Third party evidence involves gathering testimonials from appropriately suitable people about how a student performed to workplace standards. When verification of student performance in real workplace settings requires someone other than the assessor, third party evidence becomes essential for RTO Compliance.
Third party evidence is classified as supplementary evidence. This classification carries significant implications for how it should be used. Supplementary evidence should never stand alone as the sole basis for judgement about competency. It must be triangulated with direct and indirect evidence to form a complete picture of student performance.
Direct evidence is observed or witnessed by the assessor firsthand. Indirect evidence consists of work products or documentation that assessors can review. Third party evidence supplements both by providing testimony from workplace observers who witnessed performance the assessor could not.
For Registered Training Organisations, understanding how to collect and use third party evidence correctly is fundamental to RTO compliance. According to the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA), assessment evidence must be valid, authentic, current, and sufficient. Third party evidence, when collected properly, contributes to meeting these requirements. When collected poorly, it creates compliance risks and undermines assessment validity.
When to Use Third Party Evidence
Third party evidence becomes necessary in specific situations where assessor observation is impractical or inappropriate. Understanding these situations helps RTOs maintain compliance while gathering valid evidence.
Workplace safety concerns may preclude observer presence. Some work environments present hazards that make additional personnel unsafe. In these situations, only the supervisor or designated workplace personnel should be present during task performance.
Confidentiality and privacy requirements restrict who can observe certain activities. Healthcare settings, counselling contexts, and situations involving sensitive client information may prohibit assessor presence. Third party evidence from appropriate workplace personnel provides verification without compromising confidentiality obligations.
Everyday performance evidence differs from formal assessment performance. Students may perform differently when they know they are being assessed. Third party evidence captures how students perform routine tasks as part of normal work activities, providing insight into authentic workplace behaviour rather than assessment-specific performance.
Repeated task requirements benefit from third party verification. When competency standards require demonstration across multiple instances or contexts, third party observers can verify consistent performance over time without requiring assessor presence at every occurrence.
Identifying when third party evidence is appropriate—and when it is not—forms the foundation of compliant assessment design for RTOs.
Where Third Party Evidence Sits in Assessment
Third party evidence occupies a specific position within assessment architecture. Understanding this position prevents misuse and ensures evidence contributes appropriately to competency judgements while maintaining RTO compliance.
Third party evidence supports workplace tasks by collecting evidence of skills or behaviours. The third party gathers evidence; the assessor makes the final judgement. This distinction is critical. Third parties should never be asked to determine competency. Their role is to provide testimony about what they observed, leaving competency determination to qualified assessors.
Third parties may contribute to assessment in multiple ways. They may play a role in the task itself, in supplying resources and environment, or in both. Their involvement should be clearly defined in assessment documentation.
Observable skills require third party observers to verify that students completed each step within a task. The observer witnesses performance and provides testimony about what occurred.
Non-observable skills do not require observation because they can be evidenced through documentation produced by the student during workplace activities. For non-observable components, third party evidence may verify that documentation is authentic and reflects actual workplace activities rather than fabricated records.
The distinction between observable and non-observable skills determines what evidence collection mechanisms are appropriate and what role third parties play in the assessment process.
Choosing the Right Method
Determining whether third party evidence is appropriate requires systematic consideration of task characteristics. Several questions guide this decision.
Is the task observable? Some tasks must be witnessed to be verified. Physical techniques, interpersonal interactions, and procedural sequences often require observation to confirm correct execution.
Does communication or technique need to be witnessed? Tasks involving specific communication approaches or technical methods may require real-time observation to verify quality. Documentation alone cannot capture tone, timing, or technique nuances.
Is the task routine? Routine tasks performed repeatedly may benefit from third party verification across multiple instances. This demonstrates consistent performance rather than one-time capability.
Does the task need to happen more than once? Competency standards specifying multiple demonstrations require evidence of each instance. Third party observation can verify repeated performance without requiring assessor presence every time.
Is the task non-observable? Tasks producing documentation or work products may not require observation. The outputs themselves serve as evidence, potentially supplemented by third party verification of authenticity.
Is the task risky? High-risk tasks may require simulation or restrict observation to supervisors only. Safety considerations take precedence over assessment convenience.
Matching evidence collection methods to task characteristics ensures appropriate use of third party evidence and supports assessment validity required for RTO compliance.
Structuring Your Documentation for RTO Compliance
Effective third party evidence collection requires properly structured documentation. Three separate components serve distinct purposes and audiences. Proper documentation structure is essential for demonstrating RTO compliance during audit.
Student Assessment Task
The student assessment task document provides everything students need to complete their assessment successfully.
Instructions for completing the task must specify conditions and resources. Students need to understand exactly what they are expected to do, under what circumstances, and with what materials or support.
Information on documentation requirements clarifies what evidence students must provide. This includes both their own work products and any supporting materials.
Provision for answering questions allows students to explain their task completion. This captures the reasoning behind actions, not just the actions themselves.
