Learner guide

Site: eLearning.co.za Printed by: THOMAS KHWADU

Course: Moderator (I1) Date: Tuesday, 7 May 2024, 7:54 AM
Book: Learner guide
 Table of contents
1. Unit 1: Introduction to Moderation of Outcomes-based Assessments
2. Unit 2: Demonstrate Understanding of Moderation within the Context of an Outcomes-based Assessment System
3. Unit 3: Plan and Prepare for Moderation
4. Unit 4: Conduct Moderation
5. Unit 5: Advise and Support Assessors
6. Unit 6: Report, Record and Administer Moderation
7. UNIT 7: Review Moderation Systems and Processes
 1. Unit 1: Introduction to Moderation of Outcomes-based Assessments
Unit 1.1: Embedded Knowledge, Glossary and Definitions

1. Glossaryof terms used:

Abbreviation Full name or term What it is or does
SAQA South African Qualifications Statutory body
responsible for
Authority overseeing the
development and
implementation of the
NQF

ETQA Education and Training Quality The bodies responsible

for monitoring
Assurance body achievements in terms
of NQF standards
NQF National Qualification Framework Structure that
organises and classifies
qualifications and
standards in SA
NSA National Skills Authority Statutory body that
oversees the works of
the SETAs

SGB Standards Generating Body Statutory body

carrying out specific
functions relating to
the establishment of
national standards and
qualifications
ETD Education, Training and Term used for all
practitioners and
Development practices concerning
the facilitation of
learning
OBE Outcome-based education A method of education
and training that
focuses on the results
of learning and what
the learner needs to do
at the end of the
learning activity
NSB National Standards Body Statutory body
carrying out specific
functions relating to
registrations of
national standards and
qualifications
NSF National Skills Fund Fund for the use of
education and training
of special target
groups
SETA Sector Education and Training Statutory body
administering
Authority education and training
within a particular
sector of industry

ABET Adult Basic Education and Training Training mostly in

literacy and numeracy
for adults with no or
incomplete schooling
CHE Council on Higher Education Statutory body
responsible for matters
related to higher
education
ECD Early Childhood Development Sub-field of Education,
Training and
Development
FET Further Education and Training Education and training
from Level 2 to Level 4
on the National
Qualifications
Framework

GET General Education and Training Education and training

for level 1 on the
National
Qualification
Framework
 HEQC Higher Education Quality Statutory body
responsible for quality
Committee (of the CHE) assurance in higher
education and training
HET Higher Education and Training Education and training
at Level 5 and higher
on the National
Qualifications
Framework
ISO International Standards South African Bureau
of Standards code to
which their member
organisation comply
ITB Industry Training Board Organised sector
training bodies that
existed pre-1994.
Replaced by SETA`s
NTB National Training Board National training body
that existed pre-1994
QA Quality Assurance Process whereby all
employees comply with
organisation standards
and ensure that they
are met
QMS Quality Management System System enforced by the
organisation who wish
to set quality standards
and ensure that they
are met
RPL Recognition of Prior Learning Assessment of learners
prior learning against
current standards

SGA Standards Generating Activity An informal group

within an SGB that
generates standards
SGG Standards Generating Group An informal group
within an SGB that
generates standards

2. Definitions
In terms of this unit standard, the following definitions are used:
● Assessment: - a process in which evidence is gathered and evaluated against agreed criteria in order to make a judgement of
competence for developmental and/or recognition purposes.
● Assessment activities: - what a candidate does or is involved in as a means of producing evidence e.g. designing things, making things,
repairing things, reporting on something, answering questions, solving problems, demonstrating techniques.
● Assessment criteria: - descriptions of the required type and quality of evidence against which candidates are to be assessed.

● Assessment design: - the analysis of defined outcomes and criteria to produce a detailed description of how an assessment should take
place, including all instructions and information regarding the assessment activities and assessment methods. The product of the
assessment design could be termed an Assessment Guide (see definition below).
● Assessment facilitator (or evidence facilitator): - a person who works within particular contexts, under the supervision of registered
assessors, to help candidates/learners gather, produce and organise evidence for assessment.
● Assessment guide: - this is a complete package based on a thorough analysis of specified outcomes and criteria, assessment
requirements and a particular assessment context. Assessment guides are designed primarily for use by assessors to conduct an
assessment (or possibly a series of related assessments) in terms of a significant and coherent outcome of learning e.g. a unit standard.
Assessment guides address the following key aspects in detail:
How will the assessment take place?
What is needed to make the assessment happen?
How will evidence be gathered, recorded and judged?
● In general, Assessment guides include descriptions of the approach to the assessment, assessment conditions, assessment activities,
instructions to assessors and candidates/learners, assessment methods, assessment instruments (e.g. scenarios, role-plays, questions,
tasks), resource requirements, guidance for contextualising assessments, relevant standard operating procedures, administrative
procedures, moderation requirements, assessment outcomes and criteria, observations sheets, checklists, possible or required sources of
evidence and guidance on the expected quality of evidence including exemplars, memoranda or rubrics.
● Assessment instruments: - those items that an assessor uses or a candidate uses as part of the assessment e.g. scenarios with questions,
case studies, description of tasks to be performed, and descriptions of role-play situations.
● Assessment method: - for the most part, assessment methods relate to what an assessor does to gather and evaluate evidence.
Assessment methods include observing candidates, questioning candidates, interviewing supervisors/colleagues/managers of candidates,
listening to candidates, reviewing written material, and testing products.
● Assessment plan: - an assessment plan is produced at the provider level, and gives an overview of the timeframes and responsibilities for
assessment and moderation for the agreed delivery period. The plan addresses practical implementation details, including, for example,
decisions about the clustering of certain outcomes or unit standards/outcomes for integrated assessment, any planned RPL, and the
relation of assessment and moderation to the delivery of modules/ programmes in terms of timeframes.
● Assessment principles: - see more detailed definitions in the next section.

● Candidate/learner: - person whose performance is being assessed by an assessor. Such people include those who may already be
competent, but who seek assessment for formal recognition (candidates), as well as those who may have completed or are in the process of
completing learning programmes (learners).
● Candidate-moderator: - the person who is being assessed against this particular unit standard.

● Evaluative expertise: - the ability to judge the quality of a performance in relation to specified criteria consistently, reliably and with
insight. Evaluative expertise implies deep subject matter understanding and knowledge about the outcomes being assessed at a theoretical
and practical level but does not necessarily include practical ability in the outcome.
● Evidence: - tangible proof produced by or about individuals, that can be perceived with the senses, bearing a direct relationship to
defined outcomes and criteria, based on which judgements are made concerning the competence of individuals. Evidence includes plans,
products, reports, answers to questions, testimonials, certificates, descriptions of observed performances, and peer review reports.
● Evidence facilitator: - see assessment facilitator.

● Moderation: - a process that supports and evaluates the assessment environment, process and instruments with a view to confirming the
reliability and authenticity of assessment results and improving the quality of assessments and assessors.
● Performance: - includes a demonstration of skills, knowledge, understanding and attitudes, and the ability to transfer these to new
situations.
● Portfolio of evidence: - a carefully organised and complete collection of evidence compiled by candidates/learners to prove competence
in relation to defined outcomes.
● RPL - Recognition of Prior Learning: - the comparison of the previous learning and experience of a learner against specific learning
outcomes required for:
The award of credits for a specified unit standard or qualification
Access to further learning
Recognition in terms of meeting minimum requirements for a specific job
Placement at a particular level in an organisation or institution, or
Advanced standing or status
● This means that regardless of where, when or how a person obtained the required skills and knowledge, it could be recognised for credits.
In this sense, RPL is an important principle of the NQF. RPL involves an assessment process of preparing for RPL, engaging with RPL
candidates, gathering evidence, evaluating and judging evidence in relation to defined criteria, giving feedback and reporting results. Given
that all candidates are assessed against the same criteria, credits awarded through RPL are therefore just as valid as credits awarded
through any other assessment process.
● Outcomes-based assessment: - a planned process for gathering and judging evidence of competence, in relation to predetermined
criteria within an outcomes-based paradigm, for various purposes including further development and recognition of learning achievements.
● Verifier: - those who operate at a systems level to monitor assessment and moderation practices, trends and results.

