There are two inter-related research questions guiding this research study, the first of which seeks to examine the values, beliefs and assumptions operating in Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), in Irish Higher Education (HE), specifically those of the key stakeholders, the Assessor, Mentor and Candidate. The second question seeks to examine the conditions necessary for the RPL process to function effectively. This research study takes a grounded theory approach to examine the values, beliefs, and assumptions of each of the actors in RPL. The conceptual framework employed for this research study develops Van-Kleef’s (2007) model of RPL to position values, beliefs, and assumptions at its core.

RPL is a cornerstone of lifelong learning provision, and a critical aspect of broadening participation through the acknowledgement of all forms of learning; prior formal, non-formal and informal. RPL provides a valuable way to serve the diverse communities in contemporary Europe, improving access to Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and/or providing for exemptions and grades within third level programmes (CEDEFOP, 2018; European Commission et al., 2016; Singh, 2015).

Recent lifelong learning and RPL policy discourse has championed a neo-liberal agenda to promote RPL and serve the needs of the economy. However, such rhetoric pays scant attention to the realities of RPL practice. To date, there is little research on the organisational cultural context operating in RPL, its impact on practices, and the philosophical positions within these, aspects of which inform the assessment itself (Travers, 2017; Hamer, 2016).

It is argued that making the values, beliefs, and assumptions in RPL explicit, might provide for an informed approach, one where the hegemonic influence of power held by the HE system is acknowledged (Friesen, 2011; Hamer, 2016; Harris, 2000). This research study is arguing that understanding the philosophical foundations in RPL provides for more equitable provision, where each actor’s voice is present and understood. It is envisaged that RPL provision will play a key role to enable access to a more diverse student body in the HEI’s of the future, to respond to the evolving lifelong learning needs of the community (CEDEFOP 2018; European Commission et al., 2016; Singh, 2015). RPL is very much an aspect of HE provision that connects with communities in the broadest sense, and as such is highly relevant in the European context (Singh, 2015). It operates at the boundaries of HEI’s and in doing so provides the catalyst to acknowledge all forms of learning (Harris, 2000). Understanding the values, beliefs, and assumptions of each actor in RPL is the first step to design a practice framework that can foreground the philosophical foundations present, so as to nurture a culture where each actor has the confidence and capability to deliver on their responsibilities in RPL (Friesen, 2011; Hamer, 2016).

The current study commenced in 2014 in Ireland and takes a critical constructivist grounded theory approach to examine the values, beliefs, and assumptions operating in RPL (Charmaz, 2006). Initial desk research was completed to identify the presence or absence of information on RPL on the HEI websites. The primary data is derived from 82 semi-structured interviews, which were gathered sequentially over three years, from 2014 to 2016. The data incorporates the views of 21 Mentors from 14 Irish HEI’s, 31 Assessors, and 30 past Candidates of RPL from one HEI. This research study is presently addressing the primary findings arising from these interviews. This research used Charmaz’s (2006) constructivist grounded theory approach which involved purposive and convenience sampling initially. As the interviews proceeded initial analysis of the data allowed for the development of theoretical sampling (Charmaz, 2006; Cohen et al., 2018). Firstly, open coding was carried out on the transcripts. The open codes were descriptive in nature and closely followed the interview questions (n=573 open codes). Secondly, the focused coding allowed for the identification of themes within the data. These themes formed tentative conceptual categories (n=5 focused codes). As the interviews proceeded, the tentative conceptual categories were confirmed over time to become conceptual categories with properties and definitions describing each one. Following Charmaz (2006), the research study used memos and also employed constant comparison of the data to support the data analysis progress the coding process. Analysis was an iterative process where memos’ captured observations and/or summarised key issues that arose in the interviews. As the interviews proceed, these memos were compared with other memos to capture patterns or links in the data. The theoretical sampling approach meant no further interviews were sought when the properties of the categories were saturated, and no new properties emerged. This research study used diagramming to visualise a hypothetical RPL process and integrated the memos with this (Charmaz, 2006, European Commission et al., 2016).

This paper presents the primary findings; 1. Values in RPL 2. Beliefs supporting lifelong learning and RPL 3. Assumptions in RPL 4. Challenges posed by RPL 5. Supports for RPL The values, beliefs, and assumptions in the primary findings represent the philosophical foundations operating in RPL, and understanding what these are can enable a more informed approach. Firstly, the three actors shared reasonably similar value systems, with honesty emerging as the value of primary importance. Also important were fairness, openness, equity, trust, cultural acceptance, and respect. In terms of beliefs, all agree that lifelong learning is valuable and that alternative pathways into HE are important. However, other beliefs contrasted between the actors. The assumptions present represent the dichotomy within RPL; some assumptions are about what RPL provides while others are about upholding the standards. Furthermore, RPL is described as a complex process. All comment that it is difficult for the Candidate to understand what is required in RPL and that the formality of the language employed can be difficult to interpret. Mentors and Candidates report that RPL takes more time than envisioned. The data also reveals that supports for RPL are essential. The actors universally call for resources and see this as a fundamental requirement in a HEI setting. Candidates and Assessors look for clear guidelines, while all seek a user-friendly approach, one that provides realistic advice for the candidate. Finally, Assessors and Mentors say that training for RPL should be available. The conclusions from the primary findings are that the range of values, beliefs, and assumptions expressed in this research study closely follows their role; whether it is assessment, mentoring support, or the applicant. The insight gained by understanding these perspectives may provide for more equitable processes that can acknowledge the various standpoints (Hamer, 2016).

Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory; a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage. Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2018) Research Methods in Education. 8th edition. New York: Routledge. CEDEFOP (2018) European Inventory on Validation of Non-Formal and Informal Learning; Country report Ireland, available: https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/country-reports/european-inventory-validation-non-formal-and-informal-learning-2018-update-ireland (accessed 12th November 2020). Friesen, N. (2011) ‘Endword: Reflections on research for an emergent field,’ in J. Harris, M. Brier & C. Wihak (eds.) Researching the Recognition of Prior Learning; International Perspectives, Leicester: NIACE, 325-328. Hamer, J. (2016) ‘Assessment Philosophy: A Critically Conscious Tool for Ethical Skills Recognition,’ PLA Inside Out: An International Journal on Theory, Research and Practice in Prior Learning Assessment. Harris, J. (2000) RPL: Power, pedagogy and possibility, Pretoria, Human Sciences Research Council. Singh, M. (2015) Global Perspectives on Recognising Non-formal and Informal Learning, Hamburg: Springer International Publishing, UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. Schein, E. (2004) Organizational Culture and Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Travers, N. (2017) ‘Inherent tensions within the practices of prior learning assessment at SUNY Empire State College.’ in: Jelly, K. & Mandell, A. (eds.) Principles, Practices and Creative Tensions in Progressive Higher Education. Rotterdam, Boston, Tapei: Sense Publishers, 215-241. Van Kleef, J. (2007) 'Strengthening PLAR: Integrating theory and practice in post-secondary education.' Journal of Applied Research on Learning, 1, 1-22.