Accounts: 0782557223 Tracking: 0318115749 | 0870574924

BLOG

Occupation Qualification elearning criteria set by the QCTO

QCTO is committed to quality assuring all forms of assessment of programmes and qualifications within the sub- framework. To this end, there is recognition of the prevalence of use of technology not only in delivering training programmes within this sector, but also in assessing students.

E-assessment is any type of assessment that has an electronic component and incorporates one or more of e-testing, e-portfolios and e-marking. Examples of e-assessment include:

  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using local intranets/networks and individual workstation
  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using the internet.
  • Assessments comprising a combination of automatic marking and manual.
  • Electronic test delivery, with all marking completed manually on screen or on paper.
  • A range of multimedia formats for submitting assessment
  • Electronic scanning of completed assessments for marking.
  • Tests downloaded from the internet by the centre.
  • Delivery of assessments and submission of completed assessments by secure e
  • E-portfolios to store and manage candidates’ evidence electronic
  • Assessments that are automatically marked and react adaptively to student performance

Validity of e-Assessments

Assessment Quality Partners should ensure that:

  • Students who pass the programme demonstrate the graduate competences indicated in the purpose and exit level outcomes of the programme.
  • Where relevant, practical competences are adequately assessed
  • Systems have been put in place to ensure reliability, rigour and security of the e- assessment system for remote students
  • Assessment activities are sufficiently varied for the programme purpose and level and the diversity of its student bod Appropriate constructs as covered in the relevant courses are adequately covered in the assessment.
  • Where students submit assessment individually by electronic means from homes or workplaces, and not from a recognized assessment centre, the programme has the necessary security systems for electronic assessment.
  • Programmes delivered exclusively or mainly through electronic learning methods do not narrow the range of assessment to the assessment of factual knowledge (which is most easily assessed), rather than the full range of outcomes and depth of knowledge required for the particular programme of stud In technology supported distance education delivery, there is the danger of limiting assessment tasks to low level cognitive skills (e.g. simple multiple choice questions [MCQs] that can be computer-marked) at the expense of high level skills (usually requiring more open-ended written and practical assignments) that enhance deep and critical engagement with concepts. Higher order thinking skills like application, analyses, evaluation and creation should be covered in the assessment.
  • There is evidence of staff development to familiarise academic staff with online assessment strategies that take high level cognitive skills into account thereby ensuring credible online assessment.

Management of e-Assessment

  • There is evidence that the assessment body understands the importance of feedback on formative assessment in e-learnin
  • There is evidence of an assessment management system to ensure that feedback on assessment is confidential and reaches the right students timeousl Systems are in place to communicate feedback and results quickly, efficiently and securely to a distributed student body.
  • Adequate systems to guarantee the integrity and security of the assessment system and the authenticity of student submissions (including means to discourage plagiarism from online sources) are in place.
  • E-assessment systems are tested to ensure proper functionality and any shortcomings identified are fully addressed prior to full implement
  • There is regular monitoring and checking of the smooth functioning of e-assessment systems to make sure that the assessment system is not compromised in any way.
  • The e-assessment body has enough competent staff to address any technical problems students face with the assessment system to ensure the assessment process runs smoothly and does not in any way disadvantage the studen
  • The assessment body does not pass on unnecessary costs to students.
  • There is a policy on external moderation of the e-assessment and the policy is effectively implemented.
  • External moderation reports are used to improve the various aspects of the e- assessment process, like the validity of the assessment instruments, the quality of student performance, and the reliability of the marking process.
  • Assessment partners must have effective quality assurance measures in place to ensure the integrity of the assessment data.
  • E –assessment systems must have capacity to generate key information like system error reports and data that demonstrates regulatory compliance.
  • Where Assessment Partners enter into partnership arrangements with any other provider, formal service level agreements with clearly stated roles and responsibilities must be signed.

Teaching / Learning value of e-Assessments

  • The central role of formative assessment and feedback in online learning is formally recognised and there is evidence of an appropriate (1)number and variety of formative assessment tasks, and (2) mechanisms for the monitoring and (3) quality assurance of feedback and (4) minimum turn-around time are in place.
  • Accurate and reliable records of student e-assessment are kept and can easily be retrieved as when there is need.
  • The potential of the electronic environment for the use of ongoing formative assessment of different kinds (self-, peer- and tutor assessment) is exploited appropr

 

User friendliness of e-Assessment System

  • The rules and regulations governing assessment are published and clearly communicated to students and relevant stakeholders.
  • Evidence is provided to demonstrate that these rules are widely adhered t
  • Breaches of assessment regulations are dealt with effectively and timeously.
  • Students are provided with information and guidance on their rights and responsibilities regarding e-assessment processes (for example, definitions and regulations on plagiarism, penalties, terms of appeal, supplementary examinations, etc.).
  • Student appeals procedures are explicit, fair and effect
  • There are clear and consistent published guidelines/regulations for:
    • Marking and grading of result
    • Aggregation of marks and grad
    • Progression and final award
    • Credit allocation and articulation.
  • As much as possible, e-assessment systems should operate on inclusive principles and therefore accommodate learners with various forms of physical challenges.
  • E-assessment systems are designed in such a way that they are easy for learners to navigat Assessment partners should ensure that learners do not spend much time grappling with system issues instead of with the content of the assessment.
  • Mechanisms are in place to support learners who are less competent in working with technologies so they can gain the necessary skills and gain sufficient confidence in working with the technology; and
  • Ensure that there is fair and equal treatment of all undertaking e-assessment, irrespective of geographical location, time of assessment and course.

Use of e-portfolios for assessment

In addition to regulatory principles, e-portfolio systems should (1) store and (2) maintain performance evidence for access by (3) all required parties securely, meet the (4) evidence needs for a range of qualification types and (5) enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to another.

  • E-portfolio systems must have the capabilities to store and maintain a variety of forms of performance evidence or coursework for secure access by the learner, assessors, verifiers and moderators based on a robust authentication proc
  • As far as is practicable, awarding bodies must give due consideration to the need to support a degree of inter-operability in the e-portfolio systems that they develop or endorse to enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to anothe

NOTE WELL:

The qualification assessment specifications must spell out clearly the internal and external assessment modes identifying whether the assessment will be practical, paper based, electronic or blended.

The e-assessment instruments must be designed and developed in accordance with the QCTO Guide for developing assessment tools.

