Replies
No one has replied to this post.
I am wondering, would we have backdated the original 2 learning aims and recorded the withdrawal on them, rather than recording the two new aims as the withdrawal (as it was less than 42 days?)
No, I think what you have done is correct. If they returned and completed at least 1 episode of learning, they should be returned in the ILR, regardless of whether they then withdrew within the qualifying period.
I'm not familiar with how APTEM apply the QAR rules; does it update automatically, or do you have to refresh the dataset?
Claire Marshall
Back from BIL for less than 42 days
Created
Hi,
We have a handful of learners who went on a break in learning, returned but then went on to withdraw less than 42 days after they returned.
Our internal QAR reports (we use APTEM) have these learner's status's as on a BIL, even though they are withdrawn in the ILR.
I am wondering, would we have backdated the original 2 learning aims and recorded the withdrawal on them, rather than recording the two new aims as the withdrawal (as it was less than 42 days?)
Hope this makes sense!
Claire