Concerned Learning Material Developers


Academic Literacy

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 14 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #27651
    Louise Sterling
    Participant

    Just wanted to share the supreme irony of a course I am reviewing. The course is on academic literacy at Level 5 (14582:Develop and apply academic literacy skills) and has been compiled from plagiarised cut and paste sections from wikipedia, wiki-how,  http://www.thelanguagelab.ca etc. The course has received accrediation from SETAs and I believe many clients are using this in their training programmes.

    Please can SAQA, the QCTO and DHET explain how the SETAs can apply such rigour relative to coverage of individual AC’s in learning materials design, but ignore the massive plagiarism of study material content when it comes to accreditation. 

    A university student would be expelled for submitting a plagiarised essay yet our TVET learners are provided plagiarised learner guides as text books.

    Surely our learners at Level 5 deserve better than this!

    Share on Social Media
    #27664

    This is shocking but not really surprising. It seems the SETA’s etc do not apply rigour to the actual materials, just to the process.  The quality of materials provided to students, even at higher levels is very poor. 

    Isn’t it sad that the system that should ensure quality at all levels falls short?

    #27663
    Rufaz M Mavhure
    Participant

     It is an open secret that most training materials are plagiarised or copy and paste from one manual to another. Check how most Learnerships manuals are “fattened with  same section on Communication'”. Sad reality is material development has been left to a few connected who can quickly get approvals. Worse most manualS are not updated. Someone somewhere in the SETAS is not doing their job well.

    It sad reality that we have to train delegates with half baked materials. As facilitators usually take as given and do the best in odd circumstances. What suffers are the delegates and providers its business as usual.

    We need to change in many areas; OUTCOMES WITH REWARDS NOT PROFITS ONLY

    #27662
    Hannes Nel
    Participant

    This is why I’ve been campaigning for strict quality assurance of training materials since 1998. In fact, I strongly believe that everybody should not even be allowed to develop training materials, especially manuals or books. Developers of training materials should accredit for this purpose and whatever they produce must also be evaluated by an external quality assurance body. More bureaucracy, but essential.

    #27661
    Rufaz M Mavhure
    Participant

    I have seen some Providers have forms on which Facilitators comment about manuals.Noting spelling mistakes; relevance etc. This turns out to be useless excercise as the forms wont be used for any value addition. So much papers works but zero value in the end.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 14 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Share on Social Media