Administration of e-assessments and technical support

  • All staff undertaking e-assessment processes at assessment centres must be familiar with the on-line environment and have undergone appropriate training prior to gaining access to the syst
  • Accredited Assessment centres should have plans in place to manage every aspect of the e-assessment procedure, ensuring that the process is robust, reliable, fair and efficient and that robust contingency plans are in place to mitigate against technical failure.
  • In the case of technical failure occurring within the first 80% of the scheduled time of the assessment, it is recommended that the EISA be rescheduled. If a technical failure occurs within the last 20% of the scheduled time, the assessment may be concluded (provided the previous 80% has been saved), and the marks gained may, at the discretion of the AQP and the QCTO be standardised accordingly.
  • In cases of serious technical failure which affects the whole group assessments may be rescheduled or where appropriate students offered the assessment in paper for In either case, the QCTO should be immediately informed of the new arrangements by telephone and a written communication should be sent to the QCTO soon after the assessment.
  • Learners must be given access to and be familiar with the assessment format, question types and the technology prior to the summative examination.

Occupation Qualification elearning criteria set by the QCTO

QCTO is committed to quality assuring all forms of assessment of programmes and qualifications within the sub- framework. To this end, there is recognition of the prevalence of use of technology not only in delivering training programmes within this sector, but also in assessing students.

E-assessment is any type of assessment that has an electronic component and incorporates one or more of e-testing, e-portfolios and e-marking. Examples of e-assessment include:

  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using local intranets/networks and individual workstation
  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using the internet.
  • Assessments comprising a combination of automatic marking and manual.
  • Electronic test delivery, with all marking completed manually on screen or on paper.
  • A range of multimedia formats for submitting assessment
  • Electronic scanning of completed assessments for marking.
  • Tests downloaded from the internet by the centre.
  • Delivery of assessments and submission of completed assessments by secure e
  • E-portfolios to store and manage candidates’ evidence electronic
  • Assessments that are automatically marked and react adaptively to student performance

Validity of e-Assessments

Assessment Quality Partners should ensure that:

  • Students who pass the programme demonstrate the graduate competences indicated in the purpose and exit level outcomes of the programme.
  • Where relevant, practical competences are adequately assessed
  • Systems have been put in place to ensure reliability, rigour and security of the e- assessment system for remote students
  • Assessment activities are sufficiently varied for the programme purpose and level and the diversity of its student bod Appropriate constructs as covered in the relevant courses are adequately covered in the assessment.
  • Where students submit assessment individually by electronic means from homes or workplaces, and not from a recognized assessment centre, the programme has the necessary security systems for electronic assessment.
  • Programmes delivered exclusively or mainly through electronic learning methods do not narrow the range of assessment to the assessment of factual knowledge (which is most easily assessed), rather than the full range of outcomes and depth of knowledge required for the particular programme of stud In technology supported distance education delivery, there is the danger of limiting assessment tasks to low level cognitive skills (e.g. simple multiple choice questions [MCQs] that can be computer-marked) at the expense of high level skills (usually requiring more open-ended written and practical assignments) that enhance deep and critical engagement with concepts. Higher order thinking skills like application, analyses, evaluation and creation should be covered in the assessment.
  • There is evidence of staff development to familiarise academic staff with online assessment strategies that take high level cognitive skills into account thereby ensuring credible online assessment.

Management of e-Assessment

  • There is evidence that the assessment body understands the importance of feedback on formative assessment in e-learnin
  • There is evidence of an assessment management system to ensure that feedback on assessment is confidential and reaches the right students timeousl Systems are in place to communicate feedback and results quickly, efficiently and securely to a distributed student body.
  • Adequate systems to guarantee the integrity and security of the assessment system and the authenticity of student submissions (including means to discourage plagiarism from online sources) are in place.
  • E-assessment systems are tested to ensure proper functionality and any shortcomings identified are fully addressed prior to full implement
  • There is regular monitoring and checking of the smooth functioning of e-assessment systems to make sure that the assessment system is not compromised in any way.
  • The e-assessment body has enough competent staff to address any technical problems students face with the assessment system to ensure the assessment process runs smoothly and does not in any way disadvantage the studen
  • The assessment body does not pass on unnecessary costs to students.
  • There is a policy on external moderation of the e-assessment and the policy is effectively implemented.
  • External moderation reports are used to improve the various aspects of the e- assessment process, like the validity of the assessment instruments, the quality of student performance, and the reliability of the marking process.
  • Assessment partners must have effective quality assurance measures in place to ensure the integrity of the assessment data.
  • E –assessment systems must have capacity to generate key information like system error reports and data that demonstrates regulatory compliance.
  • Where Assessment Partners enter into partnership arrangements with any other provider, formal service level agreements with clearly stated roles and responsibilities must be signed.

Teaching / Learning value of e-Assessments

  • The central role of formative assessment and feedback in online learning is formally recognised and there is evidence of an appropriate (1)number and variety of formative assessment tasks, and (2) mechanisms for the monitoring and (3) quality assurance of feedback and (4) minimum turn-around time are in place.
  • Accurate and reliable records of student e-assessment are kept and can easily be retrieved as when there is need.
  • The potential of the electronic environment for the use of ongoing formative assessment of different kinds (self-, peer- and tutor assessment) is exploited appropr

 

User friendliness of e-Assessment System

  • The rules and regulations governing assessment are published and clearly communicated to students and relevant stakeholders.
  • Evidence is provided to demonstrate that these rules are widely adhered t
  • Breaches of assessment regulations are dealt with effectively and timeously.
  • Students are provided with information and guidance on their rights and responsibilities regarding e-assessment processes (for example, definitions and regulations on plagiarism, penalties, terms of appeal, supplementary examinations, etc.).
  • Student appeals procedures are explicit, fair and effect
  • There are clear and consistent published guidelines/regulations for:
    • Marking and grading of result
    • Aggregation of marks and grad
    • Progression and final award
    • Credit allocation and articulation.
  • As much as possible, e-assessment systems should operate on inclusive principles and therefore accommodate learners with various forms of physical challenges.
  • E-assessment systems are designed in such a way that they are easy for learners to navigat Assessment partners should ensure that learners do not spend much time grappling with system issues instead of with the content of the assessment.
  • Mechanisms are in place to support learners who are less competent in working with technologies so they can gain the necessary skills and gain sufficient confidence in working with the technology; and
  • Ensure that there is fair and equal treatment of all undertaking e-assessment, irrespective of geographical location, time of assessment and course.

