particulars about the application
process (SAQA, 2013). In addition, the would-be implementers, as required by the policy, are
supposed to inform clients about RPL prior to, and on enrolment. The results of the study
Hlongwane: Compliance to legislative framework . . . 85
indicated that only 60.3% of the respondents agreed that information about RPL services was
widely available to potential candidates. However, only half (50%) of the institutional RPL
policy documents analysed contained promotional information about RPL assessment.
Overall, there seemed to be low levels of awareness about RPL services and their benefits in
LIS schools in South Africa. RPL service providers or training organisations have different
views on RPL applicability and implications.
• There is a lack of clarity between the institution and the various departments on the
responsibility to market RPL;
• there is fear that RPL is a political prescript that is likely to compromise academic
standards;
• RPL outcomes are not valued as equal to formal training outcomes;
• confidence to undertake the process is lacking, and knowledge and understanding of
the merits of RPL are lacking; and
• there is a lack of institutional leadership and commitment.
The downside to ineffective publicising of RPL is that the uptake will be low since the
intended beneficiaries may not know about the possibilities and opportunities available to
them. This means that RPL service providers may be perpetuating social exclusion and
defeating their own mandate of upholding social justice. It has emerged in the literature that
there is low RPL uptake in the Higher Education and Training sector. The RPL phenomenon
still needs to be publicised vigorously to create awareness and understanding especially in
developing countries like South Africa where there is a dire need for social transformation.
Admission procedures in LIS schools which included RPL
The results of the survey indicated, on the one hand, that the admission procedures of 6 out of
10 LIS schools (55.9%) were not inclusive of non-matriculated learners. On the other, the
institutional RPL document analysis revealed that seven out of 10 (70%) RPL policies used
by LIS schools made reference to this aspect. What these results show is that commitment to
the principles of equity/redress (70%) as reflected in the institutional RPL policy documents
does not, in practice, translate into the implementation of admission procedures that are
inclusive of non-matriculated learners.
Formal articulation agreements regarding RPL in the broader LIS sector
In this study, the survey results indicated that only 13.2% of the respondents acknowledged
that formal articulation agreements among LIS schools exist while none of the institutional
RPL policy document (0.0%) reflected any formal articulation agreements among them. The
significance of formal articulation agreements among LIS schools lies in ensuring that there
is recognition of RPL results/outcomes in the LIS sector to enhance student mobility. Despite
13.2% of the respondents indicating that there were formal articulation agreements among
LIS schools, the results are a clear indication of deviation from the SAQA RPL policy (2013)
which requires LIS schools to establish formal articulation agreements among themselves in
relation to the chosen field of learning and qualifications.
86 Journal of Education, No. 75, 2019
Conclusions
In my study, I found out that there are islands of good practice in terms of compliance with
all the legislative framework themes discussed above regarding the implementation of RPL in
South African LIS schools but there are very few formal articulation agreements regarding
RPL in the broader LIS sector.
I recommend that the Department of Higher Education, together with CHE and SAQA,
conduct regular monitoring and evaluation processes of RPL implementation in LIS schools
to encourage compliance with prevailing legislative frameworks. Further, periodic RPL
accreditation processes could also be used to great effect to ensure that LIS schools comply,
failing which their accreditation to offer RPL services could be reviewed. This will help
create an enabling environment, which is a prerequisite for an effective and credible
recognition of the RPL process in LIS schools. This will take greater cooperation among all
stakeholders if we are to create an enabling environment for the implementation of RPL in
the South African Higher Education and Training sector, including LIS schools.
References
Australian Qualifications Authority (AQF) Advisory Board. (2002). Australian qualifications
framework implementation handbook (3rd ed.). Carlton South, Victoria, AU: AQF
Advisory Board.
Bowman, K., Clayton, B., Bateman, A., Knight, B., Thomson, P., Hargreaves, J., & Enders,
M. (2003). Recognition of prior learning in the vocational education and training
sector. Adelaide, AU: National centre for vocational education research (NCVER).
