Trainers and assessors

Who is allowed to teach a nationally recognised course is regulated, not left to the provider's judgement. The requirement sits in the 2025 Outcome Standards for RTOs, whose Quality Area 3 covers the VET workforce, and the detail sits in the Credential Policy that accompanies the Standards. Both are enforceable through the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Act 2011.

The instrument is the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Outcome Standards for NVR Registered Training Organisations) Instrument 2025, arranged as four Quality Areas containing 23 Outcome Standards. It commenced on 1 July 2025 with no transition period, so it covers the whole of our current registration term of 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2032. Three of the 23 standards deal with the workforce, and they are the subject of this page.

The relationship between the Standards and the Credential Policy is worth getting right, because it is often stated loosely. Outcome Standard 3.2 requires that training and assessment is delivered to students by credentialled people with current skills and knowledge in training and assessment. The Credential Policy accompanying the Standards specifies which credentials satisfy that requirement, role by role. The Standard sets the obligation; the Policy sets the list.

This page sets out those requirements rather than publishing biographies. That is deliberate. A trainer roster changes, and a reader deciding whether to trust a provider is better served by knowing what the rules actually require and how to test a provider against them. For the credentials and industry background of the trainer delivering a particular course, ask us directly — it is a fair question and a provider should answer it.

People behind the training

Our current source team page names the people in training, assessment, administration and leadership roles. On the live source page checked 23 October 2026, the published roster includes:

• Trainer and assessor: Amanda, Cate, Hayley, Lauren, Nicholas (listed twice on the source page), Rob, Stuart, Troy and Yvette.
• Culinary skills assessor: Adrian, Andrew I, Cain, Catherine, Douglas, Rohan and Stuart w.
• Other roles: Sam (Coffee Executive Officer); Angela (Sales Associate); Louise (Administration Assistant); Matthew (EA to General Manager); Sam (Administration Officer); Shumies (Administration Officer); Andrew (General Manager); Lucy (Administration Manager); Marnie (Financial Controller); Sophie (Compliance Coordinator); Terri (Business Development); and Warrick (Director).

This is the published source roster, not a guarantee that a named trainer will lead a particular intake or that every listing is unchanged after the observation date. Contact us if you need to know who will teach or assess your course. The credential and currency requirements below explain what any person acting in those roles must meet.

The scope these requirements apply across

The workforce standards are not satisfied once and then set aside. They apply to every training product on the provider's scope of registration, which for RTO 3722 means 17 current qualifications, 81 current skill sets and 579 current units of competency, drawn from sixteen training packages. Every current item is held at the extent "deliver and assess" — there are no assess-only entries — so for each one we must be able to show both a credentialled trainer under Standard 3.2 and the relevant industry currency under Standard 3.3.

That breadth is the reason the currency question has to be asked unit by unit rather than about the organisation. The same provider's scope reaches from espresso extraction to ageing support to business administration, and industry currency in one of those says nothing about the others. Note also that CRICOS registration covers three qualifications only — SIT40422, SIT50322 and SIT50422 — so for international students the workforce delivering their course is a narrower group than the scope as a whole.

The Credential Policy: four different permissions

The Policy does not set one bar. It sets four, according to what the person is doing. The distinction that matters most is whether the person may make an assessment judgement, because that is the decision that turns evidence into a qualification.

Two things follow that are worth knowing as a student.

First, a person delivering under direction cannot decide whether you are competent. They can teach and they can contribute evidence, but the judgement belongs to someone holding the fuller credential, who is also responsible for oversight, guidance and quality assurance of the directed person's work.

Second, the RTO must be able to justify the relevance of the credential to the student cohort and delivery context. Holding a listed credential is necessary but not sufficient; the fit to the actual cohort has to be defensible.

What counts as a diploma in adult education or VET

This was broadened in 2025 and the change is practical rather than cosmetic. The qualification must be at AQF level 5 or higher, must focus on training and assessing adults, and must be relevant to delivering and assessing VET and competency-based training. Critically, the title does not need to contain the words "adult education" or "vocational education and training" — the evidence is the academic transcript or record of results, which must show the skills and knowledge required to train adults and teach VET.

What counts as a secondary teaching qualification

A credential issued by a higher education provider that would satisfy the academic requirements for registration as a secondary school teacher in at least one state or territory. The person need not currently be registered as a teacher. Overseas qualifications do not qualify on this pathway.

