Overall comparison between the current and draft revised standards
| Area
|
Current Standards | Draft Revised Standards | Similarities | Differences | Maps to the current standards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Training and Assessment |
Must be consistent with training packages and VET accredited courses; must enable learners to meet the requirements for each unit of competency or module. |
Must be engaging, well-structured, and aligned with training product requirements. |
Both emphasise alignment with training product requirements and the achievement of competency. |
The revised standards emphasise the quality of training delivery, including engagement and structure, which is an extension beyond the current standards' focus on consistency and meeting requirements. The revised standards also introduce new elements such as pacing and the engagement of training, which are not explicitly covered in the current standards. |
Clause 1.1-1.4 |
|
Industry Relevance and Engagement |
Must be informed by industry engagement; uses outcomes of industry engagement to ensure relevance.
|
Requires proactive engagement with industry to integrate feedback into training strategies.
|
Both require industry engagement to inform training and assessment practices.
|
The draft stresses more proactive and systematic engagement with industry.
The revised standards expand the scope of engagement to include not only industry but also employers and community representatives. Additionally, the revised standards appear to place more emphasis on the process of engagement and the direct application of current industry practices within training. |
Clause 1.5, 1.6
|
|
Learner Support
|
Identifies and provides educational and support services necessary for learners.
|
Identifies learners' support needs and ensures access to necessary services. |
Both require RTOs to determine and provide necessary support for learners. |
Similar requirements, though the draft may provide more explicit guidance on the types of support. |
Clause 1.7 |
| Assessment
|
Must comply with training packages or VET accredited courses and principles of assessment and rules of evidence. |
Must be fit-for-purpose, fair, and accurately reflect the learner's competency. |
Both set stringent requirements for assessment practices to be valid and reliable. |
The draft could offer a more detailed approach to how assessments should be developed and validated. |
Clause 1.8 |
| Validation of Assessment | Must systematically validate assessment practices and judgments. | Regular validation by competent individuals; systematic review process at least every five years.
|
Both require ongoing validation of assessments. | Draft might introduce more structured timelines and risk-based approaches for validation frequency.
|
|
| Trainer and Assessor Requirements | Trainers and assessors must have vocational competencies and current industry skills; must undertake professional development.
|
Credentialled individuals with current skills and industry knowledge must deliver training and assessment; ongoing professional development. |
Both require trainers and assessors to be adequately qualified and current with industry standards. |
The draft might have more emphasis on the "currentness" of skills and structured professional development.
|
|
| Industry Engagement
|
RTO uses a range of strategies for industry engagement.
|
Engagement with industry, employers, and community representatives is mandated. |
Both emphasise the importance of industry engagement.
|
Draft may specify more explicit expectations for the nature and extent of engagement.
|
|
| Recognition of Prior Learning | Offers recognition of prior learning.
|
Encourages recognition of prior learning with transparent processes based on evidence. | Both recognise and value prior learning in the assessment process.
|
Draft standards could provide clearer processes and consistency in recognising prior learning.
|
|
|
Governance and Administration |
Executive officers must have authority to ensure compliance; must meet financial viability and risk assessment requirements.
|
Leadership must commit to quality training and assessment; systematic monitoring and evaluation of performance against the standards. |
Both sets of standards emphasise the importance of strong governance and financial viability. | Draft standards may offer more detailed guidance on leadership roles and the nature of systematic evaluation.