Use of e-portfolios for assessment

In addition to regulatory principles, e-portfolio systems should (1) store and (2) maintain performance evidence for access by (3) all required parties securely, meet the (4) evidence needs for a range of qualification types and (5) enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to another.

  • E-portfolio systems must have the capabilities to store and maintain a variety of forms of performance evidence or coursework for secure access by the learner, assessors, verifiers and moderators based on a robust authentication proc
  • As far as is practicable, awarding bodies must give due consideration to the need to support a degree of inter-operability in the e-portfolio systems that they develop or endorse to enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to anothe

NOTE WELL:

The qualification assessment specifications must spell out clearly the internal and external assessment modes identifying whether the assessment will be practical, paper based, electronic or blended.

The e-assessment instruments must be designed and developed in accordance with the QCTO Guide for developing assessment tools.

Administration of e-assessments and technical support

  • All staff undertaking e-assessment processes at assessment centres must be familiar with the on-line environment and have undergone appropriate training prior to gaining access to the syst
  • Accredited Assessment centres should have plans in place to manage every aspect of the e-assessment procedure, ensuring that the process is robust, reliable, fair and efficient and that robust contingency plans are in place to mitigate against technical failure.
  • In the case of technical failure occurring within the first 80% of the scheduled time of the assessment, it is recommended that the EISA be rescheduled. If a technical failure occurs within the last 20% of the scheduled time, the assessment may be concluded (provided the previous 80% has been saved), and the marks gained may, at the discretion of the AQP and the QCTO be standardised accordingly.
  • In cases of serious technical failure which affects the whole group assessments may be rescheduled or where appropriate students offered the assessment in paper for In either case, the QCTO should be immediately informed of the new arrangements by telephone and a written communication should be sent to the QCTO soon after the assessment.
  • Learners must be given access to and be familiar with the assessment format, question types and the technology prior to the summative examination.

Occupation Qualification elearning criteria set by the QCTO

QCTO is committed to quality assuring all forms of assessment of programmes and qualifications within the sub- framework. To this end, there is recognition of the prevalence of use of technology not only in delivering training programmes within this sector, but also in assessing students.

E-assessment is any type of assessment that has an electronic component and incorporates one or more of e-testing, e-portfolios and e-marking. Examples of e-assessment include:

  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using local intranets/networks and individual workstation
  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using the internet.
  • Assessments comprising a combination of automatic marking and manual.
  • Electronic test delivery, with all marking completed manually on screen or on paper.
  • A range of multimedia formats for submitting assessment
  • Electronic scanning of completed assessments for marking.
  • Tests downloaded from the internet by the centre.
  • Delivery of assessments and submission of completed assessments by secure e
  • E-portfolios to store and manage candidates’ evidence electronic
  • Assessments that are automatically marked and react adaptively to student performance

Validity of e-Assessments

Assessment Quality Partners should ensure that:

  • Students who pass the programme demonstrate the graduate competences indicated in the purpose and exit level outcomes of the programme.
  • Where relevant, practical competences are adequately assessed
  • Systems have been put in place to ensure reliability, rigour and security of the e- assessment system for remote students
  • Assessment activities are sufficiently varied for the programme purpose and level and the diversity of its student bod Appropriate constructs as covered in the relevant courses are adequately covered in the assessment.
  • Where students submit assessment individually by electronic means from homes or workplaces, and not from a recognized assessment centre, the programme has the necessary security systems for electronic assessment.
  • Programmes delivered exclusively or mainly through electronic learning methods do not narrow the range of assessment to the assessment of factual knowledge (which is most easily assessed), rather than the full range of outcomes and depth of knowledge required for the particular programme of stud In technology supported distance education delivery, there is the danger of limiting assessment tasks to low level cognitive skills (e.g. simple multiple choice questions [MCQs] that can be computer-marked) at the expense of high level skills (usually requiring more open-ended written and practical assignments) that enhance deep and critical engagement with concepts. Higher order thinking skills like application, analyses, evaluation and creation should be covered in the assessment.
  • There is evidence of staff development to familiarise academic staff with online assessment strategies that take high level cognitive skills into account thereby ensuring credible online assessment.

Management of e-Assessment

  • There is evidence that the assessment body understands the importance of feedback on formative assessment in e-learnin
  • There is evidence of an assessment management system to ensure that feedback on assessment is confidential and reaches the right students timeousl Systems are in place to communicate feedback and results quickly, efficiently and securely to a distributed student body.
  • Adequate systems to guarantee the integrity and security of the assessment system and the authenticity of student submissions (including means to discourage plagiarism from online sources) are in place.
  • E-assessment systems are tested to ensure proper functionality and any shortcomings identified are fully addressed prior to full implement
  • There is regular monitoring and checking of the smooth functioning of e-assessment systems to make sure that the assessment system is not compromised in any way.
  • The e-assessment body has enough competent staff to address any technical problems students face with the assessment system to ensure the assessment process runs smoothly and does not in any way disadvantage the studen
  • The assessment body does not pass on unnecessary costs to students.
  • There is a policy on external moderation of the e-assessment and the policy is effectively implemented.
  • External moderation reports are used to improve the various aspects of the e- assessment process, like the validity of the assessment instruments, the quality of student performance, and the reliability of the marking process.
  • Assessment partners must have effective quality assurance measures in place to ensure the integrity of the assessment data.
  • E –assessment systems must have capacity to generate key information like system error reports and data that demonstrates regulatory compliance.
  • Where Assessment Partners enter into partnership arrangements with any other provider, formal service level agreements with clearly stated roles and responsibilities must be signed.

