This topic contains 112 replies, has 41 voices, and was last updated by 
Skills Universe 2 years, 7 months ago.
-
Posts
-
-
-
Hi
It depends on the course and the necessity, but most of the time – NO.
If it is a credit-based course and the learner is to receive credits/be entered onto the National Learner Record Database (NLRD) then a provider who is not yet accredited cannot ensure this for the learner. If it is a “nice to have” course, then perhaps you can.
Accreditation, even with its gaps, is at least a standard that providers should reach.
-
-
I dont entirely agree with Winnie . Our very own Educational Institutions at the highest level have not done much about SAQA or Unit Standards .
There are also Global players with excellent products who dont see the RSA SETA landscape as useful at all.
My advice : When looking a training look at the results the trainers have had and get testimonials from other users.
-
I am an accredited assessor and moderator and at times am asked by a non accredited provider to present a course. I make use of my own material which is fully accredited with both Inseta and TETA and thus there is nothing wrong with the course material, as it is more than up to date and is kept up to date being approved by the Association of Marine Underwriters of SA plus part is passed by average adjusters in London. Therefore it is not always correct to state that the material can be substandard. Furthermore, it is the only course on marine insurance which is accredited with the Inseta. Not a good idea to just presuppose content.
-
It depends on the type of training you are referring to. I am the sole member of a first aid training company – been accredited by Dept Labour since 1995. My company’s training is of an exceptionally high standard and my course content exceeds most SETA registered unit standards.
Dept Labour is the LEGAL COMPLIANCE requirement, not SETA. This in itself should answer the question.
I have been trying to obtain HWSETA compliance for four years now – have had site visit, etc, & spent thousands of rands purchasing material which I will never use as it’s inferior to my own – supposedly to ensure accreditation with SETA – the contacts I am dealing with there constantly move the goal posts & I’ve all but given up.
My current clients are long-standing, loyal clients & wouldn’t be so if they were unhappy with the level of training I provide or lack of compliance.
So I would say, as long as you research potential training companies well, you should ensure you don’t end up burnt 🙂
Hope this helps!
Regards
Petra
-
-
Hi Jacqui
With absolute pleasure! Would love to have a look at it when you’re done 🙂
Warm regards
Petra
-
I am a registered trainer with Cathsseta, but I also train other programs that I am comfortable with. I am a freelance trainer but not accredited as I do not have a training school.
I believe once a trainer and when you have the training manual, its not difficult to impart knowledge to learners if you yourself understand and attach logic to the material. Facilitation is not only teaching but a two way participation between trainer and learner. As a trainer I also learn a lot from my learners because they are given the opportunity to also contribute from their experiences. To an extent, I do agree with Greg, and yes its also important to make sure you contract a registered trainer as your certificate holds no ‘ value’ in my opinion.
-
-
Greetings,
My experience is that many companies are not interested in sending people on accredited training.The PoE’s put them off (its too long and time consuming). These companies want quick fix solutions e.g. addressing Conflict in the Workplace. They are happy just to receive a certificate of attendance which can be used for Recognition of Prior Learning (if need be). Non-accredited training therefore still has a large market. Acccredited Training providers must obviously be used for accredited training requirements, but non-accredited training providers can still be used for non-accredited training situations discussed above. See http://www.tbasa.co.za.
Regards
Patrick Lowe
-
Hi Itebogeng
I agree with those who say it depends, but really training is transferring skill so if u dont need the credit then why not train without acreditation. i had a fashion design school and i was not acreditted, i was fair to the learners and told them i am not acreddited guess what most learners today still ask me to continue as they gained and have thier own business today. -
Greetings All,
I believe that Accreditation as a Training Provider as well as the accreditation and alignment of course material to registered NQF unit standards and qualifications is imperative to ensure the credibility of a Provider and their course/s. There are far too many training providers offering less than adeqaute courses at exhorbitant prices. We need to have quality standards to work towards. If we are unhappy with the quality of current unit standards/ qualifications or the red-tape involved in the Accreditation process , it is up to us in the training profession to do something about it. We need quality assurance in S.A. to become ‘world class’ providers of education.
-
Greetings All,
I believe that Accreditation as a Training Provider as well as the accreditation and alignment of course material to registered NQF unit standards and qualifications is imperative to ensure the credibility of a Provider and their course/s. There are far too many training providers offering less than adeqaute courses at exhorbitant prices. We need to have quality standards to work towards. If we are unhappy with the quality of current unit standards/ qualifications or the red-tape involved in the Accreditation process , it is up to us in the training profession to do something about it. We need quality assurance in S.A. to become ‘world class’ providers of education.
-
Greetings All,
I believe that Accreditation as a Training Provider as well as the accreditation and alignment of course material to registered NQF unit standards and qualifications is imperative to ensure the credibility of a Provider and their course/s. There are far too many training providers offering less than adeqaute courses at exhorbitant prices. We need to have quality standards to work towards. If we are unhappy with the quality of current unit standards/ qualifications or the red-tape involved in the Accreditation process , it is up to us in the training profession to do something about it. We need quality assurance in S.A. to become ‘world class’ providers of education.
-
Greetings All,
I believe that Accreditation as a Training Provider as well as the accreditation and alignment of course material to registered NQF unit standards and qualifications is imperative to ensure the credibility of a Provider and their course/s. There are far too many training providers offering less than adeqaute courses at exhorbitant prices. We need to have quality standards to work towards. If we are unhappy with the quality of current unit standards/ qualifications or the red-tape involved in the Accreditation process , it is up to us in the training profession to do something about it. We need quality assurance in S.A. to become ‘world class’ providers of education.
-
Greetings All,
I believe that Accreditation as a Training Provider as well as the accreditation and alignment of course material to registered NQF unit standards and qualifications is imperative to ensure the credibility of a Provider and their course/s. There are far too many training providers offering less than adeqaute courses at exhorbitant prices. We need to have quality standards to work towards. If we are unhappy with the quality of current unit standards/ qualifications or the red-tape involved in the Accreditation process , it is up to us in the training profession to do something about it. We need quality assurance in S.A. to become ‘world class’ providers of education.
-
As some have said, it depends on the programme. If it is a programme from which credits and qualifications are expected, accreditation and registration are essential. If not, (motivational seminar, team-building, etc….) these things are not essential (let’s not generalise and assume that they are operating illegally).
BUT, as has been pointed out, you are on your own with a non-accredited trainer. Make sure you get what you want and check with others who have used the provider. On the other hand, i have had shocking service from an accredited, national training provider too. It depends on the trainer on the day. Accreditation does not automatically mean quality; it just means recourse.
-
-
Without accreditation credits cannot be applied towards a qualification
Without accreditation, the course content would not be aligned to unit standards so you would not be sure of what the outcomes would be.
Accredited trainers would have had to fulfill certain requirements pertaining to training methodology and quality and although SETA is not a guarantee of quality it is at the very least a reassurance.
Our material is approved by MICT SETA and has gone through allot of development and careful crafting to create and maintain a good quality product. Because we are confident in our product we are happy to go through the process of alignment and accreditation.
