Concerned Providers Interest Group – QCTO/SAQA/SETA/DHET


So ………… what exactly is the charges to buy Learning Material 2017?????

This topic contains 1 reply, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Tando Qeqe 2 years, 4 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #24895

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Dear Skills Universe Members, today I sit being extremely frustrated that my calculations just don’t add up anymore.  I don’t have a Maths Degree, so now I am asking you for help and assistance to explain and educate me on the following:

    1. Various adverts have been doing the rounds on Full qualifications that are being sold – from R3000 to R10 000 (seems that the NQF levels are all one in the same, which I find extremely weird).

    2. If you only want a Unit Standard, then the cost is anything from R500 to R2000 (for ONE unit standard)

    3. So if I buy a full Qualification, it could cost me R5000.00 (this is the full qualification – fundamentals, core and electives).

    4. How do you work out that if I buy one unit standard that it will cost me R1000, but if I buy the full qualification, then it will cost me R5000.00???

     

    Seriously, how does these calculations work?  There are Qualifications that have more than 100 unit standards (so it could cost up to R120 000.00 if I buy the unit standards one by one), but If I buy the Full Qualification, then I will pay R5 000.00 (if the qualification has 100 unit standards, then this means that I am paying a mere R50.00 (FIFTY RAND) per unit standard.

     

    Okay, can I please request some indication of where I am going wrong, what I am calculating wrong.  How does this work?

    Share on Social Media
  • #24919

    Tando Qeqe
    Participant

    Hi Lynel

    I have worked with Cost Accountants, definitely, there must be a formulae/criteria follow before you get to the actual final cost. I must say, since the last ‘selling of qualifications’, you seem to hit the nail on the head with your intricate questions.

    Now,I’m in a stage of sitting and watching Qualifications discussions to unfold, as much as I’m interested in buying some Qualifications.

    Rgds

    Tando

    Share on Social Media
  • #24918

    Nigel Shipston
    Participant

    Hey Lynel,

    You can buy a Rolls Royce or you can buy a Chery.  The difference in price is spectacular, and so is the quality.  It is my experience that over the last 5 years there are a whole bundle of people climbing on the bandwagon as “Learning Programme Developers”.  Most of these have no formal training on this, and many have resorted to copying existing materials with sufficient cosmetic amendment to avoid the copyright trap.

    General guideline, work with people who have an established and recognised reputation, check out material and ensure you don’t get caught by the the cheap trick.  Buying cheap normally means you get cheap, and this often means that once your money is spent, there is no support should the material not be accepted by the SETA. All too often these cheap programmes are merely a bunch of copy and paste exercises slapped together to create a good impression, but never edited for foreign legislation, terminology or measurements, and often not aligned to the assessment criteria.

    Also remember that when you buy Qualifications, it does not mean that you get all the electives listed on the qualification.  Generally the practice is to supply sufficient electives to address the minimum credit requirement of the qualification, and while most of these are standard the electives can be customised to suit your needs in terms of the training you will be offering.

    Just a general hint, when looking at these stream of adverts going out, look at the grammar and spelling.  This is the first indicator of dodginess.  If they have websites, check them out.  Lots of flash but little attention to grammar and spelling, and some of the websites are not fully operational. Company documentation often has an appearance of using the old photostat machine to insert logo’s etc. Avoiding answering questions directly and resorting to policies if they don’t want to reveal something.  Where possible, check if the material has been previously accredited by a SETA and check the chain of evidence if one is available.  If not, you know the answer about purchasing the material. If the face that you can see is not up to scratch, pretty much a good reflection of what to expect in the material.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24917

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Hi Tando, I just want to get to the stage where I know what is right and what is wrong.  I would really appreciate the professional Learning Material Developers to come on board here, give some tips, costs (general) so that the new members have a good understanding of what they need to look for, and what they need to watch out for.  This way we can also minimise the fraudulent activities, as we are aware of learning material that have been stolen, and we do not want to participate with or market these shenanigans. 

    Share on Social Media
  • #24916

    Tando Qeqe
    Participant

    Nigel

    “If not, you know the answer about purchasing the material. If the face that you can see is not up to scratch, pretty much a good reflection of what to expect in the material.”. You have summed it up for me,that’s exactly my approach.

    Coming back to Lynel, what you raised then on LMD, seem very prevalent & getting worse. 

