For skills-universe members, who are private Skills Development Providers (SDP)s, or private providers of Education & Training.
INSETA policy limits SDF registration when working with Skills Providers
14th Apr 2020 at 4:01 pm #74572sylvia hammondKeymaster
Are you providing Skills Development Facilitator (SDF) services – and also working with a skills provider, as an assessor – or moderator – of facilitator?
The Insurance Sector Education and Training Authority (INSETA) has created a Code of Conduct, which indicates that an SDF registration will no longer be accepted, if the SDF provides any role to a Skills Development Provider (SDP).
Consequently, this potentially affects SDFs, who work in a range of dual roles, such as: L&D Managers, facilitators, assessors, or moderators.
The Association of Skills Development for SA (ASDSA) is conducting this survey in order to ascertain the potential impact upon existing SDFs.
Please complete this important survey (it’s very quick) – accessible on this link:Share on Social Media14th Apr 2020 at 4:39 pm #74575Janelle GravettParticipant
This is crazy! So many SDFs will be affected as the majority of External SDFs offer services in Assessment, Moderation, Facilitation etc to add to their income! Its not possible to survive as an independent SDF doing ONLY SDF work! I am very interested to hear why INSETA has implemented this!15th Apr 2020 at 11:44 am #74578Dave RiekertParticipant
Could we possibly have the reason for their decision.15th Apr 2020 at 2:45 pm #74579sylvia hammondKeymaster
Thank you for your comments Janelle and Dave.
Yes, why did the Inseta take this policy decision?
But in addition, I would add, it may well be time to question: –
* to what extent are Sector Education & Training Authorities (SETA)s legally able to simply make policy decisions, which potentially have profound economic impact upon employment/work projects for those participating in the sector?
* If the Department of Higher Education & Training (DHET) is required to consult prior to promulgating legislation – including Regulations – as the court has confirmed, then what is the SETA legal obligation to consult?
* What research did the INSETA conduct prior to this policy decision?
* Did the INSETA conduct an investigation into the potential impact upon each of the Skills Development Facilitators (SDF)s currently submitting to INSETA?
I do understand that appropriate qualifications for an SDF may well be in economics, business management and strategy. However, some training in quality assurance, assessment and moderation practices, and an understanding of theories of learning and development is beneficial for implementation of the range of Post-school Education & Training (PSET) interventions. So, the provision of assessment services may support such implementation.
If the INSETA was concerned that a conflict of interest arises, and an SDF may favour a particular Skills Development Provider (SDP) – who may also reward the SDF – then that is the issue to be dealt with directly.
If an SDF has been found to collude with an SDP in some manner – then that is the matter to be dealt with – not this broad-brush policy decision.
If members have knowledge of the background or rationale for this decision – we would appreciate it – so we can understand the “why”.23rd Apr 2020 at 10:51 am #74646karen dellerParticipant
Hi – I wonder if this also applies to inhouse SDFs of providers. We are an SDP with 28 staff. Almost all are assessors and almost all do assessing for us in their capacity as faculty. Would that force me to bring in an external SDF? That seems unreasonable as well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.