You might find the companies or materials that are not aligned or accredited would be cheaper ( and in some cases more expensive ). But the risk is in the quality and the outcomes. Which is very expensive to get wrong.
-
I disagree.
I am not registered with any SETA and have run my own training courses in 13 countries for the past 16 years.
Whilst SETA registration gives some form of reassurance, it is not the only requirement for a successful training intervention. In the world of business today, it is your Reputation that is the deciding criteria.
In fact, in the past 16 years I have only been asked for SETA registration 3 times.
I facilitate 90% of my workshops and seminars in the public environment. I attract many delegates from the various SETAS and that makes it too difficult and cumbersome to register with various ones.
My programs draw from various fields and is holistic in nature, and that adds to the problem. Take for instance the Reputation Risk Management program that I will be hosting at the end of the month. It contains Crisis Management, Reputation Risk and Crisis & Strategic Communications issue. Under which Seta must I register it?
Where a client demands registration I can do that with pleasure provided the training will be on-going and over a period of time. The amount of administration involved for once –off interventions is just too much, and after all if it was not up to standard I would no longer be in the marketplace. After all, my reputation matters to me.
However all my training is outcomes based and internationally aligned. (In fact I used to be the Chairman of The Guild of Competency Development Practitioners -a body instrumental in the SETA development). I have done work with many South African companies, including 7 Government Departments, The Industrial Development Corporation and the National Research Foundation.
This is what Dr. Amani Saidi, National Research Foundation said – The course was extremely relevant to the stakeholder function, was well-structured and effectively delivered by the facilitator. The high level of people that attended, and the high level of class discussions enriched the course further, plus the course was competitively priced, such that it is greater value for money.
So just to assume that because a course is not registered that it is of sub-par standard is not correct.
I have a few thoughts (some I guess cynical) about the questions raised about certification and/or accreditation processes. I have studied widely – In fact I have multiskilled in four areas and I now find that much more useful.
– First the humorous. I once read that a PHD is nothing more than the transfer of old bones from one graveyard to another i.e. often very little new groundbreaking research (There is room for specialised knowledge in any profession)
– Secondly. Let me use the example a comedian. Imagine you went to a show tonight and they introduce the main speaker as a comedian with 2 PhD’s. BUT he does not make you laugh. What then? He has the accreditation and the qualifications, but he did not meet your needs and expectations.
So for me proof of educational qualifications and accreditation is context specific.I guess it is very much like an output/input model. As a customer I cannot really care whether you have studied at the best university or alma mater. If I was sick all I want to know is that you can cure me. As a customer what can you do for me and my problems?
This is more a case of personal influence. Sure, qualifications and accreditation counts. It might give me an introduction. Open the doors for me. Boost my own confidence and self-image. Some clients demand that. They measure you by your education, your appearance, your money, car, your image. Others measure you by your ability to get into their representational system (an NLP concept) – and judge you by your ability to relate to them.
It seems to get down to the word Performance. I have always bought into a Japanese psychiatrist Morita’s work. For instance Morita expresses his adverse thoughts about feelings. He describes feelings as clouds – they come and they go, just like your blood sugar. He uses an example that in a relationship people say I love you, but their ACTIONS never match their words, and their feelings. I guess a lot of my thoughts on reputation come from this.
You build your Reputation thoughtfully day by day through the actions you take, the words you use, etc. No certificate on the wall will make me a professional.
Over the past twenty years I must have attended more than 50 short courses and conferences, read hundreds of books on PR and strategy and worked on countless of assignments. BUT I have nothing to show for it from an educational perspective, but that I explained above. However I have also spoken at more than 80 conferences in 13 countries.
So how I do build my reputation? I build it daily through every action. I get and use referrals and references. I use the Media to position myself as an expert and I deliver.
Let’s even go further. Look at MIT’s new model where they give access to University education away – content and knowledge. Why? Because they know that it is a person who makes a difference. Let’s use Nelson Mandela as an example.
So I guess what I am saying in a long – winded way is that qualifications and accreditation are useful parts of the puzzle, the portfolio. BUT they are just that – parts.
No certification, accreditation or professional membership makes you a professional. It all lies in what you say, how you behave and how you act. If those are not in synch your reputation will become a problem. That is what I base my reputation on. Sometimes the standards put forward by many an institution is based on ethical and ideological standards that comply with what is happening at an educational institution.
Having taught Buddy Aid (First Aid without equipment in a military situation) I learned what is important. It is results that count. However those results must be stakeholder based.
Another school of thought says “Caveat Emptor –Let the Buyer beware”
In the Insurance fields this principle applies. By raising the entry level and the bar for actuaries and making qualifications difficult to attain they are virtually making salaries sky high. It is a simple Economics principle – the law of supply and demand.
Controlling an industry can be done either through legal means, religious or governmental control. Free market principles say let the customer decide.
Deon Binneman
Speaker, Facilitator & Adviser
Profile: http://about.me/deonbinneman
I help organizations & individuals to build, sustain and protect their reputations
P: +27 11 4753515 / M: 83-425-4318 / Johannesburg, South Africa
Reputation…Years to build, Minutes to destroy!
-
This issue(judging by the responses to Itebogeng’s initial question) is a very “hot potato ” at the moment. I come from an academic/teaching background and confirm the sentiments as expressed above. Firstly it is virtually impossible for one to get material accredited. Secondly a great deal of “accredited ” material is substandard and therefore useless. Thirdly, it has always alarmed me that as long as one is an accredited / registered provider, the actual training/facilitation can be conducted by anyone !! Fourthly in order to become an accredited Training Provider, one is stymied at all turns, personally I have never encountered “red tape ” that is so tightly wound that nothing can dislodge it. Finally, certain accredited assessors are not able to train unit standards for which they are accredited assessors.Clients need to be warned that accreditation or the lack thereof is virtually meaningless due to the very real problems surrounding most of the SETAS.
-
It depends on the purpose of the training. However, it is recommended that you use registered and accredited providers as you will obtain certificate of competence. However, the quality, relevance, suitability and scope of the material may meet and or even exceed what is prescribed by SETA. Some of the unaccredited trainers,
provide broader, better and practical training programs.
-
I suggest you work with an Accredited Training Provider as there is recourse whenever you are not happy with the service received or content. Accredited training providers are checked upon by SETAs to ensure they are abiding to the Quality Management System that was approved as one of the main requirements for accreditation. Having said this, an accredited Training provider can also providing training that is not SAQA aligned for reasons such as that SAQA doesn’t yet have such trainings available but at least you have peace of mind that their operations are guided by a SETA as opposed to non accredited provider. Hope this helps.
-
Hi Deon
I hear you but my issue is not the reputation of the facilitator but the contents of course, if your material is not registered how does that influence the person geting the training. again yes it might broaden the individuals knowledge but how does she proof that she gained some knowledge that will help develop her career. Remember interviews has to be accompanied by a cv and verification of that cv.