|
Comparison in a detailed manner - Clause 1.1-1.4 (SRTOs 2015) to Clause 1.1 (Revised SRTOs)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Training and assessment strategies and practices are consistent with training packages and VET courses, enabling learners to meet unit requirements. | 1.1(a) | Training is consistent with the requirements of the training product. | Both require training to be consistent with the official training product requirements. | |
| - | - | 1.1(b) | Modes of delivery enable learners to attain skills and knowledge consistent with the training product. | Both standards emphasise the importance of the mode of delivery in achieving required skills and knowledge. | Revised standards explicitly mention the modes of delivery, suggesting a broader interpretation than just consistency. |
| - | - | 1.1(c) | Training is structured and paced for learner progression, with time for instruction, practice, feedback, and assessment. | - | New addition in revised standards emphasising the structure and pacing of training. No direct equivalent in the current standards. |
| - | - | 1.1(d) | Training facilitation techniques, activities, and resources engage learners and support understanding. | - | New addition in revised standards focusing on the engagement and motivation of learners through training techniques. No direct equivalent in the current standards. |
| - | The amount of training varies depending on the learner's existing skills, the mode of delivery, and work placement arrangements. | 1.1(e) | If work-integrated learning is required, it must enable attainment of necessary skills and knowledge. | Both mention the importance of work placement arrangements in learning. | The revised standards specify that such arrangements must allow for the attainment of necessary skills and knowledge. |
| 1.2 | The RTO determines the amount of training with regard to the learner's skills, the mode of delivery, and the proportion of qualification delivered. | - | - | Aligns with 1.1(b) and 1.1(c) in the revised standards. | Current standards explicitly mention the amount of training, which is not directly referenced in the revised standards. |
| 1.3 | Sufficient trainers, support services, learning resources, and facilities are required for training and assessment. | - | - | Implied in the revised standards but not explicitly stated. | The revised standards do not explicitly mention the sufficiency of trainers and resources, focusing more on the delivery and engagement quality. |
| 1.4 | The RTO must meet all requirements specified in the relevant training package or VET accredited course. | 1.1(a) | Training is consistent with the requirements of the training product. | Both require compliance with the training product requirements. | The revised standards have rephrased this requirement and placed it under a broader clause that also emphasises engagement and structure. |
Clause 1.5, 1.6 (SRTOs 2015) to Clause 1.2 (Revised SRTOs)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5 | Training and assessment practices are relevant to industry needs and informed by industry engagement. | 1.2 | The RTO engages with industry, employers, and community representatives to ensure relevant skills and knowledge. | Both emphasise the importance of industry engagement to ensure training and assessment practices are relevant and up-to-date. | The revised standards broaden engagement to include employers and community representatives, not just industry. |
| 1.6 | RTO uses industry engagement outcomes to ensure the relevance of training strategies, practices, and resources, as well as the skills of trainers and assessors. | 1.2(a) | Identifies how the RTO seeks advice and feedback from relevant industry, employer, and community representatives. | Both require an RTO to systematically use feedback to inform and update training and assessment practices. | The revised standards specify the process of seeking advice and feedback, rather than just the use of outcomes. |
| - | - | 1.2(b) | Uses the advice and feedback to inform changes to training and assessment strategies and practices. | Directly aligns with the purpose of 1.6 in the current standards. | No significant difference; both emphasise the importance of updating strategies and practices based on feedback. |
| - | - | 1.2(c) | Training reflects current industry practice. | Aligns with the intent of 1.5 and 1.6 to keep training relevant to industry needs. | The revised standards explicitly require training to mirror current industry practices, implying a more direct connection with up-to-date industry standards. |
Clause 1.8 (SRTOs 2015) to Clause 1.3 and 1.4 (Revised SRTOs)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.8 | The RTO's assessment system complies with training package or VET course requirements, Principles of Assessment, and Rules of Evidence. | 1.3 | The assessment system is fit-for-purpose and consistent with the training product. | Both clauses ensure the assessment system meets the requirements of the training package or VET course and are guided by quality principles. | The revised standard emphasises the fitness for purpose of the assessment system and the process of testing and refining assessment tools. |
| - | Principles of Assessment are Fairness, Flexibility, Validity, and Reliability. | 1.4(a) | Assessment aligns with principles of fairness, flexibility, validity, and reliability. | The principles of assessment are consistent across both sets of standards. | There is no significant difference, but the revised standards articulate the principles in a way that directly connects to the act of assessing. |
| - | Rules of Evidence are Validity, Sufficiency, Authenticity, and Currency. | 1.4(b) | Assessors make judgements based on validity, sufficiency, authenticity, and currency. | The rules of evidence remain consistent, with both requiring that assessment evidence must be valid, sufficient, authentic, and current. | The revised standards seem to focus more on the assessors' judgments being justified, while the current standards focus on the assurance that the learner's evidence meets these rules. |