Two liberalising changes from the 2015 Standards

An RTO still running a trainer matrix built on the 2015 Schedule 1 may therefore be over-restricting its own workforce — excluding TAE40110 holders without the add-ons, and excluding VET diploma holders on a wording technicality. That is a compliance detail rather than a student concern, but it explains why credential lists differ between providers.

Quality Area 3: the three workforce standards

Standard 3.1 — workforce management

The organisation must ensure the number of trainers, assessors and other staff is appropriate for the services offered, and must facilitate access to continuing professional development so staff can perform their roles. Sufficiency of numbers is a standard in its own right, and it is new in 2025 — the 2015 Standards had no equivalent. That is why "how many students per trainer" is a legitimate question rather than an impertinent one.

Standard 3.2 — credentialled trainers and assessors

The outcome required is that training and assessment is delivered to VET students by credentialled people with current skills and knowledge in training and assessment. Two limbs, both of which have to hold: the person must be credentialled, and their skills and knowledge in training and assessment must be current. The Credential Policy set out above is what determines whether the first limb is satisfied for a given role.

The second limb is why continuing professional development is an express obligation rather than an inference. An RTO must ensure all trainers and assessors undertake CPD to maintain current skills and knowledge in training and assessment, to stay informed of changes in training and assessment practice, and to develop skills in engaging and supporting students. CPD relates to Standards 3.2 and 3.3 together: 3.2 keeps the teaching and assessing current, 3.3 keeps the industry knowledge current. They are different kinds of currency and one does not substitute for the other.

Standard 3.3 — industry currency

This is the one that matters most in hospitality. The outcome required is that training and assessment is delivered by people with current industry skills and knowledge relevant to the training product. The performance indicators require that everyone delivering training or assessment has:

• industry competencies, skills and knowledge relevant to, and at least to the level of, the training product; and
• a practical understanding of current industry practice relevant to it.

So the requirement that a person assessing SITHFAB025 Prepare and serve espresso coffee holds that competency, or better, comes from here — and it is paired with a separate requirement that they know what current practice actually looks like. A teaching qualification obtained years ago, however impeccable, does not satisfy the second limb.

Standard 3.3 also requires the engagement with industry to be systematic: regular consultation with industry, employer and community representatives, and use of that advice and feedback to change training and assessment strategies so that training reflects current practice. That obligation has its own standard as well — Standard 1.2, industry engagement — which requires the RTO to identify relevant industry, employer and community representatives, seek meaningful advice and feedback from them, and use it to change what is delivered.

Industry experts, and the limits on them

Standard 3.3 permits industry experts to be engaged for delivery, but on tight conditions. They must be engaged only on specific need, by reference to the training product's requirements or a particular cohort's needs; must hold industry competencies and specialised expertise directly relevant to what they deliver; must work under the direction of a trainer or assessor holding the direction-level credential; must conduct assessment alongside that trainer or assessor rather than independently; and remain subject to RTO oversight throughout.

This is a recognised arrangement rather than a workaround. It lets an RTO bring a current practitioner into the room while the credentialled assessor keeps responsibility for the judgement. It is not a route for an uncredentialled person to sign off competence. Where experts are used, the RTO's marketing must also say which services they deliver.

Why currency matters more on practical units

Several units we deliver are assessed by demonstrated performance under commercial conditions, not by written work. An assessor judging whether a candidate performed to commercial standard needs to know what commercial standard currently is.

None of that can be assessed from a desk, and none of it can be assessed credibly by someone who has not worked to that standard.

Validation: the check behind the assessor

Standard 1.5 requires validation of assessment, and the Credential Policy sets who may do it. Validation of a non-TAE training product must be undertaken at least once every five years, and at least one person in the validation activity must hold one of the credentials listed for full delivery or assessment. The validation team must collectively have the industry competencies relevant to the training product, a practical understanding of current industry practice, and one of those credentials.

What changed in 2025 is how the RTO decides what to validate. The old prescription — validate 50 per cent of training products within three years — has been repealed, and replaced by a documented risk-based approach in which the RTO determines and justifies which components and what sample size it validates. Validation outcomes must then be used to strengthen the assessment system, not merely recorded.

That change interacts with a retention rule worth knowing. Assessment evidence must be kept for two years after a student completes the training product, while the validation cycle runs to five. An RTO that disposes of evidence at the earliest permitted date may find it has little left to validate, and the regulator has said as much.

Validation is invisible to students, but it is one of the mechanisms that keeps a qualification meaning the same thing across providers. It is a large part of why a Statement of Attainment issued by one RTO must be recognised by another.