-
-
It is fascinating to see how much confusion there still is on the purpose and need for accreditation. To begin with, it is not illegal to offer non-accredited training. There are still employers who need training in areas for which registered standards do not even exist – these are mostly dedicated to a particular occupation or skill, for example some art courses, some courses in soft skills such as management of time, stress, etc. The Constitution provides for this. What would be illegal is if a training institution claims to offer accredited learning and to issue credits when this is not the case. It might also be illegal to claim that the client will be able to claim skills levies back on account of non-accredited learning – this is not always the case. There is in my mind two important reasons why accredited education and training is often better. Firstly, it is only when your credits are read into the NLRD that you can enjoy access and follow further learning, i.e. it supports lifelong learning. Secondly, a learning institution that went through the trouble of obtaining accreditation from a recognised quality assurance body probably offers learning of substance – they have been evaluated even though the evaluation is sometimes not professionally done. At least a learning institution must, in the opinion of the quality assurance body, have the capacity to offer good quality learning before they will be accredited. In addition to accrediting with a SETA ETQA learning institutions should also register with the DHET, and to do this they also need to accredit with either Umalusi or the CHE/HEQC. It is not possible to register with DHET if you are accredited with a SETA or professional Body ETQA only or not accredited at all. It will be possible to register with DHET once you are accredited by the QCTO also, but for the time being this option is not available yet.
Dr Hannes Nel, MD Mentornet
-
-
All depends on if you NEED acreditted training or not – There is a LOT of very good training that is not NQ based. Do not believe the lie that ALL training needs to be NQ aligned. SETA acredditation does not necessarily mean good training, just they have jumped through the many hoops.
I offer both NQ and non NQ training and to be honest I feel the non NQ training is better as it is more focussed on what is actually needed then a course based on badly designed entrenched qualifications.
-
Hi Deon,
You make some interesting and (dare I say) valid points! You have obviously been in the industry for a long time and your reputation speaks for itself. However, what about those who are passionate about learning and development, and who recently entered the market. How do they prove their credibility? Assessments on NQF aligned unit standards and qualifications are intended to judge applied competence as well as knowledge and behaviours learned. I believe the intention of the National Skills Development strategy and framework is a noble one as it is meant to reddress inefficiencies and the results of the enequalities of past education practices in S.A.
-
Hi Deon,
You make some interesting and (dare I say) valid points! You have obviously been in the industry for a long time and your reputation speaks for itself. However, what about those who are passionate about learning and development, and who recently entered the market. How do they prove their credibility? Assessments on NQF aligned unit standards and qualifications are intended to judge applied competence as well as knowledge and behaviours learned. I believe the intention of the National Skills Development strategy and framework is a noble one as it is meant to reddress inefficiencies and the results of the enequalities of past education practices in S.A.
-
Hi Deon,
You make some interesting and (dare I say) valid points! You have obviously been in the industry for a long time and your reputation speaks for itself. However, what about those who are passionate about learning and development, and who recently entered the market. How do they prove their credibility? Assessments on NQF aligned unit standards and qualifications are intended to judge applied competence as well as knowledge and behaviours learned. I believe the intention of the National Skills Development strategy and framework is a noble one as it is meant to reddress inefficiencies and the results of the enequalities of past education practices in S.A.
-
Hi Deon,
You make some interesting and (dare I say) valid points! You have obviously been in the industry for a long time and your reputation speaks for itself. However, what about those who are passionate about learning and development, and who recently entered the market. How do they prove their credibility? Assessments on NQF aligned unit standards and qualifications are intended to judge applied competence as well as knowledge and behaviours learned. I believe the intention of the National Skills Development strategy and framework is a noble one as it is meant to reddress inefficiencies and the results of the enequalities of past education practices in S.A.
-
Hi Deon,
You make some interesting and (dare I say) valid points! You have obviously been in the industry for a long time and your reputation speaks for itself. However, what about those who are passionate about learning and development, and who recently entered the market. How do they prove their credibility? Assessments on NQF aligned unit standards and qualifications are intended to judge applied competence as well as knowledge and behaviours learned. I believe the intention of the National Skills Development strategy and framework is a noble one as it is meant to reddress inefficiencies and the results of the enequalities of past education practices in S.A.
-
-
-
-
-
-
In my opinion South Africa is desperately short of skills. Some of them do require to be addressed by interventions which are compliant with SETA requirements, others which are compliant with the requirements of other National statutory bodies (think First Aid, firefighting, Dangerous Goods etc.) and still others which are compliant with the requirements of international bodies (Microsoft, Apple, IATA and many others)which are generally less that interested in SETA accreditation requirements (why should they be?).
There are however skills interventions which are urgently needed but do not necessarily need to be benchmarked in any way other than through the endorsement of those who have found them useful. Such skills requirements a thrown up by developments and, as such, are too current to have been incorporated into the accreditation system. Many providers I have encountered address skills needs which have not necessarily been “unit standardised” and which thus, by definition, cannot be accredited.
It is also very arguable as to whether SETA accreditation is any guarantee of quality – one thing that is well recognised by Government and other stakeholders is that SETA’s do not have the capacity to adequately ensure quality of the providers they accredit. This is one of the areas on which the QCTO will need to focus great attention.
To clarify another point – there is nothing illegal about providing non accredited training. What is illegal is providing such training and making out that it is accredited.
South Africa needs all the training we can find PROVIDED the training offered meets the skills needs of industry. Therefore it is incumbent on the HR practitioner to go way beyond using SETA accreditation as the sole criterion for choosing a provider. What first needs to happen is to establish the skills needs of each individual in the company, then draw up provider selection criteria based on those needs and then to start looking. I am quite willing to assist anyone who requires such assistance. -
-
Hi to all, interesting discussion. One of the original reasons for accredited training was that training was informal, related to specific workplace and company needs, and therefore didn’t allow the employee to move on to other companies to better themselves. Now I ask myself does that still apply? When interviewing, do recruiters ask for formal qualifications?
From my limited research so far in the construction industry for example people are not asked whether they have a formal qualification – they demonstrate what they can do. (Of course that may also make them cheaper to hire.)
Then there’s internationally accepted courses – I’m aware of some young people who have found employment in the middle east – so a SA accreditation wasn’t particularly relevant. While the world has been moving on, are we stuck (and moving closer towards) an outdated paradigm? Or are employers still exploiting workers by giving them informal company-related training?
-
-
You have hit the nail on the head – this is where my research is heading – towards a new paradigm and what it should look like and how it will operate. The answer will be canvassed from some 8000 accredited and provisionally accredited providers. And yes, recruiters do ask for formal qualifications and verification in our field -in other words the field of governance and administration – I get requests for this all the time. I think this is industry dependent. I think workplaces are fed up with the red tape and rigmarole involved in formal training, learnerships, etc and look to providing very skills specific training that is needed at a particular time – often short courses would meet the need.
-
-
I am fully accredited with the AgriSeta. I cannot see how somebody not have any knowledge or practical
experience can facilitate a group of students and issue them a certificate. If you want to facilitate why not be
accredited. Being Chairperson of the Mpumalanga Agriculture Providers Forum I have to take a stand that if I have to sub contract a service provider I will not make use of somebody or company that has not got full accreditation.
In Agriculture I will make use of a mentor that is not a registered facilitator but have the knowledge or be a specialist
in a specific area.