| - | - | 1.3(b) | Assessment tools are tested to ensure they can be conducted according to principles of assessment and rules of evidence. | - | The revised standards introduce the concept of pre-testing assessment tools, which is not explicitly mentioned in the current standards. |
| - | - | 1.3(c) | Outcomes of testing inform changes to assessment tools. | - | The revised standards explicitly require the RTO to use the results of tool testing to make necessary adjustments, promoting a continuous improvement process for assessment tools. |
Clause 1.9 (SRTOs 2015) to Clause 1.5 (Revised SRTOs)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.9 | The RTO must have a systematic validation plan for assessment practices and judgements, detailing when and which products will be validated, who will participate, and how outcomes will be documented and acted upon. | 1.5(a) | Validation ensures consistent and valid assessment judgements in line with the training product and Standards. | Both clauses require systematic validation of assessment practices and outcomes to ensure consistency and validity. | The revised standards emphasise the consistency of valid assessment judgements and their alignment with the Standards. |
| 1.10 | Each training product is validated at least once every five years, with at least 50% validated within the first three years. | 1.5(b) | Validation occurs regularly and at least every 5 years, informed by various factors including risks and feedback. | Validation frequency is consistent, with a five-year minimum cycle for both. | The revised standards add that validation frequency should be informed by risks and feedback, indicating a more dynamic approach. |
| 1.11 | Systematic validation is undertaken by persons with relevant vocational competencies, current industry skills, knowledge in vocational teaching and learning, and specified credentials. | 1.5(d) | Validators must have industry competencies, practical industry knowledge, and specified credentials. | Both standards require validators to have industry-relevant skills and appropriate credentials. | The revised standards seem to add a practical understanding of current industry practices to the validators' requirements. |
| - | - | 1.5(e) | Validation outcomes are not solely determined by those who have designed or delivered the training or assessment. | - | This is a new addition in the revised standards, emphasising the independence of the validation process. |
| - | - | 1.5(f) | Outcomes of validation are used to inform revisions to the assessment system. | - | The revised standards explicitly state the use of validation outcomes for improving the assessment system. |
| - | - | 1.5(g)(i) | For qualifications enabling individuals to make assessment judgements, validation occurs after the first learner cohort completes. | - | This introduces a new requirement for timely validation following the first delivery of training that qualifies assessors. |
| - | - | 1.5(g)(ii) | Validators for such qualifications must be independent and have no involvement with the RTO's operations. | - | The revised standards specify the independence of validators, adding a layer of external scrutiny to the process. |
The comparison reveals that while both the current and revised standards mandate a systematic approach to the validation of assessment practices and judgements, the revised standards place a stronger emphasis on the quality assurance of the assessment system and independence of the validators. There is a clear intent in the revised standards to ensure that validation is not just a periodic compliance activity but an integral part of the continuous quality improvement of the RTO's assessment practices.
Clause 1.12 (SRTOs 2015) to Clause 1.7 (Revised SRTOs)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.12 | The RTO provides recognition of prior learning (RPL) to individual learners. | 1.7 | Learners are supported in seeking RPL or credit transfer to progress through their training. | Both clauses recognise and provide for the assessment of learners’ prior skills and knowledge. | The revised standards expand to include credit transfer and detail the evidence required for RPL and credit transfer, and the decision-making process. |
| - | - | 1.6(a) | The RTO must identify what is required to deliver the training product, including provisions made by the RTO or on its behalf. | - | The revised standard specifies the need to identify and ensure the provision of physical requirements for training. |
| - | - | 1.6(b) | Ensuring ongoing suitability and safety of provided facilities, resources, and equipment, as well as learner access to these. | - | This is a more detailed requirement in the revised standards that specifies not just the provision but also the ongoing suitability and safety. |
| - | - | 1.6(c) | Identifying and managing risks associated with facilities, resources, and equipment in work-integrated learning, work placements, or community-based learning. | - | The revised standards emphasise risk management in practical training environments outside the RTO's direct control. |
The comparison indicates that the revised standards have broadened the focus from learner support services to include the physical aspects of the training environment. While the current standards are concerned primarily with the support provided to learners to ensure they can meet the educational requirements, the revised standards have an additional focus on the safety, accessibility, and appropriateness of the physical facilities, resources, and equipment. This shift places an onus on the RTO to not only consider learner support in terms of educational services but also in terms of the physical provision for training and assessment activities.