Submission instructions explain exactly how and where evidence should be submitted. Ambiguity in submission processes creates unnecessary barriers and potential compliance issues.
Third Party Report with Instructions
The third party report document guides observers through their role in the assessment process.
Suitability declaration establishes that the third party meets requirements for providing valid testimony. This documents their qualifications, experience, and relationship to the student.
Instructions for the student within this document ensure the third party understands what the student is attempting to demonstrate.
Third party role clarification explains exactly what the observer is being asked to do. This prevents scope creep and ensures testimony addresses required elements.
Observation specifications distinguish between what must be observed in real time and what can be reviewed after autonomous completion. Not all task components require live observation.
Provision for circumstantial questions captures contextual information that may affect interpretation of performance. Workplace conditions, unusual circumstances, or environmental factors may be relevant.
Submission instructions for the third party ensure their testimony reaches assessors through appropriate channels.
Assessor Guide
The assessor guide provides everything needed to administer assessment and evaluate evidence in accordance with RTO compliance requirements.
Administration instructions explain how to conduct the assessment and collect evidence from all sources.
Task information details what the student is completing, ensuring assessors understand the performance being evaluated.
Third party role information clarifies what the observer was asked to do and what their testimony should address.
Judgement instructions guide assessors in evaluating evidence against competency requirements.
Marking guidance provides benchmarks for evidence quality from both third party and student sources. This ensures consistent evaluation across assessors.
Documentation quality standards specify requirements for work record evidence.
Provision for situational circumstances allows assessors to document factors affecting their judgement.
The Evidence Triangle: Meeting RTO Compliance Requirements
Quality assessment requires three types of evidence working together. This triangulation strengthens validity and supports compliance requirements.
Third party reports provide clear questions answered by observers against task steps. The observer evidences that they witnessed either the task or its outcome and describes the standard of performance observed. Third party testimony addresses what happened from an external perspective.
Student self-assessment or journal captures comments supplied by students explaining what they did and how they did it against each task. This covers both observable and non-observable activities. Student testimony provides insight into reasoning, decision-making, and awareness that observation alone cannot capture.
Work record evidence consists of documentation produced as a result of students completing non-observable task components. These artefacts demonstrate outcomes and provide tangible evidence of workplace activities.
Each evidence type contributes unique information. Third party testimony verifies performance occurred to workplace standards. Student testimony demonstrates understanding and intentionality. Work records prove task completion through tangible outputs.
Triangulation protects against the weaknesses of any single evidence source. Third party testimony alone cannot confirm student understanding. Student testimony alone cannot verify actual performance. Work records alone cannot demonstrate process quality. Together, they create a comprehensive evidence base supporting valid competency judgements and RTO compliance.
Selecting a Suitable Third Party
Third party selection directly affects evidence validity. ASQA guidance specifies that the appropriate person to observe or report on learner performance is someone in a position to make a valid comment on the learner’s performance—for example, a line manager.
Third parties may be anyone suitably qualified or experienced who works closely with or supervises the student. However, suitability requires more than proximity.
Evidence of Suitability
Third party reports should collect evidence establishing observer appropriateness.
Industry expertise must be documented. The third party should possess qualifications or experience enabling them to recognise workplace standard performance. Someone unfamiliar with industry requirements cannot validly assess whether performance meets those requirements.
Witness methodology should be recorded. How did the third party observe the student’s performance? Were they present throughout task completion? Did they observe directly or review outcomes? This information affects how testimony should be interpreted.
Assessor instructions should provide advice on confirming third party appropriateness. Assessors need guidance on evaluating whether the nominated third party is suitable for the specific assessment context.
Selection Criteria
Guidance for choosing appropriate third parties should address several factors.
Capability to observe workplace activities is fundamental. The third party must have access to the student during relevant task performance.
Skills and position to manage the student suggests authority and expertise. Supervisors and line managers typically possess both the access and the knowledge required.
Direct contact with the student ensures the third party can actually witness performance rather than relying on secondhand information.
Ability to accommodate student requirements means the third party can create or allow opportunities for the student to demonstrate required skills within normal workplace operations.
Gathering Sufficient Evidence
A third party report is an evidence collection mechanism, not a marking guide. This distinction is fundamental to collecting compliant evidence.
Third party reports must gather evidence of what happened. This evidence is held to the same standard as any other assessment evidence. The same rigour applied to student submissions must apply to third party testimony.
What Not to Do
Do not copy and paste performance criteria from the unit of competency into a checklist. Performance criteria use regulatory language that may not reflect actual workplace processes. The assessor’s role includes translating competency requirements into language reflecting real workplace activities.
Do not accept ticked boxes as evidence. A student responding to “do you know about marketing principles?” with a tick provides no evidence of actual knowledge. Third party evidence requires the same standard. Checkboxes indicating “yes, the student did this” provide no description of what actually occurred or how it met workplace standards.