-
-
I agree fully with you Greg. I have come across quite a few so called accredited trainers/service providers and have found that these so called ‘accredited by SETA’ service providers do not even have the necessary expertise in offering the training that they do. It saddens me to say that many so called SETA’s in the past and in the present have been known to accredit some training and service providers by the financial gain of some parties instead of ability and expertise. This is where I agree with Greg, look around, do some research into what it is you require, as many of the ‘cream of the crop’ training providers have refrained from applying for accreditation / registration because they refuse to ‘pay the going price’.
-
It is not against the law to use non accredited people. Your chances are equally good to get ripped off either way, both accredited and non accredited training providers charge you a packet and your certificate either way is not acknowledged by main stream universities. It was envisaged in the Skills development Act initially that there would be skills transfer possibilities between FET’s Private and Public institutions but this has not transpired. During the time I worked at SAQA many Learners came with a handful certificates and wanted that “recognised” or wanted a qualification for all the certificates. This cannot happen.
-
-
While I understand the need to avoid fly-by-night people sometimes accreditation is not everything it purports to be. You need to know what you want and beware of getting a piece of paper that makes you or your organisation look good but does nothing for you or your people in terms of real training.
The country is crying out for people to help with training. The following is my – somewhat subjective (and a bit long-winded – sorry) – take on the issue
The problem is labour and unions preventing people getting into the workplace with prohibitive laws and minimum pay and the difficulty of letting someone go who does not perform to standard.
A lot of regulation was created to protect all parties but like the law it is only as good as the interpretation it is given. I am sure that we are all appalled when we see people being let free due to an interpretation of the LETTER of the law rather than its intent.
There must be many people like myself who have had excellent training and have excellent training skills able to carry out training but who are prevented by a plethora of “protective” laws.
While it is agreed that if you have no background in a particular field you should not be training people I have seldom in the last 32 years attended a lecture or course in my field that did not nearly put me to sleep. And if I have ability as a trainer but no degree of diploma my chances of being hired and trained on the product are remote – even though, given a chance, I might make people sit up!
For example I recall attending a company sponsored course for a computer program. The course consisted of about 4 x 1 hour modules that really only gave the barest overview of the system. If you were already a user it might have clarified a few points for you. I protested vehemently to my CEO when this accredited provider issued all the people who had attended – me included – with a certificate stating that they were QUALIFIED in this particular package.
Based on the limited exposure (and I was already a user), that the course gave us I would never have dared to include the certificate in my portfolio but I know that other people did. God help the employers who subsequently might have hired them.
The point is – and I think someone else made it – that accreditation may have be given to an institution but they can send just anyone to run their courses.
What I believe is needed is an independent body that convenes every couple of months and consists of a cross section of disciplines the largest percentage being qualified/trained lecturers who can assess people.
This professional body could allow interested persons to appear before them for assessment in whatever discipline they claim competency for and issue an affidavit that, in the opinion of the panel, the individual is competent to do what they claim.
Such a panel could also possibly examine the candidate’s job and credit history to ensure, as far as possible, that the candidate is honourable and ethical as far as the background check is able to ascertain.
Any affidavit could still have the caveat that it is NOT AN ACCREDITED QUALIFICATION but as we are all aware South Africa – and our region – is desperately short of skills so a way should be found to encourage talented individuals to enter the field – albeit as unqualified people.
My competency is general training but specifically training the trainers.
I have sat through any number of power-point slide shows while the “trainer” drones off the text – I am quite capable of reading it myself. People are standing in front of students and they do not know their subject – and if they do they don’t know how to put it across. There is no animation or enthusiasm. No change of tone and no use of similes and metaphors (what I like to call “f’rinstances”) that can help the students to relate to everyday experiences. If the trainer sounds half-dead how are they going inspire and animate your students? How do people retain something that has been hurried through – the speed of the class is the speed of the slowest student (within reason of course) and I have myself walked out of software usage lectures as bewildered , if not more so, as I was when I entered.
The people who taught me how to instruct were exceptionally good – I only wish I had taken more advantage more courses at the time. When training and ability to instruct could mean the difference between life and death the standards tend to be pretty high – except you get no degree or certificate to carry around for the rest of your life.
Erik Eilertsen
-
It is a regulatory issue to train with an Accredited Service Provider. Let me explain: the Skills Development Element in the B-BBEE regulations clearly states that when a company is doing training with a Non-Accredited training provider, that specific company will not be able to get the Skills Development recognition points on the Skills Development element, thus the company’s B-BBEE compliance will suffer the loss of points awarded for spending the B-BBEE as required by the Code of Good Practice 400, and the learning matrix stipulated in the code. Therefore corporate companies want to make the money they spend on Skills Development effective, not only in training their employees, but also in complying with the B-BBEE act. Apart from skills transfer the effectiveness for the company’s business strategies are at stake should they train with non-accredited service providers. I always advise companies to spend their Skills Development money wisely to the total benefit of the company that makes business sense. Hope I could contribute to this issue positively. H. Davis – Qualitas Career Academy 016 9324499
-
Extremely interesting debate. I am of the view that it is the expertise of the subject in both content, distribution and the particular need that is of paramount importance not necessarily whether the course is accredited or not. I also think it highlights the urgent need of Professional Bodies to take cognisance of what is being trained within their domains and to perhaps become more involved in how and what is being done within the ‘profession’. Professional bodies have certainly been elevated by having ‘designations’ registered and recognised on the NQF.
-
At the risk of being contentious – and I really don’t want to be.
I think for those who are already accredited, belong to accredited bodies or work for accredited agencies to circle the wagons and not see the other side of the debate is rather short-sighted. (and I may be reading the signs incorrectly in this regard).
Accepted, I am trying to break into this industry so in spite of my obvious subjectivity I really am trying to take another point of view and encourage a more objective approach by established professionals and practitioners.
I believe the regional need for competent trainers far exceeds the available pool of qualified and interested trainers and that people who want to do this kind of work should be encouraged rather than have obstacles put in their way. Irrespective of how the competency was gained surely it makes sense to find a way to encourage interested people and find ways to assess them so that they can help the cause?
Doctors from overseas have to take a test in order to work locally – surely in the training field it would not be difficult to assess interested people – with or without prior qualifications.
I would not try to train a lab tech in his trade. If however that lab tech wanted to learn how to better impart his knowledge to others I do believe that I – and possibly many others – have the ability to help him learn that skill. Many years ago I had to manage a situation and the only way to succeed was to make full use of the available human resource. This raised objections from the established people who believed that they, and only they, should be the ones to do that work notwithstanding that there were not enough of them. Given a stark choice – success or failure – I chose success and efficiency over partisanship. I and the people I supported became winners. And the naysayers? Well they had to admit that the job was more important than their self-interest.
So, I wonder, is anybody listening? Does anyone want to explore another way?
Erik
-
The problem of course Sonja is that you are failing to realise it is the company that is accredited and not the facilitator or trainer.
I know of many accredited training companies, accredited by a SETA, who have no formally trained or qualified facilitators – they still conduct training. Do you take the time to check on the qualifications of the facilitators being used in your sector. That is far more important to me.
Accrdeditation applies to the business and approval applies to the course material.
