QCTO webinar – presentations 3 & 4

[Sylvia F. Hammond]

These are really important and well worth watching.
See attached.

Share on Social Media

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Marlie Spencer]

Thanks for sharing these Sylvia. I have two main concerns related to the long-term impact.

1. Potential conflict of interest
The SETAs will be responsible for the External Integrated Summative Assessment (EISA) as the Assessment Quality Partner (AQP). There are two things to be noted by members here. The first is a potential conflict of interest. The SETAs are required to set annual targets for the number of learners who complete (achieve) their programmes. This effectively creates a situation where the body responsible for setting assessments is also under pressure to ensure a minimum number of learners successfully completes those assessments. A bit of a referee/player situation.

Secondly, since the SETAs will have to fund the EISA as the AQP, this will have an impact on the funding available for the delivery of the actual training. Ultimately, it will probably hit the provider’s pocket. They could supplement their income by acting as EISA assessors on behalf of the AQP, but cannot perform that function for learners they have trained as per QCTO requirements. This results in other risks which I am not going to highlight now.

2. Funding the model
Back when the mandatory grant was reduced from 50% to 20%, an unsustainable situation was created. Effectively it meant that SETAs had to increase output (learners funded through discretionary funds) by 73% with the exact same input (10% of levies). Coupled with this, the administrative requirements associated with skills development increased vastly due to changes in various pieces of legislation and a general (valid) expectation of moving towards greater maturity as organisations. I agree that there are lots of opportunities for the SETAs to be innovative in processes to increase efficiency, and hopefully this will transpire. In the meantime, however, expecting the SETAs to continue funding all historical quality assurance functions, plus implement workplace approval for occupational programmes, plus implement the AQP function nationally, is a tall order.

The systemic issues with skills development in a South Africa with enormous youth unemployment is something that deeply worries me. The objective in the establishment of the QCTO was ‘simplification’ and ‘accessibility’. It frightens me to observe the train rushing in the opposite direction.

[Sylvia F. Hammond]

Hi Marlie,
Great to hear from you.

Yes, I attended a Foodbev chamber meeting on Friday & that was the first time I heard about the Setas now being responsible for the EISA.

I feel that the institutions are going around in circles, thinking that by constantly moving things – that constitutes progress.
Not so – when the basics are not done competently.

It would be beneficial to learn to manage what is in place properly first before moving into something new – that will no doubt also be done incompetently.

I also attended the QCTO meeting on the QA checklist – in the form of the apprenticeship 7 steps concept – with the support of the ILO & international funding.
I was very impressed – it is excellent.

However, I was left with the feeling that we are again following international consultants & installing a full piece orchestra – when the trio of answer the phone, respond to emails, and perform administration competently – are not done.

We should put every new initiative on hold until we work out why what we have isn’t working – and get every outstanding certificate issued. So that people can apply for jobs.

And then ask whether what we have supports youth education and training and employment.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Sylvia F. Hammond.

[Author]

Posts