2. Martyn Webster
BSc (Comp) University of NSW
Corporate IT
Qantas & Fosters
First Strike Solutions
Customised MS-Access databases
Enquiry Mate for Trainers
VET Student Records System
3. Introduction
What’s in the NAT files?
Special rules for NSW DEC
New features of the APL page site
Reporting of non-funded students
AVETMISS 7: evolution or revolution?
What “National Student Identifier”?
Is the MySkills web site the ultimate answer?
4. Change is the only constant
I assume you are already experts
Not a comprehensive tutorial...
More a grab-bag of interesting special cases
..and then some musing about the future
5. NAT file structure
Under the bonnet
Provider Student No must be consistent
Location Id must also be consistent
15. Outcome Codes under AVETMISS 6.1
In NSW:
66 – Did not start
(blank) – Not yet available
70, 90, 52, 54 not valid for claims
Note the change in terminology for outcome 30
?
What happened to:
53 - Recognition of current competency granted
54 - Recognition of current competency not granted
18. Your self-validation is not your own
Claiming for groups of students
When has a unit really started?
TCID delay dilemma fixed
New rules for Credit Transfer
APL contract rules vs APL system rules
When the first assessment is also the last
Processing a withdrawal
Course/Site Identifiers
The “training plan completed” flag
Future funding models
19. Your self-validation is not your own
Every self-validation process is logged and
recorded for several years at least.
Those records can be used to evaluate your
administrative capability in retrospect.
More attempts and more errors are considered
a sign of administrative problems.
That record has been used in very superfluous
ways to influence funding allocations.
“Nothing was your own except the few cubic
centimetres inside your skull.”
George Orwell “1984”
20. Claiming for groups of students
DEC request that providers submit claims for
multiple students when possible.
Unless you have groups of students who
consistently complete (or fail to complete) units
on the same day, this is problematic.
Re-assessment, absences and other delays
make tracking the claim stages impractical.
Our advice is to not even try (in most cases).
21. When has a unit really started?
When the student has undertaken some
assessable activity... and you can prove it!
How to tell if a distance student has started a
unit or a course
Reporting all units as started in the initial claim
is very risky ... (even if it’s true).
22. TCID delay dilemma fixed
Initial claims due within 28 days if the later of:
The student starting a unit
OR
The funding being approved
(i.e. the TCID being allocated)
So that headache has been cleared up at least
23. New rules for Credit Transfer
Credit Transfer (outcome 60) is not a payable outcome
All stage payments will be reduced on a pro-rata basis (but
how is it calculated exactly?)
If CT is involved, the initial claim must include all units that
will be granted CT and all units.
Units not yet started must be given estimated future start
dates.
Refer to NSW Training Market: Fact Sheet #38
24. APL contract rules vs APL system rules
Two different sets of rules:
APL Contract Mid-way claim is due within 28 days of
completing an assessment activity in
half of the non-CT units in the course
APL Page Mid-way claim is LATE if not lodged
within 28 days of the start of the last
reported unit.
Only the APL Contract matters...
But easier if you can keep to the claim system rules too.
25. When the first assessment is also the last
A strategy to mitigate late lodgements due to remote or
external assessors delaying delivery of assessments:
• Designate a properly qualified “chief assessor”.
• Add a cover sheet to each assessment document.
• The “chief assessor” signs off and dates each outcome,
checking that everything has been done correctly and
perhaps moderating selected results.
• The sign-off date then becomes the official date the student
was deemed competent by the RTO, allowing you to avoid
late lodgements and also add rigour to your assessment
process.
26. Processing a withdrawal
Steps vary by state. In NSW...
• Any units partly completed given Withdrawn (40) outcome.
• Any units not started given a Did Not Start (66) outcome.
• Create a NAT00130 (Qualification) record with “N” in the
Certificate Issued field.
• Claims process returns a DROPOUT result... (harsh?)
27. Course/Site Identifiers
Allocated to one or more students with the same:
• Year of study
• Course (qualification code)
• Site (identified by a separately registered Site Id)
• Delivery method
They may be allocated by DEC or by the RTO via the APL
page, depending on the funding arrangements.
Added to the end of the NAT00120 record in NSW.
