Introduction
In a recent VET Resources webinar, we explored some of the most frequently asked questions in the VET sector about assessment processes, validation flexibility, and compliance best practices.
Our panel included Mr Ben Thakkar, a respected authority on RTO compliance in Australia, and Shubbi, an experienced compliance practitioner known for her practical, audit-ready approach.
They shared actionable insights into:
Allowing electronic assessment submissions while meeting compliance requirements.
Applying flexibility in AQF statistical calculator settings.
Using a risk-based validation approach to strengthen quality assurance.
Q1: Can Students Complete and Submit Theoretical Assessments Electronically?
Short answer: Yes — provided it aligns with your RTO’s policies and procedures.
Key Compliance Points:
- Your Quality Management System (QMS) must explicitly allow electronic submission and storage of assessment evidence.
- All assessment records must be stored securely and remain retrievable for the required retention period.
- The submission method must meet all Rules of Evidence under the Standards for RTOs 2015.
Expert perspective:
There is no guideline that says you must store assessments as hard copies. It depends on how your processes are articulated and how you meet compliance requirements.” – Ben Thakkar
Shrubby added that whether assessments are electronic, paper-based, or blended, the priority is consistency, compliance, and clear documentation.
For templates and systems to manage electronic assessment processes, explore our RTO Compliance Documents.
Q2: Flexibility in the AQF Statistical Calculator for Validation
The AQF statistical calculator is a recommended tool for determining validation sample sizes. While its default settings are widely used, RTOs can adjust error levels and confidence levels based on risk and context.
Error Level:
- Default: 15% — suitable when most students are competent on the first attempt.
- Lower to 10% if:
- Many students require multiple attempts.
- You need greater accuracy in outcomes.
Confidence Level:
- Benchmark: 85% — indicates acceptable certainty in your validation results.
- Increase to 90% if:
- You have new or inexperienced trainers.
- Assessment tools or processes have recently changed.
- You are working in a high-risk training area.
Q3: Applying a Risk-Based Validation Approach
Shrubby reminded attendees that the AQF statistical calculator is not mandatory — other compliant sampling methods are allowed under the Standards for RTOs 2015.
When taking a risk-based approach, consider:
- Trainer and assessor experience.
- Past validation findings.
- Competency complexity and criticality.
- Volume of delivery for the unit.
“You can add flexibility to your validation process — just make sure it’s documented, justified, and compliant.” — Shrubby
If you need ready-made validation templates, see our Validation and Moderation Tools.
Best Practice Documentation for Validation Changes
Any adjustments to error or confidence levels — or the sampling method itself — should be:
- Documented in your validation plan.
- Supported by evidence such as past audit outcomes, industry consultation, and learner performance data.
- Reviewed periodically to ensure the changes are still appropriate.
For audit readiness, many RTOs use our RTO Compliance Checklist to ensure every step is recorded.
Key Takeaways for RTOs
- Electronic assessment submission is fully compliant if supported by policy, secure storage, and QMS processes.
- Error and confidence levels in the AQF statistical calculator can be adjusted based on risk and evidence — but changes must be documented.
- A risk-based validation approach ensures flexibility without compromising compliance.
- Always keep clear records explaining why changes were made for audit readiness.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes — provided your QMS permits it, evidence is stored securely, and requirements under the Standards are met.
Yes — adjust based on your risk profile and assessment data, but record the justification.
No — it is a recommended tool, but other compliant sampling methods are acceptable.
Next Steps for RTOs
- Review your QMS to ensure electronic submissions are supported.
- Audit your current validation approach and adjust error/confidence levels where appropriate.
- Implement a risk-based validation process using our audit-ready templates.
- Train your staff on compliance requirements for electronic assessments and validation flexibility.
Our RTO Assessment Tools and Validation & Moderation Templates can save you hours of preparation while keeping you compliant with ASQA’s expectations.
Call to Action
Stay informed and compliant with our RTO Compliance Newsletter. You’ll get:
- Updates on Standards for RTOs 2015.
- Free compliance checklists and tools.
- Invitations to exclusive training webinars and professional development events.
If you have questions about validation sampling, electronic assessment submissions, or risk-based compliance, contact our compliance experts today for tailored advice.
Disclaimer:
The information presented on the VET Resources blog is for general guidance only. While we strive for accuracy, we cannot guarantee the completeness or timeliness of the information. VET Resources is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. Always consult a professional for advice tailored to your circumstances.
