Fact Sheet: Assessment Validation

Validation is defined in the Registration Standards 2025 (2025 Standards) as meaning the review of the assessment system to ensure that:

1. assessment tools are consistent with the training product and the requirements set out in this instrument; and
2. assessments and assessment judgements are producing consistent outcomes.

Effective validation builds confidence among industry and regulators that graduates are genuinely competent and job ready and protects the integrity of qualifications.

Validation can be conducted prior to the use of the assessments, and after their use.  Pre-use validation is described as a ‘review’ in Outcome Standard 1.3, and post-use validation is outlined in Outcome Standard 1.5.

Review of Assessment Tools Prior to Use

Outcome Standard 1.3 requires RTOs to demonstrate that assessment tools are reviewed prior to use to ensure assessment can be conducted in a way that is consistent with the principles of assessment and the rules of evidence. This process can also be referred to as pre-use review or pre-assessment validation and is a critical component of an RTO’s assessment system.

The review of assessment tools prior to use (pre-use review) focuses on the design and readiness of assessment tools and ensures they can produce valid and reliable outcomes from the outset. It ensures that the tools:

• align with the training product requirements;
• are designed to meet the Principles of Assessment and Rules of Evidence;
• are clear, accessible and appropriate for the intended student cohort;
• include sufficient instructions for both assessors and students; and
• are supported by marking guides or criteria that enable consistent and accurate assessment judgements.

Pre-use review may involve mapping assessment tasks to training product requirements, testing tools with industry experts or assessors or piloting tools with a sample group. The outcomes of the review should be documented and used to inform any necessary changes to the assessment tools before they are used officially.

Post-use Validation

Validation is required for all assessment tools and practices, including those developed internally, purchased externally, administered by a third party, or used for Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL).

Outcome Standard 1.5 of the 2025 Standards requires RTOs to demonstrate:

• assessment practices and judgements are validated to ensure they are consistent with the training product requirements and comply with the 2025 Standards;
• every training product on the RTO’s scope of registration is validated at least once every five years and that validation occurs more frequently where risks to training outcomes are identified, changes to the training product occur, or relevant feedback is received from students, trainers, assessors or industry;
• that a risk-based approach is used to determine validation scope and sample size which considers risks to training outcomes, changes to the training product and feedback from students, trainers, assessors and industry;
• for qualifications or skill sets from the Training and Education Training Package that enable individuals to make assessment judgements validation must:
  • occur after the first cohort completes training and assessment; and
  • be conducted by an independent person who is not employed or subcontracted by the RTO and has no other involvement or interest in the RTO’s operations;
• validation must be undertaken by one or more persons who collectively have:
  • industry competencies, skills, and knowledge relevant to the training product;
  • a practical understanding of current industry practices; and
  • one of the credentials specified in the Credential Policy;
• in addition the person who designed or delivered the training or assessment must not solely determine the outcome of the validation; and
• outcomes of assessment validation must be used to inform changes and improvements to the assessment system.

The Credential Policy (Section 3) stipulates that validation must be conducted by individuals who collectively hold relevant vocational competencies, current industry skills, and the credentials specified. Importantly, the outcome of validation cannot be solely determined by someone who was involved in the delivery or assessment of the training product.

For certain training products, such as those from the TAE Training Package, validation must also involve an independent validator, who is a person not involved in the delivery or original assessment of the training product being validated and who has no other interest or role in the RTO’s operations. Independent validators provide objective insight and strengthen the credibility of validation outcomes. More information is available in the Fact Sheet: Trainer and Assessor Requirements.

Ultimately, validation supports continuous improvement by identifying strengths and areas for enhancement in assessment tools, processes, and assessor capability. Findings from validation activities should be documented and used to inform updates to training and assessment strategies, contributing to stronger student outcomes and audit readiness, not just for the training products that had been validated, but for other training products delivered and assessed by the RTO.

Validation Process Steps

A clear, structured, and documented process ensures that validation activities are systematic, consistent, and support continuous improvement. Below is an example of an approach RTOs can adopt and adapt to their context.

Step 1 Plan and Schedule

Outcome Standard 1.5 requires that RTOs must validate all training products on their scope of registration at least once within a five-year cycle. This ensures every training product on scope is systematically reviewed over time, regardless of identified risks. However, scheduled validation alone is not sufficient—RTOs must also respond to emerging risks and conduct validation more frequently where concerns arise.

RTOs are also required to use a risk-based approach to determine the frequency, scope, and depth of validation for qualifications and at unit level.

