!NOT FOR PUBLICATION! FOR CONSULTATION! QCTO CEO explains opening eLearning

[Nigel Shipston]

Go Sylvia!
Know the feeling and this is not the first time. The last time I received a document from my SETA (as part of a comprehensive mailing list) for which I got chewed out for re-distributing. I don’t recall getting any answer from QCTO when I pointed out that it had been distributed by a SETA already and in no way indicated that it was not for re-distribution. Communication channels are so rapid these days that it becomes imperative to indicate the status of the document if distribution is not intended. A case of not shooting the messenger!

Kind of misses the point though if it was supposedly “consultative”, as I have seen nothing yet from my SETA nor anything that would reach the SDP’s who make up the majority of SDP’s who are not represented by the bodies mentioned.

[Lynel Farrell]

Hi Sylvia, I saw this same letter on a number of large Facebook groups – and what concerns me: WHY would Appetd have such document and the SETAs but not the providers nationwide? That letter was circulated last week already on social networks. The QCTO also placed the Guidelines for the standards of eLearning for Registered Qualifications on the OQSF as well as the Summary of E-Learning and E-Assessment Guidelines on the website – which is in the public domain.

There shouldn’t be any secrets in our industry. All providers are in need of changing their mode of delivery in order to keep their head above water. I saw the letter last week and didn’t see any draft watermark.

[Louis Nel]

Thank you Sylvia.

[Heidi D Edwards]

Hi Sylvia,

The brouhaha is interesting, given that a similar document, with similar content, was available for download from the QCTO website on the 22nd of April.

Regards,
Heidi D Edwards

[Cynthia Reynders]

Hi Sylvia

Totally in agreement that sensitive documentation for consultation, draft, input should state as such otherwise it will cause unnecessary frustration.

[Author]

Posts