What ACS counts as an ICT major is a percentage, and the percentage changes with the qualification type

ACS publishes a numeric answer to “does my degree have an ICT major”, and almost nothing written about it repeats the numbers correctly. The thresholds sit on one page — ACS’s Qualifications evidence page — and they are not one threshold. They change with the type and length of the award. There is also a second, separate percentage test that decides whether your ICT content counts for the occupation you nominate, and it is the one people trip over after they have already convinced themselves the major is fine.

This page states the published criteria. It does not predict what any assessor will conclude about your transcript. ACS says plainly that it will not do that either before you apply: “it is not possible to determine the outcome until an in-depth assessment of qualifications, other educational attainments and work experience has been completed.”

The three outcomes ACS can record

ACS’s assessment process page states that a qualification is reviewed for Australian Qualifications Framework comparability, and then: “The course units of your qualification are assessed to determine whether the professional IT content is considered an IT professional unit or not. The outcome of the Assessment will note if your qualification is a Major, Minor or if the IT content is Insufficient.”

So there are three buckets, not two. “Insufficient” is the floor: “All qualifications with IT content less than the requirement for a Minor are assessed as non-IT qualifications.” A non-IT qualification is not a weak ICT qualification. For assessment purposes it is not an ICT qualification at all, which is what pushes people toward the RPL pathway — a pathway that does not look at degrees.

The major thresholds, in ACS’s own words

Bachelor’s level. “A standard 3-year Bachelor’s level qualification is deemed as having a major in computing if at least 33% of the qualification is IT. Qualifications that are longer in duration are assessed to the equivalent of a 3-year AQF Level 7 (Bachelor) award.”

Two things follow from that second sentence, and both are commonly stated backwards elsewhere. A three-year bachelor is the yardstick, not a shortfall — the rule is written for it, which is the starting point for a three-year Indian BCA or B.Sc (IT). And a four-year degree is measured against the three-year equivalent rather than against its own length, so the extra year does not automatically raise the amount of ICT you must show.

Diploma, advanced diploma or associate degree. The test is not a percentage of the whole award but a fixed quantity of study: the qualification “is deemed as having a major in computing if it contains one full academic year worth of ICT content.” ACS gives its own worked examples on the page:

• a one-year diploma must be 100% ICT;
• a two-year diploma must be at least 50% ICT;
• “If any Diploma is of duration less than 1 year, it will be considered IT Insufficient.”

That last line is absolute and is worth reading twice before paying for a short course.

Postgraduate level. “A 2-year postgraduate qualification (such as Graduate Diploma or Masters) is deemed as having a major in computing if at least 50% of the qualification is ICT. Qualifications are assessed to the equivalent of a 2-year AQF Level 8 and above award. An Australian postgraduate degree with only 12 subjects requires at least 67% ICT content.”

ACS adds structural minimums for Australian postgraduate awards specifically. They must contain “a minimum of 3 semesters or at least 1.5 years of full-time study”, “at least 2 semesters or 1 year of full-time equivalent ICT content”, and “a minimum of 12 units or subjects”. If you are considering a conversion master’s, those three lines are the specification to check a course structure against before you enrol — see non-ICT bachelor plus ICT master’s.

Research degrees. Where the award was completed primarily by thesis, ACS says “the assessment will focus on the research content and findings presented in the official thesis”, and asks for an abstract whose front page specifies “the percentage and nature of IT content relevant to your nominated ANZSCO”. That is ACS asking the applicant to do the percentage arithmetic in the document itself.

The minor threshold is expressed as a ratio, not a number

ACS does not print a second percentage. It writes: “A Bachelor’s or higher qualification is assessed as a minor when the IT content is at least two-thirds of the requirements for a major.”

So the minor threshold is defined relative to whichever major threshold applies to your award type. ACS does not publish the resulting figure, and we are not going to invent one — the rule as published is a ratio, and the arithmetic depends on which major rule your qualification falls under. If you see a flat minor percentage quoted on an agent’s blog, it was derived, not read.