Risk indicators may include changes to the training product, high number of enrolments, licensing or safety-critical outcomes, reliance on workplace or third-party assessment, complaints or feedback from students, trainers and assessors, or industry suggesting graduates are not meeting industry expectations. This approach ensures validation efforts are targeted, meaningful, and contribute to continuous improvement of assessment quality. In addition, this risk-based approach must be used to determine which components of the assessment system are validated and the sample size of assessments reviewed.

Step 2 Determine Components and Sample

RTOs must determine an appropriate sample size of assessments to validate for each training product, using a risk-based approach. The sample size should be sufficient to detect inconsistencies and confirm the reliability of assessment decisions but be proportionate to the level of risk. Factors influencing sample size include the volume of enrolments and completions, the nature of the assessment methods (e.g. workplace-based or third party evidence), the number of assessors involved, and any feedback or findings from previous validations, audits, or industry consultation.

While there is no mandated number, many RTOs use 10% of completed assessments or a minimum of five samples as a starting point, adjusting up or down based on risk indicators. For high-risk training products—such as those involving safety-critical tasks or licensing outcomes—a larger sample may be required to confirm consistency and validity. Validation records should clearly document the total number of completions, the number of samples selected, the rationale for selection, and how the sample reflects different assessors, cohorts, and delivery modes. This transparency supports audit readiness and reinforces the credibility of validation outcomes.

Step 3 – Review Assessment Tools

Validation is more than simply checking assessment results. It is a comprehensive review of all aspects of the assessment system and outcomes, ensuring they align fully with training product requirements and support consistent, fair, and reliable judgements.

Outcome Standard 1.5 specifies that validation must consider the training product as a whole and its components (e.g. individual units, clusters, modules).

When conducting the validation, the RTO should ensure:

• assessment tools were checked and clearly mapped to the training product requirements (including all elements, performance criteria, performance evidence, foundation skills, assessment conditions, and knowledge evidence);
• instructions were clear, unambiguous, and accessible for both assessors and for students;
• confirmed that tools support collection of valid, sufficient, authentic, and current evidence (Rules of Evidence); and
• contextualised assessment conditions and integrated workplace requirements were reviewed for suitability and compliance.

Step 4 – Review Assessment Evidence and Decisions

Analyse samples of completed student assessments to confirm:

• evidence met the Rules of Evidence (validity, authenticity, currency, sufficiency);
• judgements aligned with training product requirements and were consistent across assessors;
• judgements met the Principles of Assessment of flexibility, fairness, and validity;
• sufficient information was gathered to confidently determine competence; and
• trends of over or under assessment were identified and addressed.

Step 5 – Review Practices and Processes

• evaluated how assessments were being conducted in practice, including consistency with documented tools;
• checked that assessors were consistently applying the tools as designed, and that processes supported the Principles of Assessment—fairness, flexibility, validity, and reliability;
• reviewed consistency across different delivery sites, cohorts, assessors, and modes; and
• identified any deviations or risks that may have affected assessment integrity.

Step 6 – Identify Findings and Recommendations

• documented strengths, non-compliances and improvement opportunities;
• included actionable recommendations for updating tools, improving assessor practice, or refining processes;
• consider whether the findings are limited to the training product reviewed, or have implications for other similar training products or the assessment system as a whole; and
• involved assessors and relevant stakeholders (e.g. industry representatives) in discussing and agreeing on actions.

Step 7 – Document and Records Outcomes

• effective validation relies on clear documentation and a strong feedback loop;
• RTOs must ensure that validation outcomes are accurately documented, securely stored, and readily accessible for audits or internal reviews. Records should include sufficient detail to substantiate assessment decisions and demonstrate compliance;
• validation outcomes must be integrated into the RTO’s continuous improvement processes (Outcome Standard 4.4). Actions arising from validation should be logged in the continuous improvement register, with progress tracked and effectiveness monitored over time;
• outcomes should be communicated to relevant staff, including assessors, trainers, and managers, and shared with RTO advisory groups where appropriate; and
• where validation leads to changes in assessment approaches, updates should be reflected in training and assessment strategies, marketing materials, and student information.

The RTO can demonstrate they are meeting the requirements of Outcome Standard 1.5 by incorporating:

Validation Plans and Schedules

• maintain a master validation schedule covering all training products over the required cycle (e.g. five years);
• clearly document risk priorities, rationale for timing, and planned review dates; and
• identify and record specific components (e.g. units or clusters) prioritised based on risk assessments.

Validation Reports

Each validation activity should be supported by a report that includes:

• the training product(s) and specific components validated;
• validators involved and their credentials (including evidence of independence, where required);
• sample size and selection rationale;
• assessment tools and evidence reviewed;
• findings, including strengths and improvement areas;
• recommendations for changes or improvements; and
• agreed actions and responsible persons.

All validation records and supporting evidence must be retained in accordance with recordkeeping obligations and remain accessible for internal reviews and audits.