Methods of Assessment should be:

Appropriate: The method of assessment is suited to the outcome being assessed i.e. is capable of gathering evidence in relation to the
intended outcome, and not something else.
Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievements, which are not related to the achievement of the outcome
at hand.
Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost-effective assessments that do not unduly interfere with learning.
Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and
feasible. (Often referred to as naturally occurring evidence)
Principles of Assessment
Valid: The evidence focuses on the requirements laid down in the relevant standard and matches the evidence requirements of the
outcome/s at hand under conditions that mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible.
Authentic: The assessor is satisfied that the evidence is attributable to the person being assessed.
Current: The evidence is sufficient proof that the candidate is able to perform the assessment outcomes at the time the assessor
declares the candidate competent.
Sufficient: The evidence collected establishes that all criteria have been met and that performance to the required standard can be
repeated consistently in the future i.e. the performance to standard is not a "once-off".
Overall Assessment Process
Systematic: The overall process ensures assessment is fair, effective, repeatable and manageable.
Open: The process is transparent i.e. assessment candidates understand the assessment process and the criteria that apply and can
contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence.
Reliable/Consistent: The same assessor would make the same judgement again in similar circumstances and judgements match
judgements made on similar evidence.
3. Comparison of conventional with OBE curricula
Before we start on moderation itself we must note that the embedded knowledge required includes Outcomes-Based Education and
conventional training methods. Here is a reminder of these principles for your information.

3.1 Basic principles

Conventional (Norm-referenced Outcomes-based (New standards-based approach)
approach)

1. Subject focus planning Future focus planning

2. Defines the content to be covered Defines the learning outcomes
3. Passive learners often engage in rote Active learners involved in critical thinking, reasoning,
learning
reflection and action
without always understanding
4. States the information that the learner Stipulates what the learner should be able to do/
should know
demonstrate
5. Assumes understanding Understanding should be shown
6. Students do not have learning Learners know what outcomes they are expected to
expectations explained to them achieve
7. Student learning success is vague Standards are clearly defined and known to learners
(norm-referenced)
(criterion-referenced)
8. Does not give credit for learning Learning is relevant to real-life situations and
acquired outside
experience
the formal education system
9. Learning is mental processing Learning is the application of mental processing

10. Emphasis is on knowledge Emphasis is on applied knowledge

11. Rigid, compartmentalised subjects Build on prior learning and focus on the application
of knowledge
 Conventional (Norm-referenced Outcomes-based (New standards-based approach)
approach)
12. Focuses on what the teacher will do, Focuses on what the learner will do because he/she
because he/
is responsible for learning
she is responsible for delivery
13. The teacher emphasises objectives Emphasis is on facilitating the attainment of
outcomes by the learner
14. The amount of time is given, so how Requires flexible allocation of time
much can be
learned in that time is estimated
15. Time is inflexible Time is manipulated for learners
16. The calendar is fixed Time is used as an alterable resource
17. All students, regardless of ability, work Learners work at their own pace
at the pace
determined by the teacher
18. Single opportunity to prove success Multiple opportunities to prove competence
19. The syllabus and content are rigid Wide variety of expected outcomes, so teachers
can be creative in designing programmes
20. A single style of teaching A variety of approaches are used

21. A comparative/competitive approach All learners have the potential to reach and receive
in which only
full credit for achieving performance standards
some learners will succeed
The main differences in practice in lecture rooms, as well as in learning and teaching, can be seen in terms of the content, the teacher, and
what and how the learner learns.
Conventional Outcomes-based
1. Teacher-centred Learner-centred
2. Content-bound Outcomes-based
3. Teachers transmit information Teachers are facilitators of learning
 4. Emphasis is on what the teacher does Emphasis is on what learners will learn
5. Teachers identify learning opportunities Learners use learning opportunities
6. Does not give credit for prior learning outside Build on knowledge and skills that have been
the system learned previously
7. Assumes that the teacher‘s knowledge is right Learners interpret knowledge
8. Focus on facts and information Focus on the application of knowledge

9. The teacher tries to teach as much as possible Emphasis is on what the learners can do
10. Emphasis is on what the teacher hopes to Demonstrating outcomes is the real focus
achieve
11. Teachers are responsible for learning - Learners are responsible for learning - they
motivation are
comes with the teacher‘s personality motivated by constant feedback and
affirmation
12. Rigid, compartmentalised subjects Cross-curricular integration of knowledge and
skills
13. The student is accountable Shared accountability

Unit 1.2: Overview and Structure of the NQF

1. Overview of the NQF system

1.1 Introduction
Before you become a moderator, it is necessary for you to understand the South African structures and processes that support the NQF,
with particular emphasis on the quality assurance function. Moderators have a key role in the quality assurance of the assessment system of
the NQF.
Moderators are:
● Central to the system due to the fact that they are more senior than the assessors and are knowledgeable about the policy and
procedures of the organisations
● Familiar with the NQF system and should have a balanced and unbiased view

● Are ideally placed to set up and implement an assessment system in their organisations

The National Qualification Framework (NQF) Definition of the NQF: The National Qualification Framework is a structure that organises and
classifies qualifications and competencies in South Africa. It consists of registered standards, units and qualifications at eight levels of
learning.
Two principles are central to the National Qualification Framework:
● Education and training must be integrated, and

● A learner must be able to accumulate credits toward a qualification

The National Qualification Framework was designed to:

● promote easy access for learners

● recognise learning achievement through informal and formal means

● help people gain nationally recognised and portable (transferable) skills

● help identify capabilities needed to do work

● help identify current skills gaps in order to develop training programmes

● provide an overview of capabilities needed in a profession

● provide employees with access to a career path

● provide better integration of on- and off-the-job learning

● improve recognition of prior learning

The objectives of the NQF are to:

● Create an integrated national framework of learning achievements

● Facilitate access to, and progression within education, training and career paths

● Enhance the quality of education and training

● Accelerate the redress of past unfair discrimination in education, training and employment opportunities, and thereby

● Contributes to the full personal development of each learner and the social and economic development of the nation at large

The principles that underpin the objectives of the NQF are:

Integration; Relevance; Credibility; Coherence; Flexibility; Standards; Legitimacy; Access; Articulation; Progression; Portability; Recognition of
Prior Learning; Guidance of learners.
Moderators are ideally placed to ensure that the above principles and objectives are realised. Vigilant and rigorous moderation will ensure
that the integrity and quality of the NQF are maintained.
1.2 Development phase
In many ways the National Qualification Framework is still in the development phase. Many details of the system are still being debated and
developed. Pilot projects have been launched to test some of the concepts in practice.

2. Structure of the NQF

The National Qualification Framework with Eight Levels:
Education band NQF Qualification Institution
Level
 igher Education and 10 Doctorates, post-doctoral Universities,
Training research, masters degrees technikons, colleges,
9 Honours degrees and private providers,
(HET band) professional qualifications in-house training
8 National first degrees and
7 higher diplomas
6 National certificates and
5 diplomas

Further Education and 4 (Gr. 12) Further Education and Training Schools, colleges,
Training private providers,
3 (Gr. 11) Certificate, Grade 12 training centres,
(FET band)
2 (Gr. 10) NGOs, in-house
training

General Education and 1 (Gr. 9) General Education and Training Schools, ABET
Training Certificate, Grade 9, ABET level providers,
4 independent
(GET band) schools, NGO‘s
Gr. = Grade
Moderators and NQF Levels
Identify where the qualifications you are going to moderate will be according to the NQF. What about your own qualifications? The
moderator must be able to function effectively on the level at which moderation is done. You as moderator must take a leading role in
setting up and implementing the assessment system in your organisation.
Moderators should know what is required in an assessment system. They are thus ideally placed to draft the organisation's policy and
procedures. These draft policies can then serve at the learning committee meeting, training meetings and management meetings for input
and endorsement.
In this manual, we will explore the functions of moderators. The responsibility to set up an assessment system in an organisation often falls
to the moderators in the organisation. This implies that they are able to develop policies, procedures and processes at least for assessment,
moderation and RPL.

Unit 1.3: South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA)

Definition of SAQA: The South African Qualification Authority is a statutory body appointed by the Minister of Education in consultation with
the Minister of Labour. It reports to parliament.
The South African Qualification Authority is the body responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of the National
Qualification Framework.
1. Two main purposes of SAQA
SAQA has two main purposes:
● It has to create the structures for generating standards, and

● It has to ensure that the quality of those standards is maintained.

The moderator will be supporting SAQA and its sub-structures, by ensuring the quality and level of assessment, and that the content of
standards and qualifications are adhered to.
Main functions of SAQA
The South African Qualifications Authority determines policies for:
● registering standard generating bodies

● accrediting education and training quality assurance bodies

It also has to:

● register national standards and qualifications

● ensure that national standards and qualifications are internationally comparable

Unit 1.4: NSB's and SGB's

1. National Standards Bodies (NSB’s)

A National Standards Body is a statutory body that carries out specific functions relating to the registration of national standards and
qualifications. The national standards bodies form an integral part of SAQA, and report to SAQA.

1.1 Learning fields

There is a national standards body for each of the 12 fields of learning:
Learning Field
1 Agriculture and nature conservation
2 Culture and arts

3 Business, commerce and management studies

4 Communication studies and language
5 Education training development
6 Manufacturing, engineering and technology
7 Human and social studies

8 Law, military science and studies

9 Health sciences and social services
10 Physical, mathematical, computer and life sciences
11 Services
 12 Physical planning and construction

1.2 Functions of the National Standards Bodies (NSB’s)

A National Standards Body:
● defines the boundary of its field of learning in relation to other fields

● defines subfields within its field of learning

● recognises or establishes standard generating bodies

● ensures that the work of the standards generating bodies meets SAQA requirements

● recommends the registration of unit standards and the qualification of the National Qualification

Framework
● controls the moderation of education and training quality assurance bodies

2. Standards Generating Bodies (SGB’s)

A Standards Generating Body is a statutory body that carries out specific functions relating to the establishment of national standards and
qualifications.