Teaching / Learning value of e-Assessments

  • The central role of formative assessment and feedback in online learning is formally recognised and there is evidence of an appropriate (1)number and variety of formative assessment tasks, and (2) mechanisms for the monitoring and (3) quality assurance of feedback and (4) minimum turn-around time are in place.
  • Accurate and reliable records of student e-assessment are kept and can easily be retrieved as when there is need.
  • The potential of the electronic environment for the use of ongoing formative assessment of different kinds (self-, peer- and tutor assessment) is exploited appropr

 

User friendliness of e-Assessment System

  • The rules and regulations governing assessment are published and clearly communicated to students and relevant stakeholders.
  • Evidence is provided to demonstrate that these rules are widely adhered t
  • Breaches of assessment regulations are dealt with effectively and timeously.
  • Students are provided with information and guidance on their rights and responsibilities regarding e-assessment processes (for example, definitions and regulations on plagiarism, penalties, terms of appeal, supplementary examinations, etc.).
  • Student appeals procedures are explicit, fair and effect
  • There are clear and consistent published guidelines/regulations for:
    • Marking and grading of result
    • Aggregation of marks and grad
    • Progression and final award
    • Credit allocation and articulation.
  • As much as possible, e-assessment systems should operate on inclusive principles and therefore accommodate learners with various forms of physical challenges.
  • E-assessment systems are designed in such a way that they are easy for learners to navigat Assessment partners should ensure that learners do not spend much time grappling with system issues instead of with the content of the assessment.
  • Mechanisms are in place to support learners who are less competent in working with technologies so they can gain the necessary skills and gain sufficient confidence in working with the technology; and
  • Ensure that there is fair and equal treatment of all undertaking e-assessment, irrespective of geographical location, time of assessment and course.

Use of e-portfolios for assessment

In addition to regulatory principles, e-portfolio systems should (1) store and (2) maintain performance evidence for access by (3) all required parties securely, meet the (4) evidence needs for a range of qualification types and (5) enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to another.

  • E-portfolio systems must have the capabilities to store and maintain a variety of forms of performance evidence or coursework for secure access by the learner, assessors, verifiers and moderators based on a robust authentication proc
  • As far as is practicable, awarding bodies must give due consideration to the need to support a degree of inter-operability in the e-portfolio systems that they develop or endorse to enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to anothe

NOTE WELL:

The qualification assessment specifications must spell out clearly the internal and external assessment modes identifying whether the assessment will be practical, paper based, electronic or blended.

The e-assessment instruments must be designed and developed in accordance with the QCTO Guide for developing assessment tools.

Administration of e-assessments and technical support

  • All staff undertaking e-assessment processes at assessment centres must be familiar with the on-line environment and have undergone appropriate training prior to gaining access to the syst
  • Accredited Assessment centres should have plans in place to manage every aspect of the e-assessment procedure, ensuring that the process is robust, reliable, fair and efficient and that robust contingency plans are in place to mitigate against technical failure.
  • In the case of technical failure occurring within the first 80% of the scheduled time of the assessment, it is recommended that the EISA be rescheduled. If a technical failure occurs within the last 20% of the scheduled time, the assessment may be concluded (provided the previous 80% has been saved), and the marks gained may, at the discretion of the AQP and the QCTO be standardised accordingly.
  • In cases of serious technical failure which affects the whole group assessments may be rescheduled or where appropriate students offered the assessment in paper for In either case, the QCTO should be immediately informed of the new arrangements by telephone and a written communication should be sent to the QCTO soon after the assessment.
  • Learners must be given access to and be familiar with the assessment format, question types and the technology prior to the summative examination.

Occupation Qualification elearning criteria set by the QCTO

QCTO is committed to quality assuring all forms of assessment of programmes and qualifications within the sub- framework. To this end, there is recognition of the prevalence of use of technology not only in delivering training programmes within this sector, but also in assessing students.

E-assessment is any type of assessment that has an electronic component and incorporates one or more of e-testing, e-portfolios and e-marking. Examples of e-assessment include:

  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using local intranets/networks and individual workstation
  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using the internet.
  • Assessments comprising a combination of automatic marking and manual.
  • Electronic test delivery, with all marking completed manually on screen or on paper.
  • A range of multimedia formats for submitting assessment
  • Electronic scanning of completed assessments for marking.
  • Tests downloaded from the internet by the centre.
  • Delivery of assessments and submission of completed assessments by secure e
  • E-portfolios to store and manage candidates’ evidence electronic
  • Assessments that are automatically marked and react adaptively to student performance

Validity of e-Assessments

Assessment Quality Partners should ensure that:

  • Students who pass the programme demonstrate the graduate competences indicated in the purpose and exit level outcomes of the programme.
  • Where relevant, practical competences are adequately assessed
  • Systems have been put in place to ensure reliability, rigour and security of the e- assessment system for remote students
  • Assessment activities are sufficiently varied for the programme purpose and level and the diversity of its student bod Appropriate constructs as covered in the relevant courses are adequately covered in the assessment.
  • Where students submit assessment individually by electronic means from homes or workplaces, and not from a recognized assessment centre, the programme has the necessary security systems for electronic assessment.
  • Programmes delivered exclusively or mainly through electronic learning methods do not narrow the range of assessment to the assessment of factual knowledge (which is most easily assessed), rather than the full range of outcomes and depth of knowledge required for the particular programme of stud In technology supported distance education delivery, there is the danger of limiting assessment tasks to low level cognitive skills (e.g. simple multiple choice questions [MCQs] that can be computer-marked) at the expense of high level skills (usually requiring more open-ended written and practical assignments) that enhance deep and critical engagement with concepts. Higher order thinking skills like application, analyses, evaluation and creation should be covered in the assessment.
  • There is evidence of staff development to familiarise academic staff with online assessment strategies that take high level cognitive skills into account thereby ensuring credible online assessment.

Management of e-Assessment

  • There is evidence that the assessment body understands the importance of feedback on formative assessment in e-learnin
  • There is evidence of an assessment management system to ensure that feedback on assessment is confidential and reaches the right students timeousl Systems are in place to communicate feedback and results quickly, efficiently and securely to a distributed student body.
  • Adequate systems to guarantee the integrity and security of the assessment system and the authenticity of student submissions (including means to discourage plagiarism from online sources) are in place.
  • E-assessment systems are tested to ensure proper functionality and any shortcomings identified are fully addressed prior to full implement
  • There is regular monitoring and checking of the smooth functioning of e-assessment systems to make sure that the assessment system is not compromised in any way.
  • The e-assessment body has enough competent staff to address any technical problems students face with the assessment system to ensure the assessment process runs smoothly and does not in any way disadvantage the studen
  • The assessment body does not pass on unnecessary costs to students.
  • There is a policy on external moderation of the e-assessment and the policy is effectively implemented.
  • External moderation reports are used to improve the various aspects of the e- assessment process, like the validity of the assessment instruments, the quality of student performance, and the reliability of the marking process.
  • Assessment partners must have effective quality assurance measures in place to ensure the integrity of the assessment data.
  • E –assessment systems must have capacity to generate key information like system error reports and data that demonstrates regulatory compliance.
  • Where Assessment Partners enter into partnership arrangements with any other provider, formal service level agreements with clearly stated roles and responsibilities must be signed.

