We can only stand together, support one another and share information. We all have concerns, battle with communication, getting answers……….. let’s assist and drive quality education!
Assessors/Moderators gets the BOOT to Future of Occupational Qualifications?
19th Oct 2017 at 5:17 pm #63813
How will this impact you as and Assessor/Moderator/Training Provider?
Are you an Assessor, Moderator or a Provider that makes use of Assessors/Moderators currently in order to comply and adhere to the rules and regulations of being an Accredited Provider with any one of the 21 SETA/QAPs?
For many years, you needed to ensure that you have registered constituent Assessors and Moderators to assess and moderate assessments/portfolio’s, learning material, assessment instruments to name but a few. And you listened, complied and adhered to every single rule and stipulation in order to keep your business registered/accredited. Whether you have paid to upskill your own Assessors/Moderators or upskilled individuals in this field in order to be constituent Assessors and Moderators have had a huge impact in the industry. If you did not have these constituent registered Assessors/Moderators, then you did not have a chance in being an accredited provider.
According to my knowledge (or lack thereof) the Assessors and Moderators that is used to assess and moderate learning programmes, qualifications, unit standards – have been through upskilling, which is not free, whereby they are given the “tools” and skills to give developmental feedback to learners and assess them according to fair practices and a code of conduct. These individuals needed to be current in the industry with experience. Thousands of Assessors and Moderators have paid their dues to become registered constituent Assessors and Moderators in order to either remain employed or to earn a living.
With the new occupational qualifications, the registration of constituent Assessors and Moderators falls away. Why? How do you control who may assess and who may not? Or is this now a free for all, assess learners without any experience in how to deal with developmental feedback in various levels of understanding? There is a massive pool of experienced Assessors and Moderators in each and every industry, whom have gone through the re-registration process every 3rd year for more than a decade, with more rules and regulations, stipulations thrown at them. Really?
Okay, so perhaps I just don’t understand why one would ensure that thousands of jobs are on the line, taking the crumbs out of their children’s mouths.
How does this affect you? Do you have a possible solution to the current situation at hand? How do we as an industry motivate to Authorities and the Powers that be that we need these individuals in our industry to save their jobs, and show appreciation for the fantastic work they do, which seems to be forgotten?
We need your input, feedback and involvement please.
Come on, I know you want to give your input, it is time to speak up.
19th Oct 2017 at 6:44 pm #63819
South Africa with all its challenges it already faces, is trying to create a qualifications process even established 1st world countries struggle with. I do not think SA can successfully manage this, and my suggestion would be to downscale, go back to what the original intent was and concentrate on grassroots training with qualified facilitators in every workplace.
Bottom line this whole process has got too big, too bureaucratic, too much red tape and has become unworkable.
Getting rid of the assessors/moderators is a sure way to ensure failure and a final nail in the coffin.
20th Oct 2017 at 9:51 am #63835
19th Oct 2017 at 7:48 pm #63822
Providers will continue to be responsible for the formative assessment process, and for this they will need persons with assessor/moderator (and industry) expertise. Thus existing assessors/moderators will continue to be in demand. The intention of the QCTO in this regard is to not over-regulate every inch of the system that providers labour under currently.
Providers will have the freedom under the new qualifications to utilise any person(s) they deem fit and competent to undertake the assessor and/or moderator function. The only “constraint” on providers is that they are to adhere to the Qualification Assessor specifications, as stipulated in the Qualification’s “External” Assessment Specifications” doc when contracting person(s) for the assessor function.
The freedom to use competent persons as assessors and moderators (versus the current regime of having to use only persons who are registered with the SETA) is a positive paradigm shift. It places the responsibility of learner success and competence firmly with providers.
The EISA pass rate will be litmus test – providers which have ‘dodgy’ intentions will quickly sink into obscurity, and those which are competent and passionate will flourish. Thus, the selection of assessors and moderators by the provider is critical, and the provider will have the freedom to develop their own criteria for assessor and moderator competence and expertise – for instance a provider may require assessors/moderators to participate in Continuous Development Programmes within the sector of the qualification, and so on. Assessors (and facilitators!!) should be “Industry Experts” and should remain current and competent in the industry to which the qualification is related.
20th Oct 2017 at 7:22 am #63829
In a free market society, survival of the fittest means just that. The unemployed or underemployed Assessors and Moderators urgently need to hone their business skills if they want to survive. Our practitioners are voiceless or often gormless. There is a lot of work out there for the right person/s. The “unifit” Assessors and Moderators should or must die a natural death.
However, where inconsistent bureaucracy hinders, hobbles and hampers entrepreneurial endeavours, the markets suffer. The SETA, SAQA, QCTO bureaucrats seem clueless / hopeless at addressing the real needs of employers and employees. BTW, merely trying to stay abreast of the requirements is a confusing task, to say the least.
Here’s my take on it. Forget SETA accreditation. [Other than where the law requires it]. Forget it. Forget it. Forget it. Forget it. Forget it!
The benefits to employers and employees are nominal. The cost and extensive time from Facilitation to Certification is way too high and too long.
So the solution is?
Focus on equipping Facilitators with the necessary skills, knowledge and material. (Notice how SETAs do not care who provides the training?) Any trainer will do as far as SETA is concerned. What a mistake! Equip the teachers, trainers, facilitators, instructors and communicators. Upgrade their competencies, challenge them to improve their ability to establish and maintain learner attention, retention and recall. Teach them first to teach learning skills, then memory skills, then application skills. None of these elements / essentials are in any Unit Standard. (We all fondly remember the dynamic teachers / lecturers / communicator and loved their subjects at school and college and university). Nobody cares about their Assessors and Moderators.
Good Assessors or Moderators do not make up for a poor instructors. The ill-equipped, inexperienced and often incompetent trainers are, in my opinion, where the problems lie. Fix the problem at it’s roots.
Just saying ….. Ken Annandale
20th Oct 2017 at 9:55 am #63837
14th Jun 2018 at 9:40 am #66680
Dear Kate, “Providers will have the freedom under the new qualifications to utilise any person(s) they deem fit and competent to undertake the assessor and/or moderator function”.
Undoubtedly a recipe for disaster. Even with current regulations and guidelines out in the industry, I am aware of many training providers who can at best be described as unethical and chancers.
How much more so if the regulations and guidelines were to be relaxed?
14th Jun 2018 at 2:52 pm #66686
Hi Dave, I think you should remember that the assessors/moderators referred to are those involved in the formative process. The Summative assessment will no longer be the SDP’s responsibility. These will be carried out by the QAP via appointed independent assessors, hence the term external assessment. This effectively means that if SDP’s are going to muck around with internal assessment/moderation of the formative process, they will not have many successful candidates when the summative external assessment is carried out. Not going to build a credible reputation if this is the case. It is a method of encouraging “self-policing” without having ten million rules and regulations.
6th Aug 2018 at 8:55 am #67427
Fiona de Beer NelParticipant
For me being affected, I think will be less paperwork to get reregistered again every 3 years and fighting with a seta to get your reregistration report or any new registration report. I was affected by this in the past where I lost work because the seta took too long to get out the new report or giving me an incorrect report. So, for me that is a relief.
For the new process, I agree with Nigel that hopefully we will now get rid of bad assessors and moderators and agreeing with Ken that we need to get the right facilitators that can teach but also know the importance of assessment.
The freedom of using qualified persons instead of registered persons makes it easier to capacitate your own people, instead of having to spend hours recruiting and selecting assessors and moderators that is sometimes only a paper-based person but such a big lack in skill, that I eventually had to redo their work anyway.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.