2.1 Creation of an SGB

A standard-generating body is created when a national standards body recognises or establishes such a body within a defined field.

2.2 Functions of an SGB

A standard generating body:
● Generates unit standards and qualifications in accordance with SAQA requirements

● Updates and reviews standards

● Recommends unit standards and qualifications to National Standards Bodies

Members are either drawn from key education and training interest groups in the sub-field or specialists in the field.
Who is represented on SGBs?
The following categories of the organisation need to be represented on an SGB:
● State departments

● Organised business and labour

● Providers of education and training

● Critical interest groups

● The community, and

● Learners

Unit 1.5: Education and Training Quality Assurance Bodies (ETQAs)

Quality assurance refers to the monitoring and achievements in terms of the standards or qualifications registered on the National
Qualifications Framework.
Education and Training Quality Assurance bodies or ETQAs, is the term used in South Africa for the bodies that are responsible for quality
assurance of education and training.

1. The moderator and the ETQA

Moderators need to interact with one or more ETQAs and need to be informed regarding ETQA policies and procedures. Assessors need to
be informed about the ETQA requirements of the assessors and also need to be assisted with their registration at the correct ETQA. The
South African Qualification Authority accredits education and training quality assurance bodies in one of the following sectors:
● Economic sector

● Education and training system, or

● Social sector

1.1 Economic sector ETQAs

There are two kinds of economic sector education and training quality assurance bodies:
Education and Training Quality Assurers (ETQA)
Professional statutory bodies such as the
Engineering Council of South Africa
Pharmacy Council
South African Institute for Chartered Accountants

1.2 Education and training sector ETQAs

In the education and training sector there are two education and training quality assurance bodies:
● HEQC - Higher Education Quality Committee of the Council for Higher Education

● GENFETQC - General and Further Education and Training Quality Committee, now called Umalusi

Social sector ETQAs

To date no application for accreditation as an ETQA in the social sector has been received. In future, there may be ETQAs for welfare,
community youth, etc.

1.3 Functions of ETQAs

Education and training quality assurance bodies will have the following functions:
● accredit providers of education and training

● promote quality among providers of education and training

● monitor provision by such providers

● evaluate assessment and the facilitation of moderation among providers

● register assessors (and moderators) for specific National Qualification Framework standards and qualifications
● certify learners

● cooperate with bodies appointed to moderate across education and training quality assurance bodies

● recommend new and modified standards and qualifications to national standards bodies

● maintain databases acceptable to the South African Qualification Authority, and

● submit reports to the South African Qualifications Authority in accordance with SAQA`s requirement

Moderators play a leading role in assisting the ETQAs to implement the above functions. Organisations will need to report their moderation
results directly to the ETQA

Unit 1.6: Skills Development Structures

The Skills Development Act 97 of 1998, established a number of mechanisms to promote skills development nationally. Some are still in the
process of being formed
The major structures created by the Act are discussed below. They are:
● The National Skills Authority (NSA)

● Sector education and training authorities (SETAs)

● Learnerships

● Skills programmes

● The National Skills Fund

1. Definition of the NSA

The National Skills Authority is the statutory body that:
● advises the Minister of Labour on national development policy and strategy

● oversees the work of sector education and training authorities

2. Definition of a SETA
● A sector education and training authority is a statutory body that coordinates skills development and

● ensures the quality of education and training within a particular sector of industry

3. Functions of a SETA
A sector education and training authority must:
● develop a sector skills plan and budget for their sector within the framework of the national skills development strategy

● implement its sector skills plan by

establishing learnerships
approving workplace skills plans
allocating grants
 promote leadership and register learnership agreements
collect and disburse the skills development levies in its sector
● be an ETQA in their own sector

4. Learnerships and skills programmes

A learnership is a contractual agreement in terms of which a learner is provided with theoretical and practical training, which leads to a
qualification.
Note: Setting up a learnership will require a partnership between employers and educational institutions. Learnerships are designed and
registered by SETAs.

4.1 Requirements for a learnership

● must consist of a structured learning component

● include practical work experience of a specified nature and duration

● lead to a qualification registered by South African Qualification Authority and related to an occupation

● needs to be assessed and moderated by registered assessors and moderators

● needs to be certificated through the ETQA by an accredited provider

4.2 Definition of a skills programme

A skills programme is a learning programme that:
● is occupationally based

● results in a credit towards a qualification registered on the National Qualifications Framework and

● needs to be certificated through the ETQA by an accredited provider

4.3 Purpose of a skills programme

A skills programme gives learners the opportunity to get specialised learning and skills in time as the need arises. Once the SETA has
established a skills programme, an employer can apply for grants to that SETA or for a subsidy to the Department of Labour.

5. National skills fund and skills levies

The National Skills Fund is a fund established for projects identified in the National Skills Development
Strategy as national priorities.

5.1 The National Skills Fund is funded from

● 20% of the skills development levies collected by SETAs

● levies transferred to the fund from sectors without SETAs

● appropriations by Parliament

● interest on investments and

● donations

5.2 Skills Development levy

Every employer must pay a skills development levy to the Department of Financial Services, which will pay it over to the designated SETA.
The levy is equivalent to 1% of the payroll. Note: Payroll excludes overtime pay, bonuses or allowance.
The levies are split between the
● National Skills Fund (20%)

● the SETA (80%)

6. List of current SETA’s

No. Name Acronym
1 Agriculture Sector Education and Training Authority AgriSETA
2 Banking Sector Education and Training Authority BANKSETA
3 Construction Education and Training Authority CETA

4 Chemical Industries Education and Training Authority CHIETA

5 Energy Sector Education and Training Authority ESETA
6 Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and ETDP-SETA
Training Authority
7 Fibre, Processing & Manufacturing SETA FPMSETA

8 Finance, Accounting, Management Consulting and other Financial Services FASSET

Education and Training Authority
9 Food and Beverages Manufacturing Industry Sector Education and Training FOODBEV
Authority
10 Health and Welfare Sector Education and Training Authority HWSETA

11 Insurance Sector Education and Training Authority INSETA

12 Local Government Sector Education and Training Authority LGSETA
13 Manufacturing, Engineering and Related Services Education and Training MERSETA
Authority
 14 Manufacturing, Engineering and Related Services MICTSETA
15 Mining Qualifications Authority MQA
16 Public Service Sector Education and Training Authority PSETA
17 Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority SASSETA
18 Services Sector Education and Training Authority SERVICES
SETA

19 Transport Education and Training Authority TETA

20 Wholesale and Retail Sector Education and Training Authority W&RSETA

This part will be annexed as text pdf

So this is then the first heading for the unit?
We will try our best with diction, but please nte that this is a different language and may be pronounced incorrectly.
 2. Unit 2: Demonstrate Understanding of Moderation within the Context of an
Outcomes-based Assessment System
Unit 2.1: Moderation as it Contributes to Quality Assured Assessment and Recognition Systems

1. What is moderation?
Moderation is a quality assurance activity designed to ensure that assessments are conducted in a consistent, accurate and well-designed
manner. Through moderation, the organisations ensure that all assessors assessing a particular unit standard or qualification are using
comparable methods and are making similar and consistent judgments about learners‘ competence.
Moderation of assessment can be done by an internal or external moderator, but the moderation system must be determined by the
organisation‘s policy and procedures, in line with the ETQA policies and procedures.
A moderator must be able to implement the moderation process, namely:
● Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system

● Plan and prepare for moderation

● Conduct moderation

● Advise and support assessors

● Report, record and administer moderation, and

● Review moderation systems and processes

2. The contribution of moderation to quality assured assessment and recognition systems

Moderation ensures that learners are assessed in a consistent, accurate and well-designed manner. It ensures that assessors are using
standardised methods, comparable irrespective of the subject, so that consistent and accurate judgements on learners’ performance are
made.
The NQF system is one in which centralised, mainly public examinations at exit levels (final examinations), as we know them, are a small part
of the assessment system. A substantial amount of assessment is devoted to the provider and individual assessors. The importance of
moderating systems can therefore not be overemphasised. This will ensure that the system is credible and that assessors and learners
behave in ethical ways. Furthermore, moderation in the NQF is a means for professional interaction and upskilling of practitioners so as to
continuously improve the quality of assessment.
The main roles and functions of moderators therefore shall be:
Ensure and verify the assessment is
Open: Learners can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence. Assessment candidates understand the assessment
process and the criteria that apply
Consistent: The same assessor would make the same judgement again in similar circumstances. The judgement made is similar to the
judgement that would be made by other assessors
Appropriate: The method of assessment is suited to the performance being assessed
Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievement, which are not related to the evidence
Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost-effective assessments which do not unduly interfere with learning
Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and
feasible
 Valid: The assessment focuses on the requirements laid down in the Standard; i.e. the assessment is fit for purpose
Direct: The activities in the assessment mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible
Authentic: The assessor is satisfied that the work being assessed is attributable to the person being assessed
Sufficient: The evidence collected establishes that all criteria have been met and that performance to the required Standard can be
repeated consistently
Systematic: Planning and recording are sufficiently rigorous to ensure that the assessment is fair
● Identify the need to redesign the assessment if required