Teaching / Learning value of e-Assessments

  • The central role of formative assessment and feedback in online learning is formally recognised and there is evidence of an appropriate (1)number and variety of formative assessment tasks, and (2) mechanisms for the monitoring and (3) quality assurance of feedback and (4) minimum turn-around time are in place.
  • Accurate and reliable records of student e-assessment are kept and can easily be retrieved as when there is need.
  • The potential of the electronic environment for the use of ongoing formative assessment of different kinds (self-, peer- and tutor assessment) is exploited appropr

 

User friendliness of e-Assessment System

  • The rules and regulations governing assessment are published and clearly communicated to students and relevant stakeholders.
  • Evidence is provided to demonstrate that these rules are widely adhered t
  • Breaches of assessment regulations are dealt with effectively and timeously.
  • Students are provided with information and guidance on their rights and responsibilities regarding e-assessment processes (for example, definitions and regulations on plagiarism, penalties, terms of appeal, supplementary examinations, etc.).
  • Student appeals procedures are explicit, fair and effect
  • There are clear and consistent published guidelines/regulations for:
    • Marking and grading of result
    • Aggregation of marks and grad
    • Progression and final award
    • Credit allocation and articulation.
  • As much as possible, e-assessment systems should operate on inclusive principles and therefore accommodate learners with various forms of physical challenges.
  • E-assessment systems are designed in such a way that they are easy for learners to navigat Assessment partners should ensure that learners do not spend much time grappling with system issues instead of with the content of the assessment.
  • Mechanisms are in place to support learners who are less competent in working with technologies so they can gain the necessary skills and gain sufficient confidence in working with the technology; and
  • Ensure that there is fair and equal treatment of all undertaking e-assessment, irrespective of geographical location, time of assessment and course.

Use of e-portfolios for assessment

In addition to regulatory principles, e-portfolio systems should (1) store and (2) maintain performance evidence for access by (3) all required parties securely, meet the (4) evidence needs for a range of qualification types and (5) enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to another.

  • E-portfolio systems must have the capabilities to store and maintain a variety of forms of performance evidence or coursework for secure access by the learner, assessors, verifiers and moderators based on a robust authentication proc
  • As far as is practicable, awarding bodies must give due consideration to the need to support a degree of inter-operability in the e-portfolio systems that they develop or endorse to enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to anothe

NOTE WELL:

The qualification assessment specifications must spell out clearly the internal and external assessment modes identifying whether the assessment will be practical, paper based, electronic or blended.

The e-assessment instruments must be designed and developed in accordance with the QCTO Guide for developing assessment tools.

Administration of e-assessments and technical support

  • All staff undertaking e-assessment processes at assessment centres must be familiar with the on-line environment and have undergone appropriate training prior to gaining access to the syst
  • Accredited Assessment centres should have plans in place to manage every aspect of the e-assessment procedure, ensuring that the process is robust, reliable, fair and efficient and that robust contingency plans are in place to mitigate against technical failure.
  • In the case of technical failure occurring within the first 80% of the scheduled time of the assessment, it is recommended that the EISA be rescheduled. If a technical failure occurs within the last 20% of the scheduled time, the assessment may be concluded (provided the previous 80% has been saved), and the marks gained may, at the discretion of the AQP and the QCTO be standardised accordingly.
  • In cases of serious technical failure which affects the whole group assessments may be rescheduled or where appropriate students offered the assessment in paper for In either case, the QCTO should be immediately informed of the new arrangements by telephone and a written communication should be sent to the QCTO soon after the assessment.
  • Learners must be given access to and be familiar with the assessment format, question types and the technology prior to the summative examination.

Occupation Qualification elearning criteria set by the QCTO

QCTO is committed to quality assuring all forms of assessment of programmes and qualifications within the sub- framework. To this end, there is recognition of the prevalence of use of technology not only in delivering training programmes within this sector, but also in assessing students.

E-assessment is any type of assessment that has an electronic component and incorporates one or more of e-testing, e-portfolios and e-marking. Examples of e-assessment include:

  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using local intranets/networks and individual workstation
  • Assessments that are distributed, completed, marked automatically and administered electronically using the internet.
  • Assessments comprising a combination of automatic marking and manual.
  • Electronic test delivery, with all marking completed manually on screen or on paper.
  • A range of multimedia formats for submitting assessment
  • Electronic scanning of completed assessments for marking.
  • Tests downloaded from the internet by the centre.
  • Delivery of assessments and submission of completed assessments by secure e
  • E-portfolios to store and manage candidates’ evidence electronic
  • Assessments that are automatically marked and react adaptively to student performance

Validity of e-Assessments

Assessment Quality Partners should ensure that:

  • Students who pass the programme demonstrate the graduate competences indicated in the purpose and exit level outcomes of the programme.
  • Where relevant, practical competences are adequately assessed
  • Systems have been put in place to ensure reliability, rigour and security of the e- assessment system for remote students
  • Assessment activities are sufficiently varied for the programme purpose and level and the diversity of its student bod Appropriate constructs as covered in the relevant courses are adequately covered in the assessment.
  • Where students submit assessment individually by electronic means from homes or workplaces, and not from a recognized assessment centre, the programme has the necessary security systems for electronic assessment.
  • Programmes delivered exclusively or mainly through electronic learning methods do not narrow the range of assessment to the assessment of factual knowledge (which is most easily assessed), rather than the full range of outcomes and depth of knowledge required for the particular programme of stud In technology supported distance education delivery, there is the danger of limiting assessment tasks to low level cognitive skills (e.g. simple multiple choice questions [MCQs] that can be computer-marked) at the expense of high level skills (usually requiring more open-ended written and practical assignments) that enhance deep and critical engagement with concepts. Higher order thinking skills like application, analyses, evaluation and creation should be covered in the assessment.
  • There is evidence of staff development to familiarise academic staff with online assessment strategies that take high level cognitive skills into account thereby ensuring credible online assessment.