-
-
Dear Lynette – too much government interference in private enterprise, in my opinion. Too much money available to tenderpreneurs and unscrupulous exploiters of systems. The unscrupulous organisations that the accreditation system was supposed to get rid of has simply allowed them to flourish instead. Blade Nzimande was right when he said there was too much easy money to be made. Regrettably the good apples have been tarred with the brush of the bad ones (to mix my metaphors).
-
-
Use Non Acredited Providers for a Nice to Have Certifcation which will not be portable to anywehere ,I would worry if you will do that for the sake of your own bottom line not considereding the futre of those who will be given that knowledge because for me to training people in something which they can only use in your workplace is very selfish in this volatile labour market. Yes they may be good but if not accredited they are fly-by nights to me.
-
Good day Itebogeng
We are all going to give you our opinions but at the end of the day what counts is what comes from the authorities. We might be frustrated by the beraucratic redtape but all that matters is we are in South Africa and the SA matters are settled in SA nowhere else. Winnie, Paula and Jacqui have a point; so the best thing for you to do is to approach the powers that be and find out from the horse’s mouth. Good luck.
-
-
Hi Itebogeng. It is funny to read all the reaction on your input. Accredited providers will have one standpoint and un-accredited ones, another. Each of them to protect what they worked hard for.
I am an SDF since 2002 and have a good amount of clients that stick to me all the time and growing rapidly every year.
I started doing training in 2005 and I am still busy with that. I am not accredited and have no accredited interventions but the results of what I do addresses the needs of my clients. Matter of fact, I write my own training courses according to the needs in the workplace. I am not interested to become accredited ever for I have my own views on the processes as well as certain setas. Also thanks to peoples remarks and experiences in tn this forum.
I would say, if you need credit bearing training, look for accredited providers. If you need skills and knowledge to address certain needs, look for a provider with a record. Also look at the contents of what is presented, formulate your own needs and se that it is inside that training.
-
The two main schools of thought here seem to be:
- toe the line at all costs in order to be compliant and score points.
- give the students the best learning experience.
Option 1 does not necessarily guarantee that the learning experience will be a rich one. One that is made interesting by a lively presenter who is not so stricken by stage fright that he can only read from a book or slide.
Option 2 would want the trainers (I am beginning to learn that this interprets as facilitators?), to be trained and capable of providing just such a rewarding experience.
My own experience and, I gather, that of others is that all to often the person standing in front of the class is wooden and boring and that is the person whose mindset and approach I would want to change. That is the person who animates me to want to contribute.
-
Agreed Eric.
There is allot of debate about all of this but in the end the focus should only be on wether or not a learner is able to comprehend what they are being taught and use the information practically.
There does need to be a level of control that, at the very least, ensures some sort of general quality ( despite how difficult this is to quantify, given the scope of what we are debating ).I dont see why we, as trainers, training providers and suppliers dont aim at doing both.
Comply with the powers that be, commit to a general standard of training. ( its a start at least ) But NEVER EVER compromise on the quality of the training you provide day to day.
-
Well, Grant and Fanie, in the immortal words from Apocalypse Now….. no, actually the exact words would be inappropriate (too colourful you understand), but I am pleased that I appear to be on the right track.
Now, does anyone need someone to train trainers? My thoughts run along the lines of businesses that want to run in-house training but the people with the knowledge don’t know how to impart said knowledge to the ones who need it.
And companies can, I believe, mark their scorecards with their own in-house training that is precisely relevant to what they do.
I think I must roll up my sleeves and put myself out there – though I don’t really have much idea as to how to do that.
Regards to all, Erik
-
When we “peel the onion” ,the practical, frightening ,indefensible, sad truth is that those of us able to impart knowledge, skills , training etc are prevented from doing so, and the real “sufferers” once again are those who were denied(and still continue to be ) a sound educational base from which they are able to improve their lives and those of generations to come. It would be interesting to find stats that indicate how many South African teachers/lecturers and academics are overseas sharing their expertise with foreigners across the globe!??? Henry Ford said, “Making a mistake allows us to try again more intelligently.” We need to indentify the “mistake” !!!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I honed in to this discussion because it piqued my interest.
Quality of Facilitators. Started to download the threads, began drawing a spider to see where it was going, but to leave it for unpacking another day, like few others I seem not to get to!Interesting picture.
Consider this: Scenario 1. A person trains, teaching a science which can spell the difference between life and death to those he trains. In the turbulent times we live in, the success of the training is measurable (SO). The standards in this field is pridefully high. A new change takes place, and different (not new) standards are applied –but using the same learning material. Marginally competent becomes competent in the new environment.
Unhappy, he changes direction in a totally new field, unrelated to his past career. Spends years developing new skills, and is recognised by his new colleagues. Is head-hunted by a CASSTHETA registered Training Provider and persuaded to share his skills training PDA learners (part of Government programme to right the wrongs of the past education system!) and learners with a educated background. His new colleagues in this training field are mostly from a formal background with degrees and diplomas. He does not possess these credits, but is good at what he does – transferring both knowledge and his skills (he is competent in the qualifications he trains). Results are measureable and some of the learners do find employment in a very competitive environment. Recognition for both himself and the Training Provider he is accredited to.
He is sitting opposite you in an interview: Would you employ this person with no Certificates or diplomas? Without these would you regard him a good facilitator from his CV? Did he need degrees, diplomas and experience to prove himself?
I will leave scenario 2 for a separate discussion, in reply to the main question.
Fred
-
HI
I hear what Deon is saying. Interesting I must say, but I must ask would you feel comfortable flying with a self taught Pilot who does not have a valid licence, Does the fact that someone has been driving without a driver’s licence for a long time makes it okay for them, I do not think so no matter how good they may be. In short, while there are those of us who are capable of providing a service even if we are not legally recognised, is it not correct then to subject ourselves to the scrutiny that everybody else is subjected to. unless you have something to hide. -
There is nothing wrong with your statement.
My problem lies in who evaluates your program. I have a certain set of knowledge gained over 30 years. The magic lies in what I have found works or don’t work.
At one stage I was a certified trainer in about 15 different products and methodologies. All of them are restrictive because the developer believes in his wisdom that the structure and process flow is correct.
What NLP and accelerated learning techniques have taught me is to stay flexible and sensitive to the needs of the learners.
So now someone have to certify my programs. People who have no idea of the reasons nor methodologuies behind the process.
On one of my crisis vulnerability workshops a director told me that I connect dots that does not even exist.
Maybe the problems lies in the word training versus development. In pilot training a specific set of skills are taught, BUT what happens in situations where there are no radar, etc.
Let me use the example of teaching someone to change a car tyre. There is a vast difference between passing a competency test on a sunny day in a nice level car park. Its another changing a car tyre 11.00 at night in the yellow lane in a thunderstorm.
Many years ago I attended a program called “Unlocking the Learner’s potential” that had a profound impact on me. I will use anything to assist the learner to help learn.