● Allow appeals against any assessment and result thereof

● Evaluate the performance of assessors

● De-register any unsatisfactory assessors

● Contribute to our quality assurance by providing feedback on learning materials and results thereof

● Check the choice and design of assessment methods and tools to ensure that these are appropriate to the unit standard, NQF level and
qualification being assessed [5]
● At least ten percent of all learning will be moderated

● Moderation must contribute to the overall quality of performance, delivery and learning

● Ensures that the assessment process is consistent and fair

● Liaise with external bodies such as the ETQA and SAQA

● Facilitate the smooth communication between the different role players in assessment (Advice, mentoring, conflict handling and
coordination)

Unit 2.2: Moderation Methods in Terms of Strength, Weaknesses and Applications

1. Moderation Techniques/Methods and Instruments

Moderation of assessment must ensure that the assessment was done according to the assessment principles. For this purpose moderation
techniques and instruments need to be designed in such a way that the moderator can obtain information on the assessor‘s application of
the principles.
Look at the previous subunit to revise the moderation principles

1.1 Critical Cross-field Outcomes:

It is important that moderators ensure the assessment of critical outcomes as stated in each unit standard or qualification. The instrument
and techniques used by the moderator should be designed in such a way that it reveals the extent to which an assessor actually assessed
critical outcomes.
The following critical outcomes appear in the assessor unit standard:
● Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking: preparing for contingencies, candidates with special needs, problems that
arise during assessment, suggesting changes to assessment
● Work effectively in a team using critical and creative thinking: working with candidates and other relevant parties during assessment, as
well as post-assessment
● Organise and manage oneself and one's activities: preparing, conducting and recording the assessment.

● Collect, analyse, organise and critically evaluate information: gather, evaluate and judge evidence and the assessment process
● Communicate effectively: prepare candidates for assessment, communicate during assessment, and provide feedback
● Demonstrate the world as a set of related systems: understanding the impact of assessment on individuals and organisations

● Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts: give feedback on assessments in a culturally sensitive manner

At the same time, the moderator needs to be competent in the critical outcomes and show that he or she is using the skills while
moderating.
The following critical outcomes appear in the moderator unit standard:
● Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking: planning for contingencies, candidates with special needs, problems
that arise during moderation, suggesting changes to moderation following review
● Work effectively in a team using critical and creative thinking: working with assessors and other relevant parties during moderation, as
well as post-moderation
● Organise and manage oneself and ones activities: planning, preparing, conducting and recording the moderation

● Collect, analyse, organise and critically evaluate information: gather, evaluate and judge evidence and the assessment process

● Communicate effectively: communicate with assessors and other relevant parties during moderation, and provide feedback

● Demonstrate the world as a set of related systems: understanding the impact of moderation assessment on individuals, organisations
and the credibility of recognition through NQF systems
● Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts: plan, conduct and give feedback on moderation in a culturally
sensitive manner

1.2 Moderation models

A moderation model is usually stipulated in the policy and procedures and mostly has to do with the statistical model used, such as 10% of
assessments or a minimum of 3 portfolios per course and per assessor to be moderated. The variations of this model depend on the specific
occupation assessed and the assessment methods.

1.3 Moderation techniques or methods

A method is defined as a manner of procedure, especially a systematic or clearly defined way of accomplishing an end. We have come to use
the term - technique as a synonym for method. Technique is defined as an art or technical skill.
Moderation techniques cannot be applied in a blanket way to all occupations or subjects or to all types of assessment. For this reason, it is
imperative that the moderation method used is suited to the specific needs of the field or subject. The moderation unit standard expects
potential moderators to be able to list moderation methods and to discuss them with a view to their strengths and weaknesses and where
they could be applied effectively. Also, see the comparison of different techniques or methods discussed later on.

1.4 Moderation instruments or tools

An instrument is defined as a tool, implement or utensil; a means by which something is performed or affected.
Moderation instruments are the:
● Letters

● Forms and

● Reports used by the moderator to implement the moderation and record moderation findings

These forms can be designed to lead moderators and assist them to probe specific aspects of assessment.
It should be clear that:
● Moderation methods and instruments form a part of the moderation system
● To implement a moderation method, one will require a specific moderation instrument

● Moderation instruments should be designed to get the maximum information effectively about the assessment being looked at

● Moderation reports (one of the moderation instruments), also need to be compared and discussed to determine trends and issues that are
common to assessors and assessment activities (See the next table of the comparison between different moderation methods and
techniques)
Comparison of moderation methods or techniques
Method Moderation Strengths Weaknesses
instruments required
1. Sample i. Procedures describing ⇒ Can be adapted to fit ⇒ Needs to be
moderation of the sampling ratio and the purpose and specific carefully planned to
assessment methods occupation cover contingencies
documentation
ii. Moderation ⇒ Sample ratios can be ⇒ Moderation
instrument adapted to be cost- instrument needs to be
effective carefully constructed to
answer to the needs
⇒ Moderation instrument
needs to be fit for purpose ⇒ It may take some
time to get trends out
2. i. Standardised ⇒ This method is a quick ⇒ Questionnaires need
Questionnaires questionnaires way to find any anomalies to be drawn up by
to candidates and non-conformances experts
and other role- ii. Analysis and report that are present
players based on ⇒ Takes much time to
⇒ Broader moderation analyse questionnaires
questionnaires due to inclusion of more
role players
3. Interviews i. Structured interview ⇒ Skilled interviewers can ⇒ Time consuming
with assessors format extract much information
and candidates ⇒ Needs to be done in
ii. Interpretation of ⇒ Trends can be seen such a way that the
interviews and trends within a shorter time assessor status is not
report period affected
⇒ Candidates need to
know their rights
4. Statistical i. Reports from ⇒ Can be done on large ⇒ Needs some
survey and information system samples with more statistical know-how
trend analysis accurate results
ii. Trends and problems ⇒ Reports can be
to pick up ⇒ Management reports elusive and hard to
can be put to good use to specify
improve assessment and
moderation methods ⇒ Need good
electronic systems
 5. Reaction to i. Appeals form ⇒ Immediate reaction to ⇒ Reactive instead of
issues problems pro-active mode
ii. Complaints and
issues picked up in ⇒ Addresses problem ⇒ Could lead to
forums issues as they emerge assessors being
targeted by candidates
⇒ Cost effective with grudges

6. Observation i. Observation tool for ⇒ Can be effective in ⇒ May lead to the

of assessment moderator certain occupations candidate being more
nervous
⇒ Observation tool can be
designed to fit purpose ⇒ Could be
superfluous if
documentation is not
also moderated
7. Observation i. Observation tool ⇒ Both observable and ⇒ Time-consuming
and document written evidence are and thus costly
survey ii. Moderation covered
instrument ⇒ If the instrument is
⇒ Instruments need to be not good, the findings
iii. Trends and problems drawn up carefully could be meaningless
picked up
8. External i. Moderation ⇒ Need benchmarking ⇒ Could be costly
assessment to instrument for external
benchmark moderator ⇒ Could learn much from ⇒ May expose the
other organisations and internal moderators to
ii. Report on their methods criticism
comparative issues not
addressed by internal ⇒ Share best practices
moderators
9. Discussions i. Forum agenda ⇒ Learn about best ⇒ Costly
and debates in practices and how not to
assessor forums ii. Forum minutes do things ⇒ Hard to get all the
role players together
iii. Report from forum ⇒ Spreading information
⇒ Needs good
⇒ Build relations and facilitator
teams
⇒ Could be used to
⇒ Good for debates and spread misinformation
discussion

Unit 2.3: Overview of Moderation Systems in Assessments

1. Moderation Systems
A system is defined as an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole. Moderation systems combine
external and internal moderation. Both external and internal moderation systems must ensure that all assessors produce assessments that
are credible, fair, valid, reliable and practicable.
A moderation system consists of the:
● regulations on moderation from SAQA and the ETQA
● Internal moderation policy and procedures

● The network of registered internal and external moderators

● The documentation and record-keeping mechanisms and the

● Information system used by moderators

The system:
● Must be fit for purpose and cost-effective

● Will determine the ratio of moderated assessments, the way samples are taken, the process of moderation and who may be moderators

● Also dictates who may design assessment tools and when the moderators evaluate these

● Includes moderation instruments, reports and record keeping

● Should have individuals that manage it within the organisation

1.1.1 Internal moderation

Internal moderation ensures that assessments conducted in a single learning provider are consistent, accurate and well-designed. The three
main stages of internal moderation are:
● Design: The choice and design of assessment methods and instruments are appropriate to the unit standard and qualifications being
assessed
● Implementation: The assessment is appropriately conducted and matches the specifications of unit standards and qualifications. This
includes ensuring that the appropriate arrangements have been made and that there are regular discussions among assessors
● Review: Any lessons learnt from the two previous stages are considered and the necessary changes are made

NOTE:
Accredited providers should have individuals that manage their internal moderation systems. These internal moderators should:
● Establish systems to standardise assessment, including the plans for internal moderation

● Monitor consistency of assessment records

● Through sampling, check the design of assessment materials for appropriateness before they are used, monitor assessment processes,
check candidates' evidence, check the results and decisions of assessor for consistency
● Coordinate assessor meetings

● Liaise with external moderators

● Provide appropriate and necessary support, advice and guidance to assessors

Providers will have to show that they have the capacity to implement an internal moderation system that will facilitate and ensure that these
activities will be carried out effectively and efficiently in order to gain accreditation. The roles of the internal moderators who are designated
such in learning institutions should be experienced assessors who other assessors have confidence in.