Bryman, A. (2011). Business research methods (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Council for Higher Education (CHE). (2001). A new academic policy for programmes and
qualifications in higher education. Pretoria, RSA: CHE.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Department of Arts and Culture (DAC) and National Council for Library and Information
Services (NCLIS). (2010). The demand for the skills and the education and training
currently provided by higher education institutions for librarians, archivists, records
managers and other information specialists. Retrieved from
http://dac.gov.za/publications/reports/2010/Final%20Report%2015%20March201pdf
Department of Education. (1998). Further Education and Training Act, no. 98 of 1998.
Pretoria, RSA: Government Printer.
Hlongwane: Compliance to legislative framework . . . 87
Department of Labour. (1998a). Employment Equity Act, no. 55 of 1998. Pretoria, RSA:
Government Printer.
Department of Labour. (1998b). Skills Development Act, no. 97. Pretoria, RSA: Government
Printer.
Du Pré, R. (2004). Coping with changes in higher education in South Africa. Retrieved from
http://face.stir.ac.uk/paper101-RoydePre 000.htm
Harris, J. (1997). The recognition of prior learning (RPL) in South Africa: Drifts and shifts in
international practices: Understanding the changing discursive terrain. Cape Town,
RSA: Department of adult education and extra-mural studies, University of Cape
Town.
Hlongwane, I. K. (2014). Recognition of prior learning (RPL) implementation in library and
information science (LIS) schools in South Africa (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
University of South Africa, Pretoria, RSA.
International Labour Organisation (ILO). (2005). Skills, knowledge and employability:
Recognition of prior learning policy and practice for skills learned at work. Skills
working paper no. 21. Geneva, CHE: ILO.
Kistan, C. (2002). Recognition of prior learning: A challenge to higher education. South
African Journal of Higher Education, 16(1), 169–173.
Nassimbeni, M., & Underwood, P. G. (2007). Two societies: Duality, contradictions and
integration: A progress report on South Africa. The International Information and
Library Review, 39(2), 166–173.
New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA). (2003). Prior learning for learners.
Wellington, NZ: NZQA.
Ocholla, D., & Bothma, T. (2007). Trends, challenges and opportunities for LIS education
and training in Eastern and Southern Africa. New Library World,108(12), 55–78.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2009). Recognition of
non-formal and informal learning: Country note for South Africa. Paris. FR: OECD.
Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/recognition
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). (2013). Safeguarding standards and
improving the quality of UK higher education. Gloucester, UK: QAA.
South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) Act. (1995). Pretoria, RSA: Government
Printer.
88 Journal of Education, No. 75, 2019
South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). (2002). Criteria and guidelines for the
implementation of the recognition of prior learning. Pretoria, RSA: Government
Printer.
South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). (2013). Revised RPL policy. Pretoria, RSA:
Government Printer.
Stilwell, C. (2009). Mapping the fit: Library and information services and national
transformation agenda in South Africa. Part II. South African Journal of Library and
Information Science, 75(1), 1–11.
Underwood, P. G. (2003). Recognition of prior learning (RPL) and the development of
library and information science profession in South Africa. South African Journal of
Library and Information Science, 69(1), 49–54.
Van Kleef, J. (2011). Canada: A typology of prior learning assessment and recognition
(PLAR) research in context. In J. Harris, M. Breier, & C.Wihak (Eds.), Researching
recognition of prior learning: International perspectives. Leicester, UK: National
Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE).
Young, M. (2001). The role of national qualifications frameworks in promoting lifelong
learning: Discussion paper. Paris: Organisation of Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD).
Wheelahan, L., Dennis, N., Firth, J., Miller, P., Newton, D., Pascoe, S., & Brightman, R.
(Eds.). (2003). A report on recognition of prior learning (RPL) policy and practice in
Australia. Australian Qualifications Framework Advisory Board (AQFAB), Lismore,
AU: Southern Cross University.