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!
Does SETA not issue evaluators reports anymore?
11th Jan 2017 at 12:51 pm #24949
Help. I am confused.
The usual procedure for me is:
- Sell Material to client
- Sign SLA say we will repair if SETA sends us an evaluators report stating what we should do
- Submission to SETA
- If SETA has problem client gets a report, we see the report we repair for free
A client had to contact me recently because SETA said to him we must repair some second language issues in the material. We requested the evaluator report, client could not give it. It was an email from SETA to the client telling him what to do.
We are happy to repair but since when dont we get a report from SETA? The CLIENT had to contact us?
11th Jan 2017 at 2:24 pm #24962
11th Jan 2017 at 2:37 pm #24961
11th Jan 2017 at 2:44 pm #24960
I think I am then evaporating ……………. lol
Okay, on a serious note, sorry about that – but just had a sudden urge of extreme confused bursting out of laughter, not sure why. Whether it was the gremlin spelling or the fact that you need to pick a page (one of the 2000) of which they are referring to? Seriously no detailed report? Is the client sure it came from a Seta?
11th Jan 2017 at 3:18 pm #24959
I have the email that the SETA sent to the client with the recommendations for us to change (its a 2nd Lang programme in Afr, and some things needed to be changed from Eng to Afr, not a train smash) HOWEVER, I have the proof, from the SETA via the client re the changes.
When I phoned the SETA and asked “Why is there no Evaluator report so that we know what is happening?” she replied no, its is happening as of now (or something to that effect) we will not issue reports as before.
The next odd thing is that the same material passed muster in the same year, with the same SETA.
What goal posts have been moved? Have I missed a gazetted change regarding this?
11th Jan 2017 at 3:41 pm #24958
Tass, this is humiliating, not to mention distressing. We have already placed our concerns to the QCTO whereby Setas make changes as they please without informing anyone, which places many Providers at RISK, not to mention the poor learners. I wonder if this person that stated this is a newbie in the field, or are they just plain blerrie lazy? If that is the case, leave the industry please – go away to another country please or go play somewhere else. There are experts out there that are competent, are able to give good feedback and show quality does exist. Any submission whether it is a first time Accreditation, Secondary (extension of scope) or whatever they want to call it these days (each one sommer goes their own way, and make up stipulations as they please) – which is a disgrace. This is embarrassing to say the least.
The QCTO must be pulling their hair out with all these sudden changes and poor service delivery, continuous complaints about Setas. No wonder Blade extended the licenses of the Setas, as making them permanent will scar our education system for life. The world is watching us crash, and these people making up stipulations and regulations and whatever else they call it, thinks they are making a positive change, in the mean time they are destroying the industry.
I would like to know what Seta has decided that evaluator reports or developmental feedback or quality reports are no longer in use, as from now on? I would gladly take this on at the Session with the QCTO this month – this is enough.
Can you imagine if we had to do that to learners? You are not yet competent, and from now on, we have decided that we don’t feel like giving you feedback. Pay again, try again – we need the money and we are incompetent to write feedback to you in anyway. Okay, maybe I am going over the top here, but this is nonsense man. I need to compose myself before I state words here that I cannot take back again. On that note, any submission deserves an evaluation report (whether good or bad), as this is how we improve our service delivery to the clients which improves the quality of what we give over to the learners.
11th Jan 2017 at 3:52 pm #24957
- No report
- No letter as per usual stating this must be changed in order for accreditation to go ahead
Just an email to the client, we all were confused. We are helping him anyway – and if this gets thrown out with a proper report for any reasons I am going to implode.
We pride ourselves on service excellence and then have to battle the SETA’s who just mess around… enough
11th Jan 2017 at 3:54 pm #24956
12th Jan 2017 at 7:18 am #24955
12th Jan 2017 at 7:54 am #24954
Tass, please don’t give up. We need to look for solutions. If we give up, what will become of the education industry? Yes, it is frustrating, and many hours of hard work, but this is all to improve skills in South Africa. Whether you are an Assessor, Moderator, ETD Practitioner, Learning Material Developer, Verifier, SDF ect. Let’s look at what we can do.
It is time to hear some ideas, possible solutions from members. We need feedback here, as we are not lazy nor do we accept sub-standard service delivery. How do we work towards a successful outcome?
Skills Universe Members, please give us your input, this is very important and will benefit many other members having the same issues/problems and concerns. Please voice your opinion, as to how do we deal with this?
12th Jan 2017 at 7:59 am #24953
On the upside a very grateful client called this morning deeply thank full for us wading through this to get answers and directive as to how we could help. Jolanda our priceless developer is on it already. But we had to walk through treacle to find out what we had to do to help. Lets not keep moving the goal posts. Stick to protocol somehow,else we all will lose our way.
12th Jan 2017 at 7:59 am #24952
This is a formal process that needs to be recorded and properly managed. An e-mail to the client tells me this is neither formal nor official. The formal process allows you to address an issue appropriately and if it is not forthcoming, what guarantee do you have that this is in fact a genuine claim? In these cases I need to know what the actual elements are that need to be addressed and to analyse whether such claims are justified. I need to know who the “SME” is who evaluated the material, as very often I have encountered absolute amateurs trying to impose imaginary criteria in a sphere about which they know very little.
I believe that this is an issue that needs to be brought to the attention of everybody in authority in the SETA, from the ETQA Manager to the CEO. And then further should no appropriate and satisfactory action be taken. It also speaks volumes about the inconsistency in SETA operations, that a programme can be approved in one instance then turned down in another. Are the criteria being consistently applied?
12th Jan 2017 at 8:06 am #24951
12th Jan 2017 at 8:08 am #24950
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.