1.1.2 External moderation

External moderation is a means of ensuring that two or more providers delivering programmes to the same unit standards and qualifications
are assessed consistently to the same standard, and in a well-designed manner. External moderation systems are managed by the ETQAs.
External moderation involves:
● Checking that the systems required to support the provision of learning programmes across the institution/learning site are appropriate
and working effectively
● Providing advice and guidance to providers

● Maintaining an overview of provision across providers

● Checking that all the staff involved in the assessment are appropriately qualified and experienced

● Checking the credibility of assessment methods and instruments

● Checking internal moderation systems against other systems

● Through sampling, monitoring and observing assessment processes and learners‘ evidence, ensure consistency across providers

● Checking assessors‘ decisions.

● Individuals who will be external moderators should be experienced, know the learning area well, have undergone training for moderation,
and have credibility among assessors and within their area of knowledge and expertise.
● A high level of personal and interpersonal skills are also required

NOTE:
ETQA will have to prove that they have the capacity to manage and verify an external moderation system that facilitates and ensures that
these activities can be done effectively and efficiently before they can gain accreditation. ETQA will have to ensure that the moderation
systems established are consistent with capability and means. The external moderation system could be centralised and directive or it could
consist of a system of local networks. If a centrally directed system is set up by an ETQA, it could allocate the moderation function to one or
a combination of agents.
The following are examples of agents (answerable to the relevant ETQA):
● A panel established to oversee the assessment of unit standards or qualifications

● A national professional association

● An individual provider or consortium of providers

● Private consultants

In a centrally designed system, agents must comply with agreed upon requirements developed in consultation between the ETQA and the
agent. If a system of local networks is the choice, providers could design the moderation system. Local user group representation could be
included in this option.
Unit 2.4: Key Principles of Assessment, their Importance and Effect on Assessment

1. Assessment principles
We will be moderating assessments to allow us to consider the key principles of such assessments
(taken from an existing, accredited quality management system). This is outcomes-based education and training, therefore assessments are
the crux of the matter, the peak of the learning achievement and hence the focus of all training is on this vital part of the process.
Effective assessment will be underpinned by the following:
● The purpose of assessment should always be made explicit

● The criterion-referenced approach will be used

● Assessment must be authentic, continuous, multi-dimensional, varied and balanced

● Assessment is an on-going part of the learning process

● It must be accurate, objective, valid, fair, manageable and time-efficient

● Assessment takes many forms, gathers information from several contexts and uses a variety of methods according to what is being
assessed and the needs of the learner
● The methods and techniques used must be appropriate to the knowledge, skills or attitudes to be assessed as well as to the age and
developmental level of the learner
● It must be bias-free and sensitive to gender, race, cultural background and abilities

● Assessment results must be communicated clearly, accurately, timeously and meaningfully

● Progression should be linked to the achievement of the specific outcomes and should not be rigidly time bound

● Evidence of progress in achieving outcomes shall be used to identify areas where learners need support and intervention

Standards for assessments:

● Relevant outcomes linked via learning programme or unit or standard or qualification

● Variety of assessment methods

● Appropriate tools

● Evidence of development over time

● How standards and levels of performance are consistent

The assessment principles are :

● Open: Learners can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence. Assessment candidates understand the assessment process
and the criteria that apply
● Consistent: The same assessor would make the same judgement again in similar circumstances

The judgement made is similar to the judgement that would be made by other assessors
● Appropriate: The method of assessment is suited to the performance being assessed

● Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievement, which are not related to the evidence

● Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost effective assessments which do not unduly interfere with learning

● Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and
feasible
● Valid: The assessment focuses on the requirements laid down in the Standard; i.e. the assessment is fit for purpose

● Direct: The activities in the assessment mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible

● Authentic: The assessor is satisfied that the work being assessed is attributable to the person being assessed

● Sufficient: The evidence collected establishes that all criteria have been met and that performance to the required Standard can be
repeated consistently
● Systematic: Planning and recording is sufficiently rigorous to ensure that the assessment is fair

Notice the similarity between these assessment principles and moderation.

Unit 2.5: Moderation Activities that Verify the Fairness and Appropriateness of Assessment
We start with a short summary of requirements from ETDP, SETA

1. Introduction
The SAQA document on Moderation states that the process ensures that people who are being assessed are assessed in a consistent,
accurate and well-designed manner. It ensures that all assessors who assess a particular unit standard or qualification, are using comparable
assessment methods and are making similar and consistent judgements about learners' performance.
Moderation of assessment occurs at both the level of the provider (internal moderation) and at the level of the ETDQA (external
moderation). The importance of moderating systems can therefore not be overemphasised. This will ensure that the system is credible and
that assessors and learners behave in ethical ways.
Furthermore, moderation in the NQF means professional interaction and up-skilling of practitioners so as to continuously improve the
quality of assessment.
When designing a moderation system, the following points must be considered:
● The management structure of the moderating body (ETDQA)

● The functions allocated to the moderation system

● The components of the moderation system

● The moderation methods to be used

Who will be appointed as moderators ?

Moderators can be drawn from the providers and companies where assessments are being conducted, or they can be external appointees.
Regardless of where moderators are drawn from, they have to be of good standing and should have unquestionable skills in the curriculum
and assessment practices.
Also, they should have a good understanding of the expectations of all users. Any person who is appointed as moderator or chair of a
moderation panel, should have sound communication and interpersonal skills. Criteria and procedures for the selection of moderators must
be established.
An appeal can also be brought against a moderation decision.
It may therefore be useful for providers and ETQA to have an informal stage of discussion
ETDQA moderators:
● Moderators who wish to carry out the moderation function for standards and qualifications in the ETDQA primary focus must be
registered with the ETDQA from the beginning of 2005
● The ETDQA will only register moderators who are already practising as ETDQA registered assessors

● They must have achieved the unit standards – Moderate assessment and design and develop assessment

● Moderators must be subject matter experts in the field or subfield in which they carry out their moderation activities

Moderators should be able, if required, to moderate the assessment instrument including the instructions to the assessor, instructions to the
candidate, recording format, scoring guide etc. These detailed instructions are an essential part of an assessment task or instrument. They
are often made into a handbook to guide the assessors and standardise their approach to conducting an assessment task or a series of
tasks. This set of instructions is usually known as an assessment guide.
ETQA constituent providers are to ensure that a sample of all assessments conducted is moderated, with the aim of enhancing the quality of
assessments in the ETD sector.
Moderators are expected to follow the process set out in the unit standard moderate assessment
These are summarised in the sub-unit, namely:
● Plan and prepare for moderation

● Conduct moderation

● Advise and support assessors and assessment agencies

● Report, record
● Review moderation systems and processes
In addition, the overall range is stated:
● Evidence must be gathered for the moderation of assessments of candidates with special needs, and RPL cases

● Moderation must cover a range of assessment practices including assessment instruments, assessment design and methodology,
assessment records, reporting and feedback mechanisms
● Evidence must be gathered for the moderation of assessments involving a variety of assessment techniques, including work samples,
simulation, role-plays, written, oral portfolios and projects
● Moderation interactions could include pre-moderation interaction; standards discussion; recording and record keeping; reporting and
feedback mechanisms; post-moderation
A procedure from an accredited quality management system:
● Each programme when aligned and developed will provide a Moderator‘s guide according to the subject matter and aligned with the
registered unit standard, as part of the learning material pack
● Internal moderators will check this Assessment Guide prior to implementation and report on their findings for an amendment if required

● Assessments for each programme will be carried out in accordance with the procedure Assessment Management as required according to
the assessment guide provided for each programme, using the necessary forms
● Internal moderators, with the relevant subject matter expertise according to the programmes will be contracted to review at least twenty
(20) percent of the assessments These Internal Moderator(s) will be responsible for
Monitoring the consistency of assessments
Coordinate assessor meetings
Liaise with external moderators
Provide appropriate support, advice and guidance to assessors
● External moderators will be employed once per quarter to review assessments from that quarter and the results thereof. These external
moderators will
Check the systems required to support the provision of learning programmes across the learning site are appropriate and working
effectively
Provide advice and guidance to providers
Maintain an overview of provision
Ensure all people are qualified and experienced to provide quality assessment in accordance with our QMS
Check the credibility of assessment methods and instruments
Check internal moderation systems
Check assessment decisions
NOTE: The reports from External Moderators will therefore provide invaluable input to our quality management, forming part of the quality
audits.
● Moderators will choose at random ten percent or a minimum of 5 of the completed assessments and complete such tasks according to the
abovementioned policy on moderation
● Moderators will check the procedure followed by Assessors, report on the results, answer the questions on assessments as per the Quality
Management System
● Moderators will report in writing to the executive in charge and the Quality Committee on their findings.