Management of e-Assessment

  • There is evidence that the assessment body understands the importance of feedback on formative assessment in e-learnin
  • There is evidence of an assessment management system to ensure that feedback on assessment is confidential and reaches the right students timeousl Systems are in place to communicate feedback and results quickly, efficiently and securely to a distributed student body.
  • Adequate systems to guarantee the integrity and security of the assessment system and the authenticity of student submissions (including means to discourage plagiarism from online sources) are in place.
  • E-assessment systems are tested to ensure proper functionality and any shortcomings identified are fully addressed prior to full implement
  • There is regular monitoring and checking of the smooth functioning of e-assessment systems to make sure that the assessment system is not compromised in any way.
  • The e-assessment body has enough competent staff to address any technical problems students face with the assessment system to ensure the assessment process runs smoothly and does not in any way disadvantage the studen
  • The assessment body does not pass on unnecessary costs to students.
  • There is a policy on external moderation of the e-assessment and the policy is effectively implemented.
  • External moderation reports are used to improve the various aspects of the e- assessment process, like the validity of the assessment instruments, the quality of student performance, and the reliability of the marking process.
  • Assessment partners must have effective quality assurance measures in place to ensure the integrity of the assessment data.
  • E –assessment systems must have capacity to generate key information like system error reports and data that demonstrates regulatory compliance.
  • Where Assessment Partners enter into partnership arrangements with any other provider, formal service level agreements with clearly stated roles and responsibilities must be signed.

Teaching / Learning value of e-Assessments

  • The central role of formative assessment and feedback in online learning is formally recognised and there is evidence of an appropriate (1)number and variety of formative assessment tasks, and (2) mechanisms for the monitoring and (3) quality assurance of feedback and (4) minimum turn-around time are in place.
  • Accurate and reliable records of student e-assessment are kept and can easily be retrieved as when there is need.
  • The potential of the electronic environment for the use of ongoing formative assessment of different kinds (self-, peer- and tutor assessment) is exploited appropr

 

User friendliness of e-Assessment System

  • The rules and regulations governing assessment are published and clearly communicated to students and relevant stakeholders.
  • Evidence is provided to demonstrate that these rules are widely adhered t
  • Breaches of assessment regulations are dealt with effectively and timeously.
  • Students are provided with information and guidance on their rights and responsibilities regarding e-assessment processes (for example, definitions and regulations on plagiarism, penalties, terms of appeal, supplementary examinations, etc.).
  • Student appeals procedures are explicit, fair and effect
  • There are clear and consistent published guidelines/regulations for:
    • Marking and grading of result
    • Aggregation of marks and grad
    • Progression and final award
    • Credit allocation and articulation.
  • As much as possible, e-assessment systems should operate on inclusive principles and therefore accommodate learners with various forms of physical challenges.
  • E-assessment systems are designed in such a way that they are easy for learners to navigat Assessment partners should ensure that learners do not spend much time grappling with system issues instead of with the content of the assessment.
  • Mechanisms are in place to support learners who are less competent in working with technologies so they can gain the necessary skills and gain sufficient confidence in working with the technology; and
  • Ensure that there is fair and equal treatment of all undertaking e-assessment, irrespective of geographical location, time of assessment and course.

Use of e-portfolios for assessment

In addition to regulatory principles, e-portfolio systems should (1) store and (2) maintain performance evidence for access by (3) all required parties securely, meet the (4) evidence needs for a range of qualification types and (5) enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to another.

  • E-portfolio systems must have the capabilities to store and maintain a variety of forms of performance evidence or coursework for secure access by the learner, assessors, verifiers and moderators based on a robust authentication proc
  • As far as is practicable, awarding bodies must give due consideration to the need to support a degree of inter-operability in the e-portfolio systems that they develop or endorse to enable learners to move their portfolios from one centre to anothe

NOTE WELL:

The qualification assessment specifications must spell out clearly the internal and external assessment modes identifying whether the assessment will be practical, paper based, electronic or blended.

The e-assessment instruments must be designed and developed in accordance with the QCTO Guide for developing assessment tools.

Administration of e-assessments and technical support

  • All staff undertaking e-assessment processes at assessment centres must be familiar with the on-line environment and have undergone appropriate training prior to gaining access to the syst
  • Accredited Assessment centres should have plans in place to manage every aspect of the e-assessment procedure, ensuring that the process is robust, reliable, fair and efficient and that robust contingency plans are in place to mitigate against technical failure.
  • In the case of technical failure occurring within the first 80% of the scheduled time of the assessment, it is recommended that the EISA be rescheduled. If a technical failure occurs within the last 20% of the scheduled time, the assessment may be concluded (provided the previous 80% has been saved), and the marks gained may, at the discretion of the AQP and the QCTO be standardised accordingly.
  • In cases of serious technical failure which affects the whole group assessments may be rescheduled or where appropriate students offered the assessment in paper for In either case, the QCTO should be immediately informed of the new arrangements by telephone and a written communication should be sent to the QCTO soon after the assessment.
  • Learners must be given access to and be familiar with the assessment format, question types and the technology prior to the summative examination.

SETA moderation training course

115759 Conduct moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of outcomes-based assessments

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD
This unit standard is for people who conduct internal or external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of outcomes-based assessments. The assessments could be in terms of outcomes defined in a number of documents, including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

Those who have achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessments in terms of the relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements. The candidate-moderator will be able to use the prescribed Quality Assurance procedures in a fair, valid, reliable and practicable manner that is free of all bias and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for redress: race, gender and disability.

In particular, people credited with this unit standard are able to:
Demonstrate understanding of moderation course or moderation Unit Standard within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system,
Plan and prepare for moderation course or moderation Unit Standard,
Conduct moderation course or moderation Unit Standard,
Advise and support assessors,
Report, record and administer moderation course or moderation Unit Standard, and
Review moderation course or moderation Unit Standard systems and processes.

LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING
The credit calculation is based on the assumption that learners have previous assessment experience when starting to learn towards this unit standard, and in particular, recognition for the unit standard: NLRD 115753: “Conduct outcomes-based assessments”. It is recommended that candidates should achieve NLRD 115755: “Design and develop outcomes-based assessments” before attempting this unit standard:

It is further assumed that the person has evaluative expertise within the field in which they are moderating assessments.

UNIT STANDARD RANGE
1. This is a generic unit standard, and applies to internal and/or external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard within all fields of learning. It is accepted that moderation course or moderation Unit Standard happens in different ways and at different levels in different sectors, including different models for what constitutes internal versus external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard. This standard is intended to cover any situation in which moderation course or moderation Unit Standard occurs, whether this be internally, i.e. within the ambit of the provider-assessor, or externally through cooperating providers, or externally through professional bodies and quality assurance bodies.