Clause 4.1 (Current Standards) vs Clause 2.1 (Revised Standards)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1(a) | Accurately represents the services and training products on its scope of registration. | 2.1(a) | Ensures information given to learners is clear, accurate, and current. | Both emphasise the accuracy and representation of services and training products. | The revised standard adds the requirement for clarity and currentness of information. |
| 4.1(b) | Includes its RTO Code. | - | - | Both standards would still require identification of the RTO for transparency. | The revised standards do not explicitly mention the RTO Code. |
| 4.1(c) | Obtains consent for references to other organisations in marketing | - | - | The principle of consent for references likely remains implied. | This specific requirement is not detailed in the revised standards. |
| 4.1(d) | Uses the NRT Logo according to specified conditions. | - | - | The use of logos would still be subject to conditions for brand integrity. | The revised standards do not mention the NRT Logo. |
| 4.1(e) | Clarifies third-party recruitment arrangements. | 2.1(c)(i) | Details of any third-party arrangements are easily accessible to learners. | Both require clear communication regarding third-party arrangements. | The revised standard emphasises ease of access to this information. |
| 4.1(f) | Distinguishes between training delivered by the RTO and by third parties. | - | - | Both standards would naturally separate RTO from third-party delivery for clarity. | The revised standards do not explicitly state this distinction. |
| 4.1(g) | Distinguishes between nationally recognized training and other forms. | - | - | Recognition of the type of training provided is still important for both. | The revised standards do not explicitly distinguish the types of training. |
| 4.1(h) | Includes training product code and title from the National Register. | 2.1(c)(i) | Training product code and title, among other details, are easily accessible to learners. | Both require training product identification for learners. | The revised standard groups this with other critical information for learner access. |
| 4.1(i) | Markets only current training products on the scope of registration. | - | - | Both standards would not allow the marketing of outdated or irrelevant training products. | The revised standards do not mention marketing limitations. |
| 4.1(j) | Markets only outcomes confirmed by the industry regulator. | - | - | Both sets of standards are expected to market truthful outcomes. | The revised standards do not mention regulator-confirmed outcomes. |
| 4.1(k) | Includes details about financial support arrangements. | 2.1(c)(iii) | Information on fees, costs, payment terms, refund policies, and government subsidies are easily accessible to learners. | Both require disclosure of financial support and arrangements. | The revised standard emphasises the ease of access to this information. |
| 4.1(l) | Does not guarantee outcomes outside of RTO control. | - | - | The principle of not guaranteeing outcomes likely remains. | The revised standard does not explicitly mention guarantees. |
Clause 1.26 (Current Standards) vs Clause 2.1 (Revised Standards)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.26(a-d) | Ensures transition of superseded, deleted, or expired training products within specific timeframes. | 2.1(e) | Identifies changes that affect learners and informs them as soon as practicable. | Both address the need for RTOs to manage and communicate changes in training products to learners. | The revised standards focus on timely communication rather than specific timeframes for transitions. |
The revised standards seem to streamline the requirements into broader, more principle-based expectations, focusing on the clarity, accuracy, and accessibility of information rather than detailed, specific mandates. This could suggest a shift towards a more flexible framework that allows RTOs to adapt their information dissemination strategies to their unique contexts while still adhering to core principles of transparency and learner engagement.