    Share on Social Media
  • #24915

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Hi Nigel, thank you for your explanation, it makes sense.  Checking grammar, websites, references etc.  The problem with previously approved by SETA, actually means nothing in this industry.  Today they like it, approve it and you run with it.  Tomorrow, you get feedback on email stating it is not good enough without any evaluation report giving detailed feedback as to why it has been rejected.  So the words “SETA approved learning material” today, means nothing, because tomorrow it will be rejected.  This is an interesting discussion and I do hope that we will get some more input on this – it is needed. 

    Share on Social Media
  • #24914

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Hi Tando, it seems that where there’s smoke, there’s fire – it seems that we are facing a forest fire here – soon to be unleashed and exposed.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24913

    Kevin Nkomo
    Participant

    I remember a few years ago (2010-2014) it was common practice that developers would charge for material based on a “common” charge per Credit e.g Level 1&2 material will be charged at R100/Credit , Level 3&4 – R150/Credit e.t.c. In recent months there has been sprouting of developers who adopt these retailing practices that suffocate the industry. Lets look at the time input into develing a 100-Unit Standard qualification then selling it for R50 per unit standard…shocking

    Share on Social Media
  • #24912

    Tando Qeqe
    Participant

    I fully agree with Lynel, the LMDs must help us against victimisation on material(s) not even worth the paper(s) written on it/them.

    Kevin, the period you talking about, somehow I agree/ support it. The costing gap is telling us that the time,energy research & use resources are not the variables considered before final costing. In that way, its definitely going to kill the hard workers in this industry.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24911

    Kevin Nkomo
    Participant

    You will be shocked that the majority of “material developers” selling material are not even material developers. These are people who are clueless on Learning & Development but got hold of training material and got to know its value and now are going about reselling it at ridiculous prices as its not their blood and sweat. If You are a jeweler and you call a plumber to your house to fix a broken sink and the plumber lays his hand on a ring you crafted and walks away with it (without your consent) and resells it – that doesn’t make them a jeweler, they will resell at ridiculously cheap price to get rid of the item fast.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24910

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    I can only say High ^5 to Kevin and Tando!  Yes, this is true.  The main problem here is that we do not have the power nor the authority to stop this fraudulent practice, but surely we can start informing each of what we find, and alert members as we pick up on these activities.  Tass mentioned on another discussion that when selling learning material to a client, she signs a SLA which gives the client comfort when submitting this to a SETA, that should there be any corrections required, that she does this at no cost.  Tass please stop me if I am wrong.  This is a very good way of service delivery (my opinion), as the learning material is corrected by the developer, even after you have bought it.  I don’t see this service on the “cheap” material – hmmmmmmmmmm wonder why? 

    Kevin, you have experienced the recent activity (I remember this like it happened yesterday), and the caution you took was brilliant.  Well done to you and your background checks you conducted.  This is important – Nigel also mentioned this – absolutely crucial to do proper checks.  The SETAs should get some pointers here, it could benefit them and the industry if this is done correctly (but then again, will they take the time to conduct such research, I doubt it.  They don’t have sufficient capacity), the backlogs are too much for them at the moment.  This is where the QCTO and DHET can come in, put a guide together, list professional learning material developers the same way Assessors and Moderators go through registration – at least there will be some form of “code of conduct”.  There are a few Learning Material Developers that will be happy to apply, and there are many that will avoid this. 

    Share on Social Media
  • #24909

    Nigel Shipston
    Participant

    It seems as if we have become a target for the opportunists who think of nothing else but making money at the expense of unsuspecting training providers, learners and employers.  But it is not only these hideous pretenders, last year I started picking up that one or two of the training providers that I have supplied over the last 10 years or so have seen fit to resell my material without my knowledge or consent.  The level of unethical practices even went as far as selling freely available material from the SETA. Our only protection at present is for buyers to exercise the necessary caution when purchasing learning programmes and not always look at the cheap option as an answer.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24908

    Tass Schwab
    Participant

    I have written two blogs on this very topic. These are excerpts from them:

    How do you decide to make a major purchase, such as a car,house or even clothing? You will most likely do the following:

    • Ensure you have the time to shop around
    • Narrow your choices down
    • Go to a reputable store
    • Understand what type of brand you are looking for. Will it be BMW or 1966 Volkswagen Beatle?
    • Know your budget. Are you going to go cheap and regret it later or spend a bit more now and have your product last?
    • Chat to some experts, ask their opinion
    • See whose pair of running shoes lasted longest

    As a training material developer it always puzzles me how the CEO’s of companies or those responsible for purchasing Training Material ignore all of the above. I have found that many simply go in for cheap.