● Moderators will also be used to check and audit any appeals

● The Quality Committee must at all times consider reports from moderators – both internal and external – including such reports and
recommendations in their findings for constant improvement and quality learning of added value

Unit 2.6: Understanding Assessment: Introduction to Gathering Evidence

Assessments need to collate evidence that proves a Learner‘s abilities in:

● Problem-solving

● Knowledge of the subject

● Understanding the topic/subject

● Practical and technical skills

1. The purpose of Assessment

In keeping with the principles of the NQF, the assessment will serve to:
● Determine whether the learning required for the achievement of the specific outcomes is taking place and whether any difficulties are
being encountered
● Report to role-players and stakeholders on the levels of achievement during the learning process and to build a profile of the learner‘s
achievement
● Provide information for the evaluation and review of learning programmes

● Maximise learner‘s access to the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values

Types/methods of Assessment
● Baseline Assessment

This is used to decide where to start a learning programme, and to identify gaps in learning where support may be needed. A baseline
assessment assists in a cost-effective learning process, in that learners are no longer asked to complete learning modules if they are already
competent.
● Diagnostic Assessment

This is used for identifying specific problems that a learner or team of learners may have. Once the problem is identified, steps can be taken
to address it. For example, language problems may be interfering with a learner‘s conceptual grasp of theory; diagnostic assessment can
help pinpoint the problem so that the learner can be helped.
● Formative Assessment

This is the way assessment is actively used for learner programme development purposes and not just for recording purposes. Formative
Assessment helps the facilitator to cater for the continued development of each learner.
Using assessment to form‘ the learning process
Using assessment to develop learners‘ awareness of what has been achieved
Using assessment to identify the next steps in learning
● Summative Assessment

In the curriculum or programme-based system input tests, practicals and or exam marks, were recorded, but the assessments themselves
were not used to develop learners. They were used as benchmark judgements. This was a summative assessment system. In outcomes-
based education, summative assessment is a summary of learner performance recorded over a period of time. For example, at the end of the
learning programme or cycle of learning a facilitator would review the evidence of achievement collected during that programme for each
learner in order to make a summative decision on that learner‘s achievement. The evidence might include worksheets, tasks, open book
tests, practical demonstrations, projects, or a portfolio of evidence.
● Cumulative Assessment

This is a formal, recorded summary of achievements recorded over a period of time. At the end of the learning programme, a practitioner
reviews the evidence of achievement collected during that programme for each learner. The evidence might include worksheets,
assignments, research, practical demonstrations, projects, or a portfolio of evidence. A full review of these assessments conducted over time
would allow the practitioner to make a fair decision on learner competence.
To assess a learner we need to:
● Establish the purpose of the learning

● State an outcome which develops that purpose – something which the learner will be able to do as a result of the activity

● Identify the evidence we expect to see, either during or as a result of the activity, to show what the learner can do

● State criteria which assess the evidence to see if what has been done is what was required

● Describe degrees of competence to assess how well the task was done

● Decide on an appropriate method to collect the evidence

● Discuss the assessment with learners: when it will happen; how it will be done and the relevant criteria

● Apply the assessment method using appropriate techniques

● Collect the evidence

● Assess the evidence

● Use the evidence to give feedback/adjust learning/set targets

● Record the assessment results in a systematic way

Unit 2.7: Assessment Situations for Gathering Evidence of Abilities

1. What is evidence?
Evidence is the vital link in assessment. The moderator needs to see and check this evidence to complete their moderation. The assessment
uses evidence (what the learner produces or demonstrates) of an outcome to make a judgement. The achievement of the outcome is
measured by criteria.

2. What are the criteria?

The dictionary definition of Criteria is “Standards by which something is judged”. Here are some other factors to consider for criteria:
● Criteria must be available to learners to inform them of what is being assessed

● In the past, evidence of learning has been mainly direct evidence, produced at the end of learning, such as an artefact, a practical or piece
of writing or drawing, et cetera. This evidence was marked or graded by the examiner, in comparison with the work of other learners. Now
learners will be assessed against the criteria, not against each other
● When we assess we need to focus on:

The outcome – what learning is targeted or achieved?

The evidence we will see or collect to confirm that the outcome has been achieved
The degree to which the outcome is achieved
● The criteria are the statements we formulate to describe what we need to see in the evidence in order for the evidence to show that the
outcomes have been achieved
● An outcome is not necessarily the same as a Specific Outcome

● Small context-specific outcomes are often related to a particular activity. These small outcomes become stepping stones in building
towards the achievement of critical and specific outcomes. So the assessment criteria we use on a day-to-day basis will not (always) be the
same as the assessment criteria of the SO. Defining the outcome gives a clear focus for the activity and the information/evidence we need
to collect. Assessment criteria for the learning activity will focus on evidence that demonstrates that skill
● Criteria should be open and transparent. This means that learners are given the criteria before they do ask what is to be assessed. It also
means that the stated criteria are the only things against which a learner is assessed
● Facilitators often find it difficult not to correct every mistake and penalise learners for all the mistakes. Criterion-referenced assessment
does not mean that you cannot correct or make note of mistakes but it does mean that you only assess for the competence outlined by the
criteria .If you notice that learners have made many spelling errors, for example, you would not assess this unless spelling was a criterion.
You would, however, make a note to make spelling a criterion in a future assessment
● If some learners do not meet a particular criterion, you would discuss this with the learners and could make improvement a criterion for
the next assessment. (You would be specific in this: improvement of whatever had not been successful). This allows you to assess if learners
have taken note of feedback and tried to improve upon past mistakes

3. Methods of assessment to gather appropriate evidence of abilities

National assessment policy requires that facilitators use a variety of methods to assess learners to ensure fairness and transparency in the
assessment process. This does not mean that a facilitator chooses a different method each time he/she assesses a learner, it means
choosing an appropriate assessment method for the evidence.
● Wherever possible, the assessment should reflect the learning and teaching strategy. There should be no surprises or tricks in the
assessment. A variety of methods should be used to collect cumulative evidence and the judgements will not rely on a single person, exam
or test
● Facilitators should vary methods but should also be aware of the fitness for the purpose of the method they choose and not choose a
method just because it adds variety. For example, you would not assess the ability to sing a song in any other way than by practical
demonstration – as writing, or talking or role playing, etc. would not show you whether someone can really sing.
● There are also different levels in relation to how many outcomes and how many methods are integrated into an assessment. For example,
if singing a song is the outcome, then a simple practical demonstration will be the method. The criteria would be related to the singing. If
singing as a lead soprano in an opera is the outcome, the assessment becomes more complex. Several other integrated outcomes such as
reading music, understanding foreign languages, acting abilities, etc. would be assessed. Several different methods could be integrated into
assessment of the overall performance.
● Methods assessment need to include the learner so that he or she understands the whole process and does not just passively receive
assessment. Selecting/discussing criteria, analysing feedback, portfolio conferences and self and peer assessments are ways of doing this.
● Methods should allow learners to give their best performance. For example, a learner may be able to explain verbally what he or she
cannot explain clearly in writing. The facilitator would give that learner the opportunity to be assessed verbally. The written assessment
would be attached to the verbal assessment to illustrate the learner‘s skill and to highlight a writing problem that needs to be addressed.
● A single exam or test based on the material from one manual will not be appropriate to assess a range of a learner‘s skills, attitudes and
values. A single manual is no longer the only resource used in teaching and learning. So the methods we use to assess learners will reflect
this variety of sources and learners will not be able to reproduce chunks of information or perform mechanical actions which they do not
really understand. For example, a water-pump operative needs to know how to operate a particular valve and be assessed for that
competence. But the assessment must reflect his understanding of the importance of the valve in a bigger picture (his workplace, similar
workplaces and the community) and his ability to solve problems connected to the process.
Learner-centred assessment methods and a variety of assessment techniques will reflect the learner-centred approach to teaching and
learning.