Clause 5 (Current Standards) vs Clauses 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7 (Revised Standards)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.1 | Advises prospective learner about the training product appropriate to their needs considering existing skills and competencies. | 2.2 | Reviews skills and competencies prior to enrolment, advising on the suitability of the training product. | Both require assessment of the learner’s skills and advice on suitable training products. | The revised standard specifies language, literacy, numeracy, and digital literacy review. |
| 5.2 | Provides detailed information about the training product, services, learner and RTO obligations, rights, and other key details. | 2.3, 2.4 | Identifies training support needs and ensures reasonable access to trainers and assessors. | Both standards ensure learners are well informed about training and support services. | The revised standard includes assessing the effectiveness of training support and the range of access to staff. |
| 5.3 | Details fee information, consumer rights, and refund policies prior to enrolment. | - | - | Ensuring transparency in fee structure and refunds remains a core aspect. | Specific mention of consumer rights and statutory cooling-off periods is not explicit in the revised standards. |
| 5.4 | Notifies learners of any changes to agreed services, especially changes in third-party arrangements or ownership. | - | - | Both set the expectation of keeping learners informed about significant changes. | The revised standards do not detail how to handle changes in service agreements or third party arrangements. |
| - | - | 2.5 | Makes reasonable adjustments for learners with disabilities and reflects requirements of national disability law. | - | This is a new explicit requirement in the revised standards, focusing on inclusivity and legal compliance. |
| - | - | 2.6, 2.7 | Promotes wellbeing and diversity in the training environment and supports the wellbeing needs of learners. | - | These are new clauses in the revised standards, emphasizing a supportive and inclusive learning environment. |
The revised standards introduce a more holistic and inclusive approach, explicitly including provisions for assessing and supporting learners' language, literacy, numeracy, and digital literacy skills, as well as their wellbeing and diversity needs. While they retain the core intent of the current standards to inform and protect learners, they build upon this by requiring RTOs to demonstrate the effectiveness of support services and to foster an inclusive and safe training environment, particularly for learners with disabilities and young people.
Standard 6 (Current Standards) vs Clauses 2.8, 2.9 (Revised Standards)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1, 6.2 | Policies for managing complaints and appeals regarding the conduct of the RTO, its staff, or a third party; and requests for review of decisions by the RTO. | Both have mechanisms for handling complaints and appeals. | The revised standards do not specify separate policies for complaints and appeals but focus on a management system approach. | ||
| 6.3 | Policies ensure natural justice and procedural fairness, are publicly available, outline procedures, ensure acknowledgment and timely finalization, and allow for independent review. | 2.8(c)(i), 2.9(b)(i) | Complaints and appeals are managed with procedural fairness, and there are reasonable timeframes and avenues for further action. | Principles of fairness and timely response are maintained. | The revised standards emphasise a management system and continuous improvement, not just policy requirements. |
| 6.4 | If a complaint or appeal takes more than 60 days to resolve, the RTO must inform and regularly update the complainant or appellant. | Expectation of informing about delays is similar. | The revised standards do not specify a 60-day timeframe but focus on reasonable timeframes. | ||
| 6.5 | Records of complaints and appeals are maintained securely, outcomes are recorded, and potential causes are addressed to prevent recurrence. | 2.8(d), 2.9(c) | Outcomes of complaints and appeals are documented and communicated, and the feedback is used for continual improvement. | Both require documentation and use of outcomes for improvement. | The revised standards explicitly require communication of outcomes to relevant parties and a focus on continuous improvement. |
| 6.6 | Specific provision for enterprise RTOs and volunteer associations regarding their complaints and appeals policies. | This specific provision is not mentioned in the revised standards. |
The revised standards seem to integrate the complaints and appeals processes into a more cohesive system of feedback and improvement, rather than treating them as separate policies. There is a greater emphasis on using the outcomes from these processes to inform continuous improvement within the RTO. The detailed requirements of the current standards, such as specific timeframes and independent reviews, are streamlined within the revised standards to focus on fairness, accessibility, and the overall effectiveness of the complaint and appeal management systems
1.13-1.16 (Current Standards) vs Clauses 3.2, 3.3 (Revised Standards)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.13 | Trainers and assessors must have vocational competencies, current industry skills, and current knowledge and skills in vocational training and learning. | 3.3 | Training and assessment are delivered by people with current industry skills and knowledge relevant to the training product. | Both require current industry skills and vocational competencies for trainers and assessors. | Revised standards explicitly require maintaining a practical understanding of current industry practices. |
| 1.14 | Trainers and assessors must have specific training and assessment credentials. | 3.2(a) | Requires credentials as specified by the Credential Policy. | Both insist on specific credentials for trainers and assessors. | Revised standards refer to a Credential Policy for specifications, which may allow for more flexibility or updates without changing the standard itself. |
| 1.15 | Persons conducting assessments only must have specified credentials. | 3.2(b) | Where the Credential Policy allows working under direction, a system ensures quality and that such persons do not make assessment judgments. | Both mention credentials for assessors. | The revised standards address the possibility of persons working under direction and quality assurance. |
| 1.16 | Trainers and assessors must undertake professional development in vocational training and assessment. | 3.2(c) | Professional development to maintain current skills and knowledge in training and assessment is required. | Both require ongoing professional development. | The revised standards explicitly mention the need for engagement and support of learners as part of professional development. |
The current standards and the revised standards both emphasise the importance of trainers and assessors being adequately credentialed and possessing current industry skills and knowledge. The revised standards seem to focus more on the practical understanding of current industry practices and the importance of engaging and supporting learners. They also introduce a Credential Policy, which likely serves as a reference point for determining the necessary qualifications and may offer more detailed or updated guidance than a static standard. Additionally, the revised standards seem to offer a framework for oversight when industry experts are involved, ensuring quality training and assessment is maintained.
