Discrimination against pvt assessors and moderators by Setas / Discrimination against those financially less fortunate

I have been in the employment of various training providers since 1999, am a registered assessor and moderator with numerous setas.

Two years ago I resigned (good thing as company went into legal battle against the seta and closed their doors) and went on my own.

I was recently approached by a group of private individuals who in their private capacity has requested that I RPL them against a particular Unit Standard for which I am registered against.

I made contact with the Seta the Ustd is registered with only to be told that the Seta will not recognise any assessment I do unless I am with a training provider.

In other words...
Whilst I am employed or contracted in to a training provider I have the knowledge and skills to conduct assessments, but the minute I am not contracted in or employed (according to the SETA) my knowledge miraculously disappears and am incompetent and no longer able to conduct an assessment!

Is this not blatent discrimination? I am not conducting any training just assessing.

Why does the Seta have such a problem against independent assessors.

Should this group who approached me go to a training provider they will be charged twice the price and they just cannot afford it, so now instead they remain without any credits and any chance of gaining a qualification.

Is there anything we can do about this? Is there any way we can appeal this?

0 members like this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tessa Oosthuizen on August 18, 2009 at 21:03

One problem I can see from the Seta side is QA processes that a training provider has to have ( moderation, verification) and the subsequnet loading of the info on the NLRD .

I see your point though - perhaps the Seta's should look into a professional body as has been mooted for independents so this type of QA and upload could be centralised. AT this stage I can't see it though as they can barely get assessor registrations right.....

Permalink Reply by Liane Regnard on August 18, 2009 at 21:45

I know.

Received acknowledgment from SSeta in 2006 of receipt of my extension of scope and I am still awaiting a response. Emailed Anne Whittle directly again two weeks ago and am still awaiting a response!

As with the QA process nothing stopping them from insisting on a moderation report and then do verification...

Tessa Oosthuizen said:

One problem I can see from the Seta side is QA processes that a training provider has to have ( moderation, verification) and the subsequnet loading of the info on the NLRD .

I see your point though - perhaps the Seta's should look into a professional body as has been mooted for independents so this type of QA and upload could be centralised. AT this stage I can't see it though as they can barely get assessor registrations right.....

Permalink Reply by sylvia hammond on August 18, 2009 at 22:03

Hi Liane,
First, I am researching cases in the skills development area - would you be prepared to mail me details of the company and the Seta involved in the case you mention.
Secondly, if you provide me with the information of the Seta who refused to recognise any assessment that you do, I am happy to forward to that Seta CEO & SAQA to request a written response on the policy. Once we have that, then we can ascertain whether there is legal cause for action.

Permalink Reply by sylvia hammond on August 18, 2009 at 22:06

Hi Tessa,
This is exactly why I am proposing that the Assessors & Moderators should be registered with the SA Board of People Practices, it's a professional body & responsible for the quality assurance of HR qualifications, so all the points that you raise would be able to be covered professionally & competently. I fully support the association that David is proposing to deal with practical day to day matters, but the professional registration should be with the SABPP.

Tessa Oosthuizen said:

One problem I can see from the Seta side is QA processes that a training provider has to have ( moderation, verification) and the subsequnet loading of the info on the NLRD .

I see your point though - perhaps the Seta's should look into a professional body as has been mooted for independents so this type of QA and upload could be centralised. AT this stage I can't see it though as they can barely get assessor registrations right.....

Permalink Reply by Andrea Kellett on August 19, 2009 at 9:24

Hi Liane,

Allowing all assessors to give unit standards (and credits) to competent learners is a bit like saying that all Matric examiners who "pass" learners can grant a Matric certificate.

An examiner in this case works within the ambit (and DOE registration) of a school. Otherwise anyone qualified to administer the exam would be able to give certificates/credits and there would be no quality control of the learning & assessment.

Whilst I have no doubt as to your competence or subject matter expertiese at the end of the day the certificate of competence comes from the accredited provider not from the assessor. The assessor is merely a roll player in that.

Not sure if that answers your question?

Permalink Reply by Audrey Thwala on August 19, 2009 at 10:44

Hi Liane,
I believe the SETAs are trying by all means to be organised, have all admin and factors etc arranged properly as a body. I would advice you to register yourself with any training provider, we do it for free and then you become our associate, then you have an umbrella body who will monitor, advice and be there for you as an accredited body.

Please feel free to contact me, I am willing to assist.

Audrey 011 782-1108

Permalink Reply by Werner Rossouw on August 19, 2009 at 11:21

hi Liani

i hear you - and i have been in similiar situations. it seems we are 'stuck' without a provider. I must however state that now that i am a provider i can see why this rule is implemented. You have to consider that actual assessment instruments for RPL must also be approved by the SETA to ensure quality in ETD. otherwise we may as well throw out the NQF and revert back to the old way of doing things where we fork out certificates out of our garages.... We are striving for standardisation in practice and that is why we have unit standards and approved providers.

hope this helps?

Permalink Reply by Lize Moldenhauer on August 19, 2009 at 12:17

I must say, I am in two minds when I respond to this. I fully understand your frustration and challenges you face as I have been involved with the various bodies in the National Qualifications Framework since 1998. There is always a balanced view and a debate to argue both sides. I tuely believe that your feelings towards this process if justified, however having a organisation responsible and acc***able, and making sure verification and ETQA pratices are adhered to is critical. As an Assessor you have to comply with a Assessment, Moderation and Appeals policy and what about a certification policy.

I work with various assessors and moderators and I believe if you are able to allign yourself with a provideryou can have an Service Level Agreement that I believe will be able to serve your clients and be compliant to the requirements of the ETQA. And this need not be at huge additional cost for the client.

Think about an alliance with a provider I believe this will serve you well and be of mutual benefit.

Permalink Reply by Jacqueline Klem on August 19, 2009 at 13:02

Hi

I share your frustration. I assist training providers in getting their accreditation and unless you have an assessor or moderator, you cannot even submit an application. If you want to extend the scope same thing. If it is a new company who have not had the time to get their assessor and moderator registration, there are no independent people on the databasis of the SETAs to approach to act as an external assessor or moderator.

One of my clients went through the whole process of doing the assessor and moderator training and after three months of submitting their applciation to ber registered with the SETA, I contacted the SETA to ask what is happening. Within an hour the assessor registration was sent through, but three weeks later we are still waiting (now almost four months) to hear about the registration of the moderator. So the extension of scope cannot be lodged and the training cannot be offered. Loss of income!!!!

The SETA hold all the cards

Permalink Reply by Penelope on August 19, 2009 at 14:33

I am a service provider who at times wonders why do we have to go through all the trouble to capacitate us self eg getting accredited and then when it time to be give work it is only those who are paying Sdl and have sound bank balances. Whe is the minor man goining to be given a chance. Another is that the municipalities say the want accredited providers but when it comes to the real facts it is only their friends who are not accredited who get the training contract. So why do we bother to empower ourselfs jus to be made fools.Hope i am not the only one seeing this big mess.

ContributorPermalink Reply by Ashwell Glasson on August 19, 2009 at 14:57

Objectively the Seta had no choice but to give you that rather depressing answer. The reality is that it is the legislation that fundamentally guides that response.

The aacreditation component requires a juristic or legal person to be the accredited body, not a natural person. The award of the qualification would have to emanate from somewhere, not someone according to the Act.

ContributorPermalink Reply by Ashwell Glasson on August 19, 2009 at 14:58