    Purchasing Training Material needs to be treated with the same respectful process that you would go through when purchasing a major item for your home. It has taken hours for experts to write well crafted material, the hours put in will show in the pricing too. Quite a few clients that land at my doorstep have purchased on the fly because they were in a hurry, and now need it fixed because the SETA’s have thrown it out. Be careful, be aware of where you buy your material.

    AND another

    When will companies or new Training Service providers realise that when wanting to go the Accreditation route there are NO SHORTCUTS. A few weeks ago I write a blog about people usually taking good care when it comes to buying their car but actually don’t seem to care about the quality of the Training Material OR bother going the route of getting an expert in to help with Accreditation.

    I wish there were a really good English version of “Goedkoop is Duurkoop” (Penny wise/Pound foolish)

    What are the essentials for gaining Accreditation?

    Really TOP MARKET Training Material

    Does the training material contain the following –

    • Learner Guide
    • Learner Workbook (formative assessment)
    • Learner Portfolio of Evidence Guide (summative assessment)
    • Facilitator Guide with Memorandum
    • Assessor Assessment Guide with Memorandum
    • Assessor Feedback Document
    • Moderation Plan, Guide and Report
    • Curriculum Strategy and Alignment document

    I am feeling really tired today. Sometimes it feels that those of us who are “fighting the good fight” simply lose at the expense of cheap developers, and poor service from the SETA’s. 

    Share on Social Media
  • #24907

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Agree Nigel, this is completely unethical.  We need to look out for one another……….

    Share on Social Media
  • #24906

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Hey Tass, that is what I was looking for, but you got to it first.  Thank you so much for sharing this with us again.  I know this might feel as a repeat, but we need to be reminded about these important aspects.  Thank you so much for taking the time to “fetch” and share with us.  Really appreciated.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24905

    Tass Schwab
    Participant

    SLA’s are essential Lynel. If you are not promising to help if there is a problem as a developer – how committed are you to the material. A bit like what a pig is to bacon and a chicken to an egg. The ETHICS of business needs to be adhered to. I am not shy of saying my material is not cheap. And occasionally less profit is made to help a provider to purchase yes. But goedkoop is duurkoop…

    Share on Social Media
  • #24904

    Tass Schwab
    Participant
  • #24903

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Spot on Tass!  This is the way to go.  I have seen many “cheap” versions, and it cost the Provider/Employer triple at the end – was it worth the money – absolutely not.  Rather pay the more and get quality, than shooting yourself in the foot a couple of times.  I like the SLA part, the supportive role after the client bought the material for submission to the SETA – that’s more like it.  This is quality for me.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24902

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Great stuff!  Thank you for the links, really appreciate it.  I fully understand, and I support good ethics and quality.  Unfortunately not many Individuals believe in BEST PRACTICE, but I do.  Keep it up Tass!

    Share on Social Media
  • #24901

    Nigel Shipston
    Participant

    Tass, my distant cousin once said “Never surrender!”.  I believe in that, as much as I might be tired, in pain, or otherwise, it comes back to the same thing.  If we give up, the ungodly win, and as long as I am breathing, I will not relent until they give up.  And they will.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24900

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    Nigel, you are a Warrior for sure!  I second your comment and third it (because I can).  We will continue no matter how our health, pain or how weak at times we might be, but standing up and believing in quality education will continue.  We must continue to work together, help one another, give advice and share information.  I will not give up.

     

    Tass, I won’t allow you to give up.  I am not able to develop material or do what you do with your magic to bring learning material alive, but I can appreciate good quality!

     

    I completely agree with Nigel!

    Share on Social Media
  • #24899

    Nigel Shipston
    Participant

    Apart from distant cuzzie, who has my favourite quote?

    Edmund Burke

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

    And here is another:
    Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.

    Share on Social Media
  • #24898

    Tass Schwab
    Participant

    Dusting off my Joan of Arc suit for another day… I will stand tall – thank you brothers and sisters who are in this magic with me. 

    (and she actually flies off in a super woman suit, Joan of Arc wear can hang on for tomorrow)

    Share on Social Media
  • #24897

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    That’s the spirit!

    Share on Social Media
  • #24896

    Lynel Farrell
    Participant

    I like these quotes Nigel, thank you!  I am able to say, when I look back in all the little things I achieved, that I did more than a little and with various (putting it mildly) mistakes I have made thus far, it was good for me, I have gained more knowledge because of them.  And so we learn …..

    Share on Social Media

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Share on Social Media