Do not provide blank documents with just the unit title asking for feedback. Unguided questioning creates multiple problems. Evidence may be irrelevant to assessment requirements. Required information may be omitted entirely. General statements may be provided that fail to explain performance quality.
What to Do Instead
Quality testimony requires open questioning that gathers descriptions of what occurred and how it occurred. Third parties should describe specific actions, behaviours, and outcomes they witnessed. This descriptive evidence enables assessors to evaluate performance against competency requirements.
Closed questions generate closed responses. Open questions generate the detailed testimony needed for valid assessment judgements.
Framing Questions Effectively
Question design determines evidence quality. Different question structures serve students and third parties.
Questions for Students
Student questions should use a table format listing the steps in the task, allowing documentation of what happened at each stage. Each step should align to a competency requirement, ensuring evidence addresses all necessary elements.
Questions should be direct and open, addressing both how students completed tasks and why they completed tasks in particular ways. The “how” captures process. The “why” captures understanding and decision-making.
For example, rather than asking “Did you complete the client consultation?” ask “Describe how you conducted the client consultation and explain why you chose that approach.”
Questions for Third Parties
Third party questions should also use a table format listing task steps. However, steps where third party testimony is not required should be greyed out. This focuses observer attention on relevant components and prevents unnecessary testimony collection.
Questions should be direct and open, asking what the third party witnessed against each step. A follow-up question should address whether witnessed performance met workplace standards.
For example: “What reasons did the student present for providing guidance to their work colleague? Was this appropriate for the situation?”
This structure captures both description (what happened) and evaluation (whether it met standards) while leaving final competency judgement to the assessor.
Breaking Down Tasks
Complex tasks benefit from structured breakdown. Two approaches support quality evidence collection.
Repeating Tasks
When tasks must be demonstrated multiple times, evidence should be collected against each iteration.
Step out the process as for a single task, identifying each component requiring evidence.
Repeat the task template as Part A, Part B, and so forth. Each part represents one iteration.
Identify conditions for each iteration at the beginning of each part. Different contexts or circumstances may apply to different repetitions.
Add steps needed to cover alternative requirements that may apply to some iterations but not others.
Remove steps that do not need addressing more than once. Some elements may only require single demonstration.
Collect qualitative testimony against each component. Descriptions should address each iteration specifically rather than generalising across repetitions.
Splitting Task Sections
Tasks with distinct phases can be split to replicate time lapse or stages. This approach suits tasks where components occur at different times or build sequentially.
Managing Contingencies
When students must demonstrate contingency management, assessment design should create opportunities for this demonstration.
Notify students to respond if specified events occur. Students should understand they are expected to manage unexpected situations.
Coach the third party to make events occur. This ensures students encounter situations requiring contingency responses.
Include documentation space for both student and third party perspectives on how events occurred and were managed.
Marking Guidance for Multiple Evidence Sources
Assessor guides must address the complexity of evaluating triangulated evidence from multiple sources.
Verification provisions should address third party suitability and testimony currency. Assessors need processes for confirming that third parties meet requirements and that testimony reflects recent performance.
Minimum performance standards should be outlined clearly. Assessors need benchmarks defining acceptable performance levels.
Evaluation instructions should explain how to assess all evidence sources together. Student testimony, third party testimony, and work record evidence each contribute to the overall judgement. Guidance should address how to weigh and integrate these sources.
Quality definition tables should specify requirements for each evidence form. What constitutes sufficient detail in third party testimony? What documentation quality is required for work records? What depth of reflection is expected in student self-assessment?
Clear marking guidance ensures consistent evaluation across assessors and supports defensible competency judgements.
Conclusion: Best Practice Summary
Effective third party evidence collection requires attention to multiple elements working together.
Choose the right method by systematically evaluating task characteristics. Not all tasks require third party evidence, and not all third party evidence serves the same purpose.
Be explicit with instructions, resources, and conditions. Ambiguity undermines evidence quality and creates compliance risks. All parties should understand exactly what is expected.
Translate competency requirements into workplace language. Do not use unit of competency language in evidence collection tools. Real workplace processes should be described in terms practitioners recognise.
Provide benchmarks for evidence and performance quality. Assessors, students, and third parties all benefit from clear standards.
Ensure third party appropriateness through documented suitability verification. Evidence from unsuitable third parties lacks validity regardless of content quality.
Collect quality testimonials through open questioning that gathers descriptions rather than checkboxes. Never ask observers to make competency judgements—that responsibility belongs to assessors.
Triangulate evidence from third party reports, student self-assessment, and work records. Single evidence sources cannot support the validity required for compliant assessment.
Third party evidence does not need to be complicated, but it does need to be thoughtful. Investment in proper documentation structure, careful question framing, and clear guidance for all parties creates assessment processes that work. Students demonstrate skills in authentic workplace settings. Third parties understand their role. Assessors receive quality evidence supporting sound competency judgements.
The effort invested in getting third party evidence right pays dividends in assessment quality and validity—and ultimately in the confidence employers can place in RTO graduates.