Booking Id is a related but different identifier.
28. The “training plan completed” flag
Another NSW specific addition to the NAT00120 records.
Indicates if a training plan has been fully developed.
Only required for apprenticeships/traineeship courses.
Can be “Y” or “N” in the initial claim.
Should be “Y” by the mid-way claim.
...but is anybody checking?
29. Future funding models
Fee-Help for VET at Cert III level coming... but when and how?
(Uses the HEIMS reporting system)
NWDF employer / ISC channelled funding models.
(Use adhoc monthly reporting systems on spreadsheets)
The controversial 'student-entitlement' model now ratified by
the NSSC. Debate over how to implement in each state.
The Victorian “adjustment” - seriously reduce funding hourly rate
for some (down to $1.50/hour) and increase others, but let the
providers set the actual price. TAFEs are doubleplusunhappy!
30. New students listed until the initial claim
Specify the units for a funded qualification
Course/Site Id self-creation and download
Correcting of student name (once only)
New up-to-date Fact Sheets and FAQs
32. Not happening in NSW
(neither ASQA or NSW DEC require it this year)
Annually in ACT
Quarterly in SA
Monthly in QLD
(some funding schemes require reporting of all activity)
Monthly CQR in SA and WA
It won’t happen overnight, but...
33. Removal of redundant statistical fields
Additional fields
XML format put on hold – too much change?
New conventions for unit code updates
Cracks in the competency identifiers?
34. Removal of redundant statistical fields
ASGC location codes officially ignored in AVETMISS 6.1
but most state funding bodies systems still expect it.
Many are already ignored due to accuracy issues...
and they can be derived from reference data anyway.
Candidates for removal:
ASGC location code (already gone in theory)
ANZSCO occupation code
Field of Education
Qualification Names & Unit/Module Names
(the codes should be enough)
35. Additional fields
Employer details
Existing worker flag
State student number (LUI, VSN)
Internal provider course code
Qualification start and end dates
Software name and version
36. XML format put on hold – too much change?
XML is the (relatively) new format for storing data in text files.
Widely used because it allows for forward and backward
compatibility of data and exchange of files across countries,
sectors, platforms and applications.
Even Office 2007 and 2010 use it (under the bonnet).
The change from fixed width text to XML may be too much of a
technical challenge.
It has now been ruled out for AVETMISS 7 but may be considered
again for future releases.
37. New conventions for unit code updates
NSSC decided that there were too many superficial changes
causing new competency codes after complaints from
providers.
ISCs directed to retain existing codes unless there is a
functional change to a unit. Newly created codes will not have
the letter suffix at all.
Some ISCs are doing this but others are not. There is some
confusion about the change because it has not been clearly
and widely explained.
Practitioners producing mapping documents not happy with
the loss of document version control.
38. Cracks in the competency identifiers?
The Certificate III in Plumbing horror story.
One unit was removed and another unit changed code (but not
content) to the code of the removed unit!
Is this the start of a break-down or just an isolated incident?
39. Student numbering is the new reality show
(the bureaucrats just can’t get enough of them)
NSI officially part of AQTF 2007
The NSI will cover the VET area only
Perpetually deferred
VSN experience revealed a few challenges
The NSI is the key enabling mechanism for
reform of the national VET records system
40. CQR systems operate in WA and SA
(all RTOs report monthly the essential data for all certificates and
statements issued)
NCVER now talking about extending MySkills
(to a national parchment register like CQR)
A national register would have many benefits
Fixes the “30-year retention” problem
Fixes the “forged parchment” problem
Fixes the “lost parchment” problem
Fixes the “missing statistical data” problem
Lower data collection burden than AVETMISS
41. Change is the only constant
My tips for keeping up to date...
Linked-In “The social network for grown-ups”
Subscribe to newsletters
DEC Workshops
HTAN: Your local RTO network
ACPET and VELG seminars & conferences
42. Please visit us at the Enquiry Mate for
Trainers display in the marketplace
Notas del editor
Based in home office in Coal Point
Also note that SA are adding certificate no and issue date to the NAT00130 files from 1 July
Offer to provide copy of the “Keeping up with VET” document – at EMT stall.