3.1 Methods and Techniques

In the context of this process
● Method is the way you decide to assess learners

● Technique is the way you apply the method

● A tool is what you use to document the evidence of the assessment

For example, peer assessment is a method but the technique of having clearly defined roles with associated assessment criteria is needed
for the method to work well. (You may find other descriptions of methods, tools and techniques)
● In the past the facilitator was the only person responsible for assessing learners, except in the case of external exams. In continuous
assessment, the facilitator is still involved in many of the different assessment methods
● The facilitator decides on the method and the techniques and often acts as the moderator of a process but it is important for facilitators
to include learners as well
● Learners should understand criteria, and be given appropriate, positive feedback so that they gain confidence from assessment and know
what they can do
● Learners should also be able to assess others and themselves and be able to give appropriate feedback

3.2 Feedback
Feedback is an important element of all assessments and should be given after every assessment no matter which method is used.

Unit 2.8: Different Methods to Use when Gathering Evidence Part 1

1. Method 1: Pen & paper assessment

The traditional method of assessment still has a place in continuous assessment, provided that the assessment is done using criteria and
that the criteria are understood by the learners. Learners should not be assessed, for example, for language skills in a numeracy assessment.
Pen and paper assessments can be worksheets, written exercises, diagrams, tables, reports drawing, et cetera.
Some suggested techniques:
● Use in the form of worksheets or completed assignments at the end of an activity, to ensure and to build understanding. The worksheet or
writing is both evidence of an outcome and an assessment record for the learner‘s portfolio.
● Use during an activity so that learners clarify or record important points

● Assess – mind maps or diagrams where learners display their conceptual understanding

● Use as an integrated assessment in the learning programme

● You do not need to prepare assessment sheets for every writing activity. You can write the criteria or grid on the board and learners copy
these into their workbooks

2. Method 2: Question & answer assessment

Verbal question and answer is often effective with learners whose speaking skills are better than their writing skills. Be aware that some
learners are less confident than others and it is important to create a supportive environment where learners are not afraid to answer for
fear of ridicule. Always give positive feedback and guidance even if a learner gives an incorrect answer. If possible, you could use a tape
recorder to keep the evidence or you could give a brief report of the assessment for the learner portfolio.
Some suggested techniques:
Many of the techniques for question and answer are the same as for pen and paper assessments .
3. Method 3: Observation
Observation is often used in a continuous assessment process. Facilitators have always observed learners, but now facilitators are asked to
observe learners for a particular purpose and to record and use their observations.
● Everyday use of the word “observation”

● A scientist observes during an experiment of investigation, he watches carefully and notes exactly what is happening

● The detail and accuracy of the data gathered is important in helping the scientist to draw conclusions from the investigation

You will notice that there is a difference between looking at something and observing it. Observation implies that the observer is not only
looking at something but watching it closely, searching for certain things, which might be significant. An observer has a purpose. He is
looking for clues or evidence to help him to draw conclusions.
In the same way, a facilitator observes learners in order to notice significant actions, remarks or behaviour. The observations will help to
identify, for example, the interests of individual learners, so that activities can be planned appropriately. They will also help to identify
particular strengths which can be built upon and areas where further experiences and encouragement are required.
Observation requires careful planning and management. If a facilitator has a good system for observing learners, the workload is no more
than in the present system. A good system includes:
● Planning the focus of assessment

● Knowing how to note observations

● Collecting and recording evidence of progress

There are two distinct types of observation:

3.1 Type 1: Informal, ongoing observation

This could focus on:
● Learners‘ social skills

● Communication skills

● Attitudes and values

Facilitators observe learners all the time and form opinions about them. Valuable information can be gathered in this way which should
inform the summative decisions that are made about learner performance.
Facilitators should try to be unbiased, and objective and avoid stereotyping learners in these observations
(e.g. avoid labelling learners as slow, etc)
Suggested techniques:
A facilitator can use an observation book to record observations.
An observation book is any book which a facilitator uses for this purpose. It helps a facilitator to understand what learners can already do
when planning or when and what action to take to help learners. It can be organised in any way which is systematic for the facilitator, for
example:
● One page per learner

● One section per learning event

● One section for Team observations. (All observations should be dated and cancelled when action has been taken, e.g. entered on a formal
record sheet or remedial action taken)
3.2 Type 2: Focused, criterion-referenced observation
This could assess:
● Listening skills

● Understanding instructions

● Interpreting instructions

● Following a process

● Problem-solving

● Practice

● Co-operation

● Application

Some suggested techniques:

● Select a team or pair or individual for observation, as it is impossible to observe many learners at once

● Observe with clear outcomes for learning in mind

● Establish criteria for observation with the whole team for example. “When I observe your teams this is what I will be looking for” or “Don‘t
stop what you are doing, carry on” [42]
● Criteria for the assessment of evidence should reflect the outcome of your activity. Plan the focus of your observations and record what
corresponds to your plan
Discuss the criteria with learners before you begin
Observe selected learners on an ongoing basis
Use your observation book to record unexpected significant happenings that illustrate learner problems or competency
● Design an appropriate assessment sheet (see tools)

● Observation of individuals or teams should be as unobtrusive as possible so that normal activities can take place. Do not interrupt learners
unless you are asked to give assistance
● Records of observations can be part of the learner portfolio

● Observations should be used diagnostically to evaluate the learning experience and indicate where learner support is needed

Many facilitators are concerned that they will have to write essays every day about every learner. This is not what continuous assessment
means. If you know what you want to assess and have prepared assessment tools for recording the assessment, it is easy to manage.

4 Method 4: Self-assessment
● Self-assessment involves the learner assessing her own performance or achievement. When a learner assesses herself, it helps the learner
to understand why she does things and what is expected of her. It also helps learners to become responsible and increasingly independent
learners.
● Self and peer assessment skills are critical outcomes in their own right. Many facilitators say that learners are not able to assess their own
or other learners‘ work fairly. However, those who have tried over a reasonable period find that if a facilitator guides and encourages the
process, moderates carefully and shows that learners' assessments are valued equally with other methods, learners enjoy self and peer
assessment and learn to be objective.
● Objectivity needs to be taught. The first time self-assessments are introduced you may find that the learners give themselves exaggerated
marks. Self-assessment skills take time to develop. For example, when establishing criteria, ask learners to suggest criteria and to explain
their motives. When assessments are done, ask learners to justify why and how decisions were made. Learners can moderate assessments
and debate and adjust assessments until they understand the process fully. Sometimes the facilitator moderates, makes suggestions and
learners redo.
● Learners need to know what is expected of them and why. Self-assessment helps them think about what they do well and where they
need to concentrate their efforts, so that they become more focused and motivated. Clear criteria and guidance are needed to encourage
learners to develop this skill.
● Self-assessment should be used regularly both during and at the end of learning activities. It should be used meaningfully and not just for
the sake of doing it.
Some suggested techniques:
● The facilitator has individual conferences with learners. He asks the learners to explain what they have done or to describe a piece of work
or project and say what they enjoyed, did well, or did not enjoy, do well and why. The facilitator then records the discussion. The facilitator
and learner set targets for the learner (with dates and time frames).
● The facilitator assesses several tasks to gain an overview of the general strengths and weaknesses of learners. Then makes comments
against the criteria, writes these up on the board and asks learners to check their own work for these. They then discuss what can be done
to improve the weaknesses or build on the strengths.
● Learners could reflect on what they have done or achieved by writing about their progress and identifying their strengths and
weaknesses. This can be done on a foam tool designed by the facilitator and filled in by the learner. Some questions:
Did I understand the task?
How did I do it?
What resources did I use?
What did I find difficult?
Did I use the criteria to guide me?
I think I did excellent, good, average and poor work
I think I need to improve
● Learners could be given tasks and asked to plan, do, and review. Before they start they say what they intend to do and then after they
have finished they can describe what they did and how the plan worked.
● Learners should be involved in selecting the work that goes into their portfolio as this involves their own assessment of whether the work
is acceptable. They should be encouraged to record the reasons for the selection at the front of the work.
● Learners who have mastered a particular concept can be asked to explain to or assist other learners as this encourages an analytical
approach.

Unit 2.9: Different Methods to Use when Gathering Evidence Part 2

1. Method 5: Peer assessment

● Peer assessment involves one learner (or team of learners) assessing the skills of another learner (or team of learners). This assessment
can be of an individual task or of a cooperative performance such as a debate or demonstration or performance within a team.
● Peer assessment needs skilful handling to ensure that learners do not feel threatened and that competitiveness is not a factor.

● As with self-assessment the skill needs to be introduced carefully. Learners need to be taught the skills and the facilitator needs to model
and to moderate the process. Again, the facilitator must value the process by giving peer assessment equal status with other assessments.
Some suggested techniques:
● Assessment sheets (see tools) where the learners are asked to answer yes or no to a series of questions about their partners or other team
members can be used.
● Facilitators can get learners to assess one another‘s work by deciding on the criteria with the learners for example: “In this task, what are
we going to look at?” or “Do you have any other ideas?”
● These criteria can be written up and used to assess the finished tasks.