2. Assessment of candidate-moderators will only be valid for award of this unit standard if the following requirements are met:
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard is carried out for assessments that include candidates with special needs, and RPL situations. Where real assessments are not available to cover these situations, the candidate is able to demonstrate how special needs and RPL situations would be addressed within their moderation course or moderation Unit Standard plan and process.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard covers assessment instruments, assessment design and methodology, assessment records; assessment decisions, reporting and feedback mechanisms.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard is carried out for assessments involving a variety of assessment techniques, such as work samples, simulations, role-plays, written items, oral, portfolios and projects.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard activities include pre-assessment interactions with assessors, interactions during assessments and post-assessment interactions.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard involves at least two sets of real assessment materials for the same standards and at least six assessor decisions.
The assessments that are moderated are in relation to a significant, meaningful and coherent outcome statement that includes assessment criteria and allows for judgements of competence in line with SAQA’s definition of competence i.e. embraces foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. This means that moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of simple, single-task assessments will not be valid for awarding this unit standard.

3. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidate-moderators should have access to organisational assessment and moderation course or moderation Unit Standard policies, procedures and systems. It is assumed the organisational policies and procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where candidate-moderators are assessed in organisations that do not have a moderation course or moderation Unit Standard system in place, assessors of moderators should provide a mock system for the purposes of the assessment.

4. This unit standard applies to all Moderators, regardless of whether a person carries out moderation course or moderation Unit Standard internally, as part of an organisation’s quality assurance system, or externally, as part of an ETQA or other process to verify assessment results supplied by the provider or assessment agency.

Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria.

SETA moderation training course

115759 Conduct moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of outcomes-based assessments

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD
This unit standard is for people who conduct internal or external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of outcomes-based assessments. The assessments could be in terms of outcomes defined in a number of documents, including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

Those who have achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessments in terms of the relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements. The candidate-moderator will be able to use the prescribed Quality Assurance procedures in a fair, valid, reliable and practicable manner that is free of all bias and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for redress: race, gender and disability.

In particular, people credited with this unit standard are able to:
Demonstrate understanding of moderation course or moderation Unit Standard within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system,
Plan and prepare for moderation course or moderation Unit Standard,
Conduct moderation course or moderation Unit Standard,
Advise and support assessors,
Report, record and administer moderation course or moderation Unit Standard, and
Review moderation course or moderation Unit Standard systems and processes.

LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING
The credit calculation is based on the assumption that learners have previous assessment experience when starting to learn towards this unit standard, and in particular, recognition for the unit standard: NLRD 115753: “Conduct outcomes-based assessments”. It is recommended that candidates should achieve NLRD 115755: “Design and develop outcomes-based assessments” before attempting this unit standard:

It is further assumed that the person has evaluative expertise within the field in which they are moderating assessments.

UNIT STANDARD RANGE
1. This is a generic unit standard, and applies to internal and/or external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard within all fields of learning. It is accepted that moderation course or moderation Unit Standard happens in different ways and at different levels in different sectors, including different models for what constitutes internal versus external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard. This standard is intended to cover any situation in which moderation course or moderation Unit Standard occurs, whether this be internally, i.e. within the ambit of the provider-assessor, or externally through cooperating providers, or externally through professional bodies and quality assurance bodies.

2. Assessment of candidate-moderators will only be valid for award of this unit standard if the following requirements are met:
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard is carried out for assessments that include candidates with special needs, and RPL situations. Where real assessments are not available to cover these situations, the candidate is able to demonstrate how special needs and RPL situations would be addressed within their moderation course or moderation Unit Standard plan and process.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard covers assessment instruments, assessment design and methodology, assessment records; assessment decisions, reporting and feedback mechanisms.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard is carried out for assessments involving a variety of assessment techniques, such as work samples, simulations, role-plays, written items, oral, portfolios and projects.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard activities include pre-assessment interactions with assessors, interactions during assessments and post-assessment interactions.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard involves at least two sets of real assessment materials for the same standards and at least six assessor decisions.
The assessments that are moderated are in relation to a significant, meaningful and coherent outcome statement that includes assessment criteria and allows for judgements of competence in line with SAQA’s definition of competence i.e. embraces foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. This means that moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of simple, single-task assessments will not be valid for awarding this unit standard.

3. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidate-moderators should have access to organisational assessment and moderation course or moderation Unit Standard policies, procedures and systems. It is assumed the organisational policies and procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where candidate-moderators are assessed in organisations that do not have a moderation course or moderation Unit Standard system in place, assessors of moderators should provide a mock system for the purposes of the assessment.

4. This unit standard applies to all Moderators, regardless of whether a person carries out moderation course or moderation Unit Standard internally, as part of an organisation’s quality assurance system, or externally, as part of an ETQA or other process to verify assessment results supplied by the provider or assessment agency.

Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria.

SETA moderation training course

115759 Conduct moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of outcomes-based assessments

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD
This unit standard is for people who conduct internal or external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of outcomes-based assessments. The assessments could be in terms of outcomes defined in a number of documents, including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

Those who have achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessments in terms of the relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements. The candidate-moderator will be able to use the prescribed Quality Assurance procedures in a fair, valid, reliable and practicable manner that is free of all bias and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for redress: race, gender and disability.

In particular, people credited with this unit standard are able to:
Demonstrate understanding of moderation course or moderation Unit Standard within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system,
Plan and prepare for moderation course or moderation Unit Standard,
Conduct moderation course or moderation Unit Standard,
Advise and support assessors,
Report, record and administer moderation course or moderation Unit Standard, and
Review moderation course or moderation Unit Standard systems and processes.

LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING
The credit calculation is based on the assumption that learners have previous assessment experience when starting to learn towards this unit standard, and in particular, recognition for the unit standard: NLRD 115753: “Conduct outcomes-based assessments”. It is recommended that candidates should achieve NLRD 115755: “Design and develop outcomes-based assessments” before attempting this unit standard:

It is further assumed that the person has evaluative expertise within the field in which they are moderating assessments.

UNIT STANDARD RANGE
1. This is a generic unit standard, and applies to internal and/or external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard within all fields of learning. It is accepted that moderation course or moderation Unit Standard happens in different ways and at different levels in different sectors, including different models for what constitutes internal versus external moderation course or moderation Unit Standard. This standard is intended to cover any situation in which moderation course or moderation Unit Standard occurs, whether this be internally, i.e. within the ambit of the provider-assessor, or externally through cooperating providers, or externally through professional bodies and quality assurance bodies.