The distinction is expensive. On ACS’s General Skills eligibility table, a bachelor’s degree or higher with an IT Major that is closely related requires “2 years, completed in the last 10 years… OR 4 years completed anytime in past work history”. The same degree with an IT Minor requires “5 years completed in the last 10 years… OR 6 years”. The arithmetic is set out in how the qualification level changes the experience requirement.

The second test almost nobody mentions: 65% closely related

Having an ICT major does not finish the job. ACS states a separate rule on the same page:

“In all educational qualifications, at least 65% of the IT content must be closely related with sufficient core content to the nominated occupation (ANZSCO) to meet the suitability criteria.”

Read the scope of that sentence carefully. It is 65% of the IT content, not 65% of the degree, and it is measured against the specific ANZSCO occupation you nominate. ACS’s assessment process page describes this as a separate step: “An ACS Assessor will review which IT units are considered closely related to your nominated occupation.”

This is why two people with the same degree get different results — they nominated different occupations. It is also why the qualifications page warns, about ACS-accredited Australian degrees, that meeting the major criteria “does not guarantee that the qualification will be assessed as being closely related to the nominated occupation and ANZSCO code.”

You may nominate up to three occupations. ACS states: “You can then choose up to three occupations and ANZSCO codes you would like to be assessed against… You will receive a separate outcome letter for each ANZSCO code for which you are successfully assessed.” Nominations cannot be changed after submission.

Accreditation: what it does and does not do

This is the single most misreported point in the space, and ACS answers it in the FAQ on every pathway page in identical words:

“Accreditation has no impact on the outcome of your ACS Migration Skills Assessment application or the assessment of a qualification. Although ACS does provide accreditation for certain ICT Courses, it does not guarantee a suitable migration skills assessment outcome.”

The Qualifications evidence page states the narrower thing accreditation actually does: “Australian qualifications that have been accredited by the ACS will generally meet the IT, Data Science or Cyber Security major criteria.” That is a statement about the major test only — the 65% closely-related test and the work experience criteria are untouched by it.

ACS’s accredited programs list is published as an open page rather than hidden behind a search box, and it carries a rule that matters more than the list itself: “The Accreditation Period refers to the year of study commencement. A student who commenced a program within the Accreditation period will on graduation be considered to have completed an accredited program.” Accreditation attaches to the year you started, not the year you graduated, and the page notes that “Only active accredited programs are listed on this page”, with historical accreditation available by email. We are not publishing a count of programs on that list; ACS does not publish one, and the figures circulating on third-party sites are not sourced from it.

Seoul Accord

ACS has been a Seoul Accord signatory since 2008 and states that qualifications recognised under it “may be considered to have met the ICT major criteria for migration skills assessment purposes”. The pathway FAQs add a condition and a burden: such qualifications “will still be expected to meet or be comparable to the ACS accreditation standards”, the assessor “will have discretion to determine this at the time of assessment”, and “the onus of proof falls solely on the applicant to notify the ACS of this and to provide the ACS with sufficient evidence”, including screenshots from the Seoul Accord’s own accredited programs listing.

Note the scope again: even where the Seoul Accord route settles the major question, “Assessment suitability is however still subject to assessment against the nominated ANZSCO occupation.”

What to do with this

1. Get your academic transcript with every unit name and grade, and count. The major test is arithmetic on units, and you can do that arithmetic yourself before spending anything.
2. Work out which threshold applies to your award type — three-year bachelor, longer bachelor, diploma, two-year postgraduate, twelve-subject Australian postgraduate, or research degree. They are different numbers.
3. Then run the second test against the occupation you intend to nominate: of the ICT units you counted, how many are closely related to that occupation? The published bar is 65% of the ICT content.
4. If you hold a master’s, ACS requires the underpinning qualifications too: “please provide all documentation for the underpinning qualifications, such as a bachelor’s degree, including non-ICT qualifications.”
5. Do not expect a pre-check. ACS states it cannot offer pre-assessment advice, and it also states that it “is unable to provide career or employment advice to applicants”.

This site summarises published rules. It is not ACS, it does not perform assessments, and nothing here is a prediction of an outcome — ACS decides, on the documents you submit, under the criteria quoted above. A skills assessment is, in ACS’s own words, something you need “BEFORE you can apply for a visa”; for anything about visas themselves, go to the Department of Home Affairs or a registered migration agent.