Step 8 – Implement and Monitor Improvements

• validation is not a standalone compliance task, it should be embedded throughout the assessment lifecycle, from planning and risk assessment to implementation and review;
• validation outcomes must be used to enhance assessment tools, processes, and practices, and reflected in updates to training and assessment strategies. Where gaps in assessor practice are identified, targeted professional development should be provided, and findings shared to support reflective practice and ongoing capability building. RTOs should monitor the impact of changes made through validation, such as improved student outcomes or reduced appeals, and conduct follow-up reviews to confirm effectiveness; and
• RTOs should ensure that improvements identified through validation are implemented in practice and monitored over time. This includes updating assessment tools, refining processes, and supporting assessors to apply changes consistently. Validation findings should also inform broader quality initiatives, such as industry engagement and training strategy updates. By actively integrating validation into continuous improvement, RTOs demonstrate a commitment to maintaining high standards and delivering training that remains relevant, responsive, and effective.

Validation Scalable to RTO Context

While Outcome Standard 1.5 outlines a comprehensive approach to validation, its principles are designed to be scalable and adaptable to RTOs of all sizes. Smaller organisations may believe the requirements to be challenging at first glance; however, the flexibility built into the 2025 Standards—such as using a risk-based approach and determining sample sizes proportionate to context—allows validation practices to be tailored to available resources. The focus is on meaningful, targeted validation that supports continuous improvement, not on volume or complexity.

For example, a small RTO delivering three qualifications with low enrolment numbers plans validation over a five-year cycle, ensuring each qualification is reviewed at least once. Using a risk-based approach, the RTO identifies one qualification as higher risk due to its licensing outcomes and prioritises it for earlier validation.

For sample size, the RTO selects five completed assessments per unit, representing different assessors and delivery modes. Validators include a trainer with industry experience and a qualified external consultant to meet independence requirements. Validation activities are documented in a simple report template, and outcomes are discussed in team meetings to inform improvements.

This approach meets the requirements of Outcome Standard 1.5 while remaining manageable and proportionate to the RTO’s small size and resources.

Supporting Validators

Ensuring validators are well supported and prepared is critical for achieving accurate, consistent, and meaningful validation outcomes. This could be done through:

Training and Induction

• provide comprehensive training on relevant standards, unit or qualification requirements, and validation processes;
• clarify expectations around objectivity and documentation standards; and
• offer practical guidance on reviewing tools, mapping, and evidence.

Resources and Templates

• supply structured templates for validation planning, reports, and feedback;
• provide mapping guides to help validators check alignment of tools to training product requirements; and
• share sample questions or checklists to support consistency in reviews.

Access to Industry Input

• encourage validators to consult with industry experts where relevant; and
• provide updates on industry trends and emerging skills needs to inform validation decisions.

Ongoing Support

• offer opportunities for validators to share experiences and learn from each other (e.g. validator forums or regular review meetings);
• provide feedback on validator performance and celebrate effective practice; and
• review the validation process itself to ensure templates and processes are providing the required reassurance of quality.

Credential Maintenance

• support validators to maintain current credentials and industry currency, as required under the Credentials Policy and Outcome Standards; and
• monitor professional development records and encourage ongoing upskilling.

A strong support system empowers validators to conduct thorough, objective reviews that genuinely strengthen the RTO’s assessment quality and credibility.

Risks to Quality

Issue: Assessment tools are not fully mapped to training product requirements, leading to gaps in evidence collection.

Solution: Strengthen the pre-use review processes (Outcome Standard 1.3) and provide training on assessment mapping to tool developers and assessors.

Issue: Different assessors make varying judgements on similar evidence.

Solution: Use validation findings to inform assessment benchmarks and marking guides.

Issue: Elements and performance criteria that require direct demonstration are being assessed through questioning alone, compromising validity.

Solution: Ensure assessment tools require evidence appropriate to each criterion, such as observation for skills-based elements, and review during validation.

Issue: Tasks or scenarios no longer reflect current industry practice.

Solution: Involve industry representatives during validation and update tools based on current workplace standards.

Issue: Assessment and validation records lack detail or are incomplete, risking non-compliance.

Solution: Provide clear recordkeeping guidelines and audit tools during validator training.

Issue: Validation plans focus only on whole qualifications without assessing risks at the unit or component level.

Solution: Incorporate component-level risk assessments in validation schedules and reports to ensure higher risk training products are prioritised.

Robust, well documented validation processes underpin high quality assessment outcomes. They build industry confidence, protect students, and support RTO compliance. By engaging qualified validators, integrating industry input, and continuously improving tools and practices, RTOs can maintain the highest standards in vocational education and training.