-
I Agree Monwabisi, there is too many fly by nights who really want to rip you off for a quick bug, that is why I am glad that training providers are regulated and I put a premium on accredited training providers, the reason being :- I am certain that the money I spend with a provider that is quality managed and accredited will give me a professional service. I just want to put the record straight for those who think that Lecturers are not accredited, they should all be Assessors and or Moderators, and have done a facilitators course to understand the model of transferring skill and knowledge and the assessment of competency. I think a lot of people do not understand at all the quality systems behind accreditation……can you imagine you have your company run by a self-taught or any tom,Dic or Harry training centre…..what a mess the economy will be in,….imagine you go to a doctor that has no formal education and your life or the life of your loved ones are at stake……”no people lets support the QUALITY of SA services, Lets be a World Class Country AND PROUD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES…..let us not compromise quality….SA is in shambles as it is….let us in the training and education profession PROUD OURSELVES OF QUALITY EDUCATION AND TRAINING AT LEAST….
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yes Deon, one cannot assume that the individual making the decision whether or not to grant “accreditation” is qualified to do so. Often this process can be alikened to a Geography teacher attempting to mark Matric Maths papers. Unfortunately this seems to be where the whole process falls down, most SETAS do not appear to have access to suitably qualified people to make these very important judgements – a very difficult task!!
-
-
Why do I detect this knee-jerk reaction that because someone is not qualified they must be a fly-by-night, tenderpreneur type? And mainly from the mainstream practitioners.
If innovation and participation are not encouraged surely one winds up with a stagnant pool of people.
Why not, if you have the resources and experience, look at ways to bring people into the fold? Ways to set up and INDUSTRY assessment board that allows newcomers to enter the field perhaps as associates. Until you examine the available talent it seems bigoted and clique-ish to exclude people.
Those people who are going to be dishonest are unlikely to put themselves forward for scrutiny. In my case I have a talent through which I know I can contribute but I need to earn an honest living – emphasis on the honest. I and, I am sure many like me, will not be given the ghost of a chance by an industry that seems to close ranks at every opportunity.
There seems to be a fear of innovation driven by what is a sort of a government (nanny government?), mindset. Don’t make a decision or step outside the line – you might be held accountable even if your actions are in the best interest of your occupation. Perhaps it is driven by that age-old fear of change?
Perhaps the only way is to advertise oneself and try to build a reputation – but that, like formal training (that is often so formulaic) to get an accreditation takes time that, at age 66, I do not have.
-
Hi Patrick,
I have had a look at your site – impressive indeed! However, why should organisations (or individuals) have to pay for training and then for the cost of RPL. I agree, the POE’s are timeous to complete, but as with all things new – once you become familiar with the process it becomes second nature. The benefits of accreditation for your client organisations are immense – firstly – their staff are credited initially(eliminating the need for RPL and thus increasing Training ROI, building staff loyalty, and of course – opening the door to further learning and development opportunities). I provide a service that assists training providers with the accreditation process.
-
Hi Patrick,
I have had a look at your site – impressive indeed! However, why should organisations (or individuals) have to pay for training and then for the cost of RPL. I agree, the POE’s are timeous to complete, but as with all things new – once you become familiar with the process it becomes second nature. The benefits of accreditation for your client organisations are immense – firstly – their staff are credited initially(eliminating the need for RPL and thus increasing Training ROI, building staff loyalty, and of course – opening the door to further learning and development opportunities). I provide a service that assists training providers with the accreditation process.
-
Hi Patrick,
I have had a look at your site – impressive indeed! However, why should organisations (or individuals) have to pay for training and then for the cost of RPL. I agree, the POE’s are timeous to complete, but as with all things new – once you become familiar with the process it becomes second nature. The benefits of accreditation for your client organisations are immense – firstly – their staff are credited initially(eliminating the need for RPL and thus increasing Training ROI, building staff loyalty, and of course – opening the door to further learning and development opportunities). I provide a service that assists training providers with the accreditation process.
-
Hi Patrick,
I have had a look at your site – impressive indeed! However, why should organisations (or individuals) have to pay for training and then for the cost of RPL. I agree, the POE’s are timeous to complete, but as with all things new – once you become familiar with the process it becomes second nature. The benefits of accreditation for your client organisations are immense – firstly – their staff are credited initially(eliminating the need for RPL and thus increasing Training ROI, building staff loyalty, and of course – opening the door to further learning and development opportunities). I provide a service that assists training providers with the accreditation process.
-
Hi Patrick,
I have had a look at your site – impressive indeed! However, why should organisations (or individuals) have to pay for training and then for the cost of RPL. I agree, the POE’s are timeous to complete, but as with all things new – once you become familiar with the process it becomes second nature. The benefits of accreditation for your client organisations are immense – firstly – their staff are credited initially(eliminating the need for RPL and thus increasing Training ROI, building staff loyalty, and of course – opening the door to further learning and development opportunities). I provide a service that assists training providers with the accreditation process.
-
Who is the client?
The Line Manager, Company or the SETA? Surely final evaluation rests with the client?
So, to put a diffrent view and a skills test.
Real skill test
There was a rich man who was deliberately hard on his farmhand. He gave him a bottle and said, “Buy me a bottle of wine.” The farmhand asked, “How can I buy you wine with no money at all?”
The rich man said, “Anyone can buy wine with money. It takes real skill to buy wine without money.”
After a while the farmhand returned with the empty bottle. He handed the bottle to the rich man and said, “Enjoy the wine, please.”
Staring at the empty bottle, the rich man asked, “There is no wine, how can I enjoy this?”
The farmhand said, “Anyone can enjoy wine if there is some. It takes real skill to enjoy wine When there is none.”
Which one is accredited?
Choking, the rich man was unable to utter a word.
-
-
To take this on a slightly different tack, what about quality assurance? How does an accredited or an unaccredited provider for that matter, ensure quality? Do the guidelines provided by the regulatory authorities for accreditation filter through to QA, or is QA something extra or beyond compliance for accreditation purposes? The adage “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”comes to mind.
-
@lynette. I agree with you. What credentials do the SETA staff have that make them worthy to be the arbiters? I wonder if anyone has ever asked a SETA for the credentials of the “evaluator” of the submission for accreditation? And furthermore, what qualifications should such people have – academic, administrative, clerical? Should they themselves be experienced facilitators, assessors and moderators?
-
@Lynett & @ Jacqui – I like that like of questioning! I do know that during this excruciating process, if I’ve been unsure of something required of me & have called my point of contact (who supposedly is well versed in what I need to provide to them), I have been left feeling completely & utterly confused at the end of the conversation (& I do consider myself a reasonably intelligent individual 🙂 ).
-
-
I tend to agree with Carmen’. As a Facilitator and writing up of training material for the same Service Provider for the last ten years (rated high by the Market) there are many observations one can make about getting accreditation. In my field new qualifications replaced the old mid year 2011. A Member of our Industry sat on the Panel for about a year determining the Unit Standards to replace the old.When it was published tnere was astonishment at both the USs which made up the qualification, and more so in the language which was employed in the descriptives. When it was queried with our Representative, he assured us it was not in the final draft in the manner it was issued.
The major headache was unpacking the terminology – and it was obvious Service Providers interpreted many SO’s and AC across the 24 USs in their own way.