The assessment your trainer is bound by

Whatever the trainer's background, the assessment itself must satisfy four principles of assessment and four rules of evidence. These are worth knowing because they are the grounds on which an assessment decision can be challenged.

The flexibility principle is the one students most often overlook. It is the clause that underpins recognition of prior learning: skills count regardless of how or where they were acquired.

Two further requirements sit alongside these and are easy to miss. Under Standard 1.3 the assessment tool itself must be reviewed before it is used, against the training product, the principles of assessment and the rules of evidence — and where a provider buys tools in rather than writing them, they must be contextualised to the actual cohort and learning environment rather than applied generically. Under Standard 1.4 the RTO must also verify that the person being assessed is the person who will be issued the qualification, and must maintain academic integrity measures. The same standard is where the prohibition on a person working under direction making an assessment judgement is written.

After the judgement: your certificate and your USI

The assessor's judgement is the step that creates a credential, so two rules about what happens next belong here.

Once you have been assessed as meeting the training product requirements, certification must issue within 30 calendar days of the completion of the assessment, provided you completed the product and paid all agreed fees. An RTO must not issue certification to anyone who has not been assessed as meeting those requirements.

For nationally recognised training, a Unique Student Identifier (USI) is generally required before a qualification or Statement of Attainment can be issued, unless an applicable exemption applies. See the official USI exemption guidance. A USI is free at usi.gov.au. If you already have one, recover it rather than creating another. Your USI must not be printed on your qualification or Statement of Attainment. We verify that it belongs to you before using it. Keep your certificate and ask the issuing RTO for a replacement if needed. A USI transcript can help verify reported training, but it is not a guarantee that every credential will appear.

If you disagree with an assessment decision

An assessment judgement is not final. Under our own complaints and appeals policy, an appeal is an application for reconsideration of an unfavourable decision or finding during training or assessment, and:

• appeals must be in writing, specifying the particulars of the decision in dispute;
• they must be lodged within 28 days of the student being informed of the decision;
• handling must commence within 10 working days of lodgement;
• the student may be accompanied or assisted by a support person at any relevant meeting, and may present their case at no cost;
• the student's enrolment is maintained throughout;
• the outcome is provided as a written statement including reasons;
• decisions in the student's favour are implemented immediately;
• a complaint unresolved after 60 days may be referred to an independent mediator.

Those timeframes are our own. What the Standards require, at any provider, is that you are told your right to appeal and all avenues for independent review under Standard 2.8, that the review is available at no or low cost, and that the process is procedurally fair with published timeframes. See policies for the full set of obligations an RTO owes a student. Complaints about a registered training organisation may also be made to ASQA, the national regulator.

Questions worth asking any provider

Before enrolling in a practical course, at any provider:

1. What credential does the trainer hold, and does it permit them to make the assessment judgement, or are they delivering under direction?
2. When did they last work in the industry they are teaching? Standard 3.3 requires current industry skills and a practical understanding of current practice.
3. Do they hold the units being delivered, at least to the level delivered?
4. Will an industry expert be involved, and if so, who makes the assessment judgement?
5. How many students per trainer, and per machine? For espresso or cookery, contact time with equipment is the real constraint on practice.
6. When was this assessment tool last validated, and was it reviewed before first use? Standard 1.5 requires validation at least every five years; Standard 1.3 requires review before use.
7. What is the appeal route if you disagree with a result?

A provider unwilling to answer these is telling you something. Further reading: how to tell a good course provider from a bad one and why certified training matters in hospitality.

About us

We are Complete Hospitality Training, RTO 3722, CRICOS provider code 04242E. Level 3, 28 Elizabeth Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, and 410 Elizabeth Street, Surry Hills NSW 2010. melbourne@cht.edu.au | +61 3 9654 1554.

See policies, our story, about, all courses, skills assessment, resources or contact.

We link to the relevant course and regulatory sources in this guide. Check those sources for current requirements, and confirm course availability, delivery, fees and entry requirements with us before enrolling.

Source records and further guidance

We link the unit records and regulator guidance relevant to this page below. Check the current source before making an enrolment, licensing or employment decision.

• SITHFAB025 Prepare and serve espresso coffee
• SIT30821 Certificate III in Commercial Cookery
• SIT40422 Certificate IV in Hospitality
• SIT50322 Diploma of Event Management
• SIT50422 Diploma of Hospitality Management
• Outcome Standards for Registered Training Organisations 2025 (full text)
• Unique Student Identifier (USI) requirements for RTOs