Standard 7 (Current Standards) vs Clauses 4.1 to 4.6 (Revised Standards)
| Clause (Current Standards) | Current Standards Description | Clause (Revised Standards) | Revised Standards Description | Similarities | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.1 | Executive officers or high managerial agents have authority to ensure compliance with RTO Standards and meet the Fit and Proper Person Requirements. | 4.4 | Fit and proper persons oversee the operations of the RTO and are regularly reviewed for their suitability. | Both require responsible individuals to be fit for their roles and to ensure RTO compliance. | Revised standards focus on regular reviews of these individuals' suitability. |
| 7.2 | RTO satisfies Financial Viability Risk Assessment Requirements. | 4.5(a) | RTO maintains financial viability with a monitored financial plan by the governing persons. | Both address financial viability and risk assessment. | Revised standards emphasise continuous monitoring and the governing persons' understanding of financial matters. |
| 7.3 | Fee protection requirements for prepaid fees exceeding $1500. | 4.5(b) | Systems in place for refunding prepaid fees if RTO is unable to deliver training. | Both include protections for prepaid fees. | Revised standards specify systems for refunds, implying a more structured approach to fee protection. |
| 7.4 | RTO holds public liability insurance. | Not explicitly mentioned | Not explicitly mentioned in the revised standards. | The current standard requires insurance coverage. | The revised standards do not explicitly mention insurance, which may be included in broader risk management or financial viability requirements. |
| 7.5 | RTO provides accurate and current information as per Data Provision Requirements. | Not explicitly mentioned | Not explicitly mentioned in the revised standards. | The current standard requires insurance coverage. | The revised standards do not explicitly mention data provision, which may be encompassed in broader quality and continuous improvement processes. |
| Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 4.1 | RTO is accountable for quality services and complies with Standards. | Not Applicable | This clause in the revised standards emphasises accountability for quality and compliance, which is an overarching theme rather than a direct counterpart to any specific clause in the current standards. |
| Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 4.2 | Leadership promotes a positive culture, recognising diversity, and ensuring integrity, fairness, and cultural safety. | Not Applicable | These points are new in the revised standards, focusing on organisational culture and ethical practices. |
| Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 4.3 | Clear definition and understanding of roles within the RTO supporting effective decision-making. | Not Applicable | This is a new addition in the revised standards, emphasising internal clarity and informed decision-making. |
| Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 4.6 | Systematic monitoring and evaluation to manage risks and support continual improvement. | Not Applicable | This is a new inclusion, focusing on systematic evaluation for risk management and improvement, which is not explicitly outlined in the current standards. |
The revised standards have a greater emphasis on regular review and monitoring, organisational culture, ethical considerations, and risk management, and continuous improvement. These changes suggest a shift toward a more proactive and systematic approach to governance and administration within RTOs.
According to our understanding, the remaining legislative requirements will be included in Compliance Requirements (a separate document) - important administrative requirements set out in a legislative instrument that support integrity in the sector and that RTOs must satisfy in order to maintain registration, including the requirement that the RTO cooperates with the VET Regulator and is legally compliant at all times.