The crux of this laborious exercise of getting through the preparation, was that some Service Providers, more than a year after publication are struggling to get accreditation from our Seta. I believe at least two will fallout. Submission after submission was returned by the Verifier. That to me was the problem. On our first attempt we were nearly through with a few minor boxes to tick and some material to adjust, then disaster. The Verifier was changed and from then it was an uphill battle, adding costs, in my opinion, this was not necessary. On resubmission of our Programme Strategy we pointed out that elements of the submitted material was not correctly read. Believe this, yet it was returned with the request to correct it. Needless to say those parts we believe was correct, we left unchanged.
Standards are supposed to bring about uniformity, so there must be uniformity in the way a submission is handled. This is definately not so.
Also, perhaps if unambigious language was used it may make it simpler to understand the requirements, and that the same Verifier see the submission through to it’s logical conclusion.
-
Hi Ndhuma
You have put it best and to add to that would be spoiling it, Kholofelo I think he missed what you were getting at. The fact of the matter is that if you are not accredited no matter how good you are or how long you have been serving you risk being classed as a fly-by-night. I am not a service provider but should I want to become one I will fight tooth and nail to become accredited. We become frustrated by people who are supposed to provide service to us at the SETAs but once we start reporting them instead of walking away thet will comply.
It took me 18 months to get accreditation as a constituent assessor because my seta’s Quality Assurance were not doing their job but as soon as I had narrowed the guys down to one I dealt with him directly. When I realised that he was not coming through for me I reported him to his superiors and he was chestised and he had to apologise to me and I was accredited.
We need to learn to tackle the ball but if it means tackling both the ball and the man in the process so be it as long as the intend was to remove the ball and not malicious in nature.
SETAs are not fortresses, we can penetrate them and make them what they are supposed to be; or should I rather say infiltrate them?
-
Could not have said it better Deon. My point; you can have all the gadgets that open and close at the right time, if you do not know how to work them, you are lost. My test for success is to go back to the learner after some time and if he/she can do what they were taught, you have succeeded. Accreditation or not.
-
There seems to be a really closed clique of people who either cannot or will not admit that a piece of paper is not the be-all and end-all when it comes to assessing someone’s abilities. Notwithstanding that spurious qualifications can easily be purchased many genuine qualifications have been achieved by people who could pass the examinations but not apply the discipine in a practical, real environment.
The instructors that I had between 1964 and about 1970 and on a few occasions thereafter were really good but few, if any, of them had a teaching qualification. Their ability to be instructors had been recognised, they had received training and on the job assessment. Only the best remained in our various “Schools of …”
Today, forty-plus years later those lessons have continued to make me one of the best radio communications people around but I don’t have a recognised technical qualification.
Those military instructors taught people about explosives and plumbing; laying, detecting, recovering landmines and bridge building; basic telephony and line laying; antenna theory and basic electricity and a lot of other specialties and the required marks were 60% for a minimum pass – but we were expected to do better.
The best of these instructors were sent on advanced instructor courses and their ability to put across the subject with wit and imagination made them outstanding at their work. They turned out outstanding students who had the confidence to go into the field where lives mattered and do what they had been taught because they had been taught well.
I maintain, once again, that if there is a regional shortage of capable instructors then overcome the myopia and look around for people who want to do this kind of work. Let the industry find ways to assess them as associates who can ease the burden while being able to earn a living and hold their heads up proudly knowing that they are not a liability to the state or anyone else.
Having said all that I will be the first to admit that there are chancers and charlatans – in every field of endeavour. One should at all times be vigilant but also know what you want to achieve and keep an open mind. Take care that going by the book does not actually fail to achieve its aim because of lacklustre, boring – but accredited – instruction.
-
Hi Jennifer
We are accrediation specialists and we have been very successful in getting our clients accreditation with Services SETA. If you have not yet found someone to help you, you are welcome to email me with your contact details for a chat. We are in Somerset West. My address is marianne@summativesolutions.co.za
Marianne Cilliers
-
Easy to Understand SETA Interactive Accreditation Workshop
Come join us for an Interactive 1 Day Workshop whereby you will be empowered with the knowledge of and equip yourself in understanding the process in becoming a SETA Accredited Training Provider.
This informative 1 Day Interactive Workshop includes the following:
ü Benefits of becoming an Accredited Training Provider with your relevant SETA
ü Legal Compliance and what is required
ü What is this thing called a “Quality Management System”
ü Searching for relevant Unit Standards on the SAQA Website
ü What should a SETA Learning Programme consist of
ü What are the requirements for Facilitators, Assessors and Moderators
ü What to expect from your first SETA visit (Health and Safety Compliance)
ü Who is CIMAP
Presenter:
Jeanine Topping & Associates is a consulting organisation that is passionate about empowering Training Providers and Assessors/Moderators to perform at their peak.
Jeanine is a registered Facilitator, Assessor and Moderator and a past Accredited Training Provider Owner with the Services Seta. Jeanine was contracted to the Services Seta whereby she performed the function of an External Moderator for Training Providers in the KZN area. Jeanine brings with her a wealth of knowledge and her passion for uplifting Training Provider standards has resulted in her being the KZN Co-Ordinator for CIMAP – The Agent for Professionalism in Assessment, Moderation and ETD Practice in South Africa.
Contact Nompilo on 031-3099800 or admin@jtanda.co.za
-
Easy to Understand SETA Interactive Accreditation Workshop
Come join us for an Interactive 1 Day Workshop whereby you will be empowered with the knowledge of and equip yourself in understanding the process in becoming a SETA Accredited Training Provider.
This informative 1 Day Interactive Workshop includes the following:
ü Benefits of becoming an Accredited Training Provider with your relevant SETA
ü Legal Compliance and what is required
ü What is this thing called a “Quality Management System”
ü Searching for relevant Unit Standards on the SAQA Website
ü What should a SETA Learning Programme consist of
ü What are the requirements for Facilitators, Assessors and Moderators
ü What to expect from your first SETA visit (Health and Safety Compliance)
ü Who is CIMAP
Presenter:
Jeanine Topping & Associates is a consulting organisation that is passionate about empowering Training Providers and Assessors/Moderators to perform at their peak.
Jeanine is a registered Facilitator, Assessor and Moderator and a past Accredited Training Provider Owner with the Services Seta. Jeanine was contracted to the Services Seta whereby she performed the function of an External Moderator for Training Providers in the KZN area. Jeanine brings with her a wealth of knowledge and her passion for uplifting Training Provider standards has resulted in her being the KZN Co-Ordinator for CIMAP – The Agent for Professionalism in Assessment, Moderation and ETD Practice in South Africa.
Contact Nompilo on 031-3099800 or admin@jtanda.co.za
-
Easy to Understand SETA Interactive Accreditation Workshop
Come join us for an Interactive 1 Day Workshop whereby you will be empowered with the knowledge of and equip yourself in understanding the process in becoming a SETA Accredited Training Provider.
This informative 1 Day Interactive Workshop includes the following:
ü Benefits of becoming an Accredited Training Provider with your relevant SETA
ü Legal Compliance and what is required
ü What is this thing called a “Quality Management System”
ü Searching for relevant Unit Standards on the SAQA Website
ü What should a SETA Learning Programme consist of
ü What are the requirements for Facilitators, Assessors and Moderators
ü What to expect from your first SETA visit (Health and Safety Compliance)
ü Who is CIMAP
Presenter:
Jeanine Topping & Associates is a consulting organisation that is passionate about empowering Training Providers and Assessors/Moderators to perform at their peak.