2. Assessment of candidate-moderators will only be valid for award of this unit standard if the following requirements are met:
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard is carried out for assessments that include candidates with special needs, and RPL situations. Where real assessments are not available to cover these situations, the candidate is able to demonstrate how special needs and RPL situations would be addressed within their moderation course or moderation Unit Standard plan and process.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard covers assessment instruments, assessment design and methodology, assessment records; assessment decisions, reporting and feedback mechanisms.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard is carried out for assessments involving a variety of assessment techniques, such as work samples, simulations, role-plays, written items, oral, portfolios and projects.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard activities include pre-assessment interactions with assessors, interactions during assessments and post-assessment interactions.
moderation course or moderation Unit Standard involves at least two sets of real assessment materials for the same standards and at least six assessor decisions.
The assessments that are moderated are in relation to a significant, meaningful and coherent outcome statement that includes assessment criteria and allows for judgements of competence in line with SAQA’s definition of competence i.e. embraces foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. This means that moderation course or moderation Unit Standard of simple, single-task assessments will not be valid for awarding this unit standard.

3. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidate-moderators should have access to organisational assessment and moderation course or moderation Unit Standard policies, procedures and systems. It is assumed the organisational policies and procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where candidate-moderators are assessed in organisations that do not have a moderation course or moderation Unit Standard system in place, assessors of moderators should provide a mock system for the purposes of the assessment.

4. This unit standard applies to all Moderators, regardless of whether a person carries out moderation course or moderation Unit Standard internally, as part of an organisation’s quality assurance system, or externally, as part of an ETQA or other process to verify assessment results supplied by the provider or assessment agency.

Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria.

SETA Assessors Training Course

115753 Conduct outcomes-based assessment 

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD
This generic Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standard unit standard is for those who assess people for their achievement of learning outcomes in terms of specified criteria using pre-designed assessment instruments. The outcomes and criteria may be defined in a range of documents including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications.

Those who achieve this unit standard will be able to conduct assessments within their fields of expertise. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications, particularly within the fields of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

People credited with this unit standard are able to carry out assessments in a fair, valid, reliable and practicable manner that is free of all bias and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for redress: race, gender and disability.

  • In particular, people credited with this unit standard will be able to:
  • Demonstrate understanding of outcomes-based assessment;
  • Prepare for assessments;
  • Conduct assessments;
  • Provide feedback on assessments; and
  • Review assessments.

LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING
The credit calculation is based on the assumption that those starting to learn towards this unit standard have no previous assessment experience. It is assumed, though, that the candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards have evaluative expertise within the area of learning in which they intend to assess (see Definition of Terms for a definition of “evaluative expertise”).

Durban Assessors Course click here

UNIT STANDARD RANGE
1. This generic assessment unit standard applies to assessment in all fields of learning. However, it is expected that assessments will be contextualised to meet the requirements of different contexts.

2. Assessment of candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards will only be valid for award of this unit standard if the following requirements are met:
Assessments carried out by the candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standard are in relation to significant, meaningful and coherent outcome statements that include criteria for assessment purposes, and allow for judgements of competence in line with SAQA’s definition of competence i.e. embrace foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. Outcomes that are highly task-orientated and do not demand much, if any, in the way of reflexive competence, will not be sufficient for measuring competence as an Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standard in terms of this unit standard. It is important that candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards select outcomes that enable them to meet the requirement laid out here.
The candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standard demonstrates repeatability by carrying out at least two assessments :

  • One of which may be a simulated assessment (in order to cover a range of typical assessment situations), and
  • At least one of which must involve a real candidate in a real assessment situation, preferably under the guidance of a mentor.

Assessors Course in Johannesburg click here
The assessments may involve two or more candidates in relation to the same outcome.
Candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards produce evidence that they can conduct assessments in RPL situations and for candidates who may have fairly recently acquired the necessary knowledge and skills through courses or learning programmes. However, candidate Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards do not need to carry out both kinds of assessments in practice for the award of this unit standard. Should candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards carry out an RPL-related assessment for the purposes of this unit standard, then it is sufficient for them to show how they might have conducted the assessment differently had it been an assessment linked to recent learning, and vice versa.

3. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards should have access to Assessment Guides and will not be expected to design assessments. (See Definition of Terms for a definition of Assessment Guides). Candidate Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards will be expected to interpret the standards at hand in order to ensure their assessment judgements are in accordance with the requirements of the standard. In cases where Assessment Guides are not available, providers should seek ways to make such guides available for the purposes of this assessment. Where candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standard also intend to design assessments, then providers are encouraged to integrate the learning and assessment of the unit standards:

  • Conduct outcomes-based assessments
  • Design and develop outcomes-based assessments

4. Candidate-Assessors course or Assessor Unit Standards should have access to organisational assessment policies, procedures and systems (including moderation). It is assumed the organisational policies and procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where such policies and procedures are not yet available, the provider may make general policies and procedures available for the purposes of this assessment.

Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria.

Assessors course in Cape Town click here.

UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE
The following knowledge is embedded within the unit standard, and will be assessed directly or indirectly through assessment of the specific outcomes in terms of the assessment criteria:

  • Outcomes-based education, training and development
  • Principles of assessment – directly assessed through assessment criterion ‘Key principles of assessment are described and illustrated in practical situations. The descriptions highlight the importance of applying the principles in terms of the possible effect on the assessment process and results.’, and indirectly assessed via a requirement to apply the principles throughout the standard.
  • Principles and practices of RPL – directly assessed through assessment criteria ‘RPL is explained in terms of its purpose, processes and related benefits and challenges. Explanations highlight the potential impact of RPL on individuals, learning organisations and the workplace.’, ‘Inputs are sought from candidates regarding special needs and possible sources of evidence that could contribute to valid assessment, including RPL opportunities.
  • Modifications made to the assessment approach on the basis of the inputs do not affect the validity of the assessment.’ and specific outcome ‘Conduct assessments.’, as well as through application in the rest of the standard.
  • Methods of assessment – directly assessed through assessment criterion ‘A variety of assessment methods are described and compared in terms of how they could be used when conducting assessments in different situations.’, and indirectly assessed through application of the methods
  • Potential barriers to assessment – assessed when dealing with special needs.
  • The principles and mechanisms of the NQF – this knowledge underpins the standard
  • Assessment policies and ETQA requirements
1 2 3 14