Jeanine is a registered Facilitator, Assessor and Moderator and a past Accredited Training Provider Owner with the Services Seta. Jeanine was contracted to the Services Seta whereby she performed the function of an External Moderator for Training Providers in the KZN area. Jeanine brings with her a wealth of knowledge and her passion for uplifting Training Provider standards has resulted in her being the KZN Co-Ordinator for CIMAP – The Agent for Professionalism in Assessment, Moderation and ETD Practice in South Africa.
Contact Nompilo on 031-3099800 or admin@jtanda.co.za
-
Easy to Understand SETA Interactive Accreditation Workshop
Come join us for an Interactive 1 Day Workshop whereby you will be empowered with the knowledge of and equip yourself in understanding the process in becoming a SETA Accredited Training Provider.
This informative 1 Day Interactive Workshop includes the following:
ü Benefits of becoming an Accredited Training Provider with your relevant SETA
ü Legal Compliance and what is required
ü What is this thing called a “Quality Management System”
ü Searching for relevant Unit Standards on the SAQA Website
ü What should a SETA Learning Programme consist of
ü What are the requirements for Facilitators, Assessors and Moderators
ü What to expect from your first SETA visit (Health and Safety Compliance)
ü Who is CIMAP
Presenter:
Jeanine Topping & Associates is a consulting organisation that is passionate about empowering Training Providers and Assessors/Moderators to perform at their peak.
Jeanine is a registered Facilitator, Assessor and Moderator and a past Accredited Training Provider Owner with the Services Seta. Jeanine was contracted to the Services Seta whereby she performed the function of an External Moderator for Training Providers in the KZN area. Jeanine brings with her a wealth of knowledge and her passion for uplifting Training Provider standards has resulted in her being the KZN Co-Ordinator for CIMAP – The Agent for Professionalism in Assessment, Moderation and ETD Practice in South Africa.
Contact Nompilo on 031-3099800 or admin@jtanda.co.za
-
Easy to Understand SETA Interactive Accreditation Workshop
Come join us for an Interactive 1 Day Workshop whereby you will be empowered with the knowledge of and equip yourself in understanding the process in becoming a SETA Accredited Training Provider.
This informative 1 Day Interactive Workshop includes the following:
ü Benefits of becoming an Accredited Training Provider with your relevant SETA
ü Legal Compliance and what is required
ü What is this thing called a “Quality Management System”
ü Searching for relevant Unit Standards on the SAQA Website
ü What should a SETA Learning Programme consist of
ü What are the requirements for Facilitators, Assessors and Moderators
ü What to expect from your first SETA visit (Health and Safety Compliance)
ü Who is CIMAP
Presenter:
Jeanine Topping & Associates is a consulting organisation that is passionate about empowering Training Providers and Assessors/Moderators to perform at their peak.
Jeanine is a registered Facilitator, Assessor and Moderator and a past Accredited Training Provider Owner with the Services Seta. Jeanine was contracted to the Services Seta whereby she performed the function of an External Moderator for Training Providers in the KZN area. Jeanine brings with her a wealth of knowledge and her passion for uplifting Training Provider standards has resulted in her being the KZN Co-Ordinator for CIMAP – The Agent for Professionalism in Assessment, Moderation and ETD Practice in South Africa.
Contact Nompilo on 031-3099800 or admin@jtanda.co.za
-
-
Dear Itebegeng Madumo
Thank you for your response – the workshop is being held in Durban next week Wednesday 5th September 2012 from 8am – 4pm. Participation is strictly through booking as our numbers are limited to 20 due to the group work and discussions that occur.
Please find attached our booking form 🙂
-
Dear Itebegeng Madumo
Thank you for your response – the workshop is being held in Durban next week Wednesday 5th September 2012 from 8am – 4pm. Participation is strictly through booking as our numbers are limited to 20 due to the group work and discussions that occur.
Please find attached our booking form 🙂
-
Dear Itebegeng Madumo
Thank you for your response – the workshop is being held in Durban next week Wednesday 5th September 2012 from 8am – 4pm. Participation is strictly through booking as our numbers are limited to 20 due to the group work and discussions that occur.
Please find attached our booking form 🙂
-
Dear Itebegeng Madumo
Thank you for your response – the workshop is being held in Durban next week Wednesday 5th September 2012 from 8am – 4pm. Participation is strictly through booking as our numbers are limited to 20 due to the group work and discussions that occur.
Please find attached our booking form 🙂
-
Dear Itebegeng Madumo
Thank you for your response – the workshop is being held in Durban next week Wednesday 5th September 2012 from 8am – 4pm. Participation is strictly through booking as our numbers are limited to 20 due to the group work and discussions that occur.
Please find attached our booking form 🙂
-
Hi Jeannine
Please foward me your email so that i can talk to you directly, we have a branch in Durban and i have been struggling to get training providers to do some training for our employees down in Durban, perhaps you would be of assistance. I am based in our Head office in Johannesburg. My email is : itebogeng@prowalco.co.za
-
Hi there – our email address is admin@jtanda.co.za – we will send you a booking form 🙂
-
Hi there – our email address is admin@jtanda.co.za – we will send you a booking form 🙂
-
Hi there – our email address is admin@jtanda.co.za – we will send you a booking form 🙂
-
Hi there – our email address is admin@jtanda.co.za – we will send you a booking form 🙂
-
Hi there – our email address is admin@jtanda.co.za – we will send you a booking form 🙂
-
-
Hi all
- ito the OH&S Act or Regs, no individual or organization has to be accredited with a SETA.
- Most existing generic SETA accredited courses do not meet the basic requirements of the Act in as far as being workplace risk specific.
- 1st Aid instructors and institutions must be DoL approved not SETA accredited.
- Almost all 1st Aid courses fall dramatically short of the legal requirements.
- Health & Safety Representative courses must be approved by the Union / Health & Safety Representatives themselves not by a SETA or the DoL.
- The objective of SAQA and the NQF is upliftment of individuals and the refunding of employer / employees levies and NOT the prevention of occupational diseases and injuries. It is a misaligned money motive [no pun intended].
- The effort and long delays in getting Health, Safety, Fire and First-Aid courses accredited means that employers are open to prosecution and employees are vulnerable to workplace dangers, hazards and risks.
Enough said.
We are however having our customizable Trainer’s Kit aligned to meet our clients needs.
Lindiwe
-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Just a thought. Why don’t we elect a government that believes in dignity for all, zero racism, respect and equal opportunity. Oops that may upset the unions and not be politically correct as we would have to scrap BEE, affirmative action and the Employment Equity Act. However we could entice South Africans of all races back who have skills and who are battling in other parts of the world. They could bring back the much needed skills and the desire to work, this would create about 5 jobs per skilled worker and the country would blossom. We could then lower tax as we have a larger tax base and bring about an economic revolution in Africa. We could export to China!
I had a dream ………………………..