● Criteria that the facilitator targeted when planning can be debated and includes:

Learners should be allowed to debate the assessments with their assessor and be given reasons for the comments or symbols.
The facilitator should emphasise giving positive feedback to learners and demonstrate how this is done. Learners should always say
something encouraging about the work they assess and give only constructive criticism for example: “I like it…, but I think it would be
better if it …” rather than saying… “I did not like this, it did not have…”

2. Method 6: Assessment of co-operative skills

Cooperative learning skills need to be assessed because they are Critical Outcomes. A range of social skills are employed during cooperative
tasks.
Team assessment
Sometimes a facilitator does not assess an individual, he assesses a whole team. Roles are allocated within the team and each member is
responsible to work with the others to complete the task.
The task for teams must be suitable and must offer opportunities for assessing: the processes of learning (how they do a task, task
problem-solving strategies and practice); critical outcomes (such as cooperation); attitudes (such as tolerance and perseverance) and the
end product of the activity, jigsaw tasks (where each section of work or each task is necessary to make up the complete product of the task)
can highlight the importance of working together as a team.
Some criteria for team tasks could be:
● Performance in a particular role like researcher, coach or planner

● Timeframes

● Problem-solving: a problem was identified, solutions were explored, theories were tested and so forth

● Attitudes: willingness and helpfulness, and so forth

Some suggested techniques:

● Give a jigsaw task to individuals or teams. The assessment of the whole reflects the value of each contribution to the whole task

● Community projects in which planning skills, participation skills and impact of the project can be assessed

● Team performance or debating skills. Apart from the content or communication skills in performance and debate, there are many other
skills like Do learners support each other? Do they engage with issues? Are they swayed by the opinions of others? Are they opinionated, or
aggressive?
● Teams can assess other teams and discuss criteria and assessments before doing tasks and after tasks have been assessed. It is important
that teams have been prepared and understand the process of giving positive feedback to others
● Assigning marks to team tasks can be debated: Does everyone in the team get the same or does the assessor allocate according to
individual performance in the task?
● Teams can assess themselves during the task, individual performances and their product

● It is important to plan an assessment of these skills, and to establish criteria

3. Method 7: Projects
A project gives evidence that a learner can:
Interpret and apply instructions
Devise a plan
Conduct research
Manage time
● Many facilitators are worried that projects are not evidence of learners‘ individual efforts – for example, access to the internet allows
learners to download information without effort. This concern should be expressed to learners and evidence of the process should be
included in the criteria so that stages in the task and not just the finished product are assessed
● A project is an opportunity for learners to show their individuality and can be used to show how learners gather information and present
information. It is useful if all mentors in a learning programme have the same criteria for assessing the generic skills of project writing
Facilitators need to plan projects carefully and consider:
Manageability
Relevance
Authenticity
Criteria for assessment should be established with learners and could include:
● Relevance

● Evidence of time spent on research

● Language

● Clarity

● Information, research

● Evidence of drafting, redrafting support material

● Length

● Presentation, style, bibliography

● Improvement areas

Projects can also be given as teamwork, provided that the criteria specify how work will be allocated and assessed for individuals in the
team.

4. Method 8: Demonstration
● A learner can demonstrate a skill in different ways. The demonstration might be practical, for example, the learner conducts an experiment
or builds a working model that does not require written work. If possible photographs should be taken for the portfolio or a short
description made by the facilitator or learner.
● In many learnership programmes a practical demonstration is the main assessment method. Assessment of this sort should not be
mechanical. It should involve problem-solving and practice skills. A simple checklist type of assessment would not be sufficient.
Some suggested techniques:
● Focus on a relevant outcome

● Assess preparation time, length of demonstration, care of apparatus, safety measures and what the outcome of the task should be
● Assess the learner‘s ability to react to unexpected situations and adapt or adjust to these
● The criteria for the assessment would be established with the learner before the demonstration is prepared, for example, what will be
assessed during the task

5. Method 9: Performance assessment

● This gives a learner a chance to demonstrate a talent or skill such as gymnastics and acting. The performance is designed to cover a range
of previously agreed criteria but the learner can interpret these in her own way
● Learners give their display in front of the assessor who uses the criteria to analyse the interpretation, design and delivery of the
performance
Some suggested techniques:
● Learners are assessed in relation to the outcome against predetermined criteria, which the learner understands. A checklist ensures that
all relevant technical skills are included
● The design and delivery (aesthetics) of the performance are assessed. That is how the technical skills were included. This requires several
interpretation criteria and levels of performance statements. An assessor in this case has to guard against subjectivity

6. Method 10: Portfolios

Portfolios are both a method of assessment and also a recording tool. They are dealt with in detail in the recording and reporting session.
● A portfolio can be a collection of work-in-progress or a selection of best work

● A portfolio can be used for specific display purposes: for example, an art portfolio, which has examples of various styles (portraits, still life,
oils, watercolours) or it can be a general assessment tool
 3. Unit 3: Plan and Prepare for Moderation

Unit 3.1: Planning and Preparation of Moderation: Roles, Responsibilities and Design Considerations

Moderation ensures that people who are being assessed are assessed in a consistent, accurate and well-designed manner. It ensures that all
assessors who assess a particular unit standard or qualification, are using comparable assessment methods and are making similar and
consistent judgements about learners‘ performance. Moderation of assessment occurs at both the level of the provider (internal
moderation), and at the level of the ETQA (external moderation).

1. Responsibilities of SAQA and its Associated Bodies

The following outlines how SAQA and its associated bodies will relate to each other in terms of moderation:
SAQA
Establishes NSBs, which it may also de-establish
Accredits ETQAs, which it may also de-accredit
Appoints moderating bodies to quality assure across ETQAs
Appoints moderating bodies to investigate problem areas to assessment, when necessary
NSB’s
Define sub-fields
Establish or recognise SGB‘s in sub-fields
Recommend standards and qualifications (with accompanying moderation options) to SAQA
Propose criteria for the appointment of moderating bodies
Liaise with ETQA‘s in reviewing, adapting, changing, establishing standards and qualifications
ETQA’s
Accredit providers
Monitor and audit providers
Register assessors
Ensure moderation among providers
Facilitate moderation across constituent providers
Facilitate moderation across ETQAs
SGBs
Generate standards and qualifications
Update and review standards
Submit standards and qualifications to NSBs for evaluation and recommendation for registration
Providers
 Are accredited by an ETQA and may have their accreditation withdrawn
Deliver learning programmes
Manage assessment and internal moderation
Are monitored by ETQA‘s and moderating bodies

2. Assessors
● Are registered by an ETQA and may be deregistered.

● Assess in accordance with established criteria

● Are monitored by ETQAs and moderating bodies

Whether centralised, decentralised or a mix of both, the form of the moderation systems which are established, will be determined by the
capacity at the operational level in terms of management structures and functions which can be allocated satisfactorily to ETQAs and
providers of education and training. SAQA will need to consider NSBs moderation proposals in the light of the management structures it
assumes will be available, the functions allocated to the moderation system and the moderation methods proposed.
When designing a moderation system, the following points must be considered:
● The management structure of the moderating body (ETQA, agent, etc.)

● The functions allocated to the moderation system

● The components of the moderations system

● The moderation methods to be used

Unit 3.2: Planning and Preparation of Moderation: Management, Functions and Best Practices

1. The Management structure

The following questions highlight the kind of management structure in a sector or organisation that will most likely have the capacity to
undertake moderation satisfactorily:

1.1 Requirements
● Who within the organisation will draw up policies for particular standards and qualifications, and how will this be done?

● Who within the organisation will implement these policies and how will this be done?

● Who within the organisation will evaluate policies and implementation and how will this be done?

1.2 Resources
● What will the costs of setting up and operating a moderation system most likely be?

● Who will pay for this?

● How will the best use of resources be achieved?

1.3 The functions allocated to the moderation system

Function 1: To determine if the assessment was conducted according to NQF principles:
Was the assessor registered and trained?
Was the process as stipulated in the assessment policy?
Did the assessment meet the requirements in number and frequency?
Was the assessment conducted fairly and in line with the learning and teaching process?
Were the assessment tools of the required standard?
Were appeals and RPL processes in place and used appropriately when necessary?
Function 2: To determine if the actual assessment of the evidence was valid, fair and reliable:
Was the evidence assessed using relevant criteria?
Did the learning programme address the outcomes?
Was the evidence gathered over time, allowing the learner to develop and practise the skill?
Was the assessment compatible with the learning process?
Were arrangements made for learners with special needs (for example physical disabilities; disadvantaged backgrounds; language
problems; stress and trauma history)?
Was RPL part of the process?
Function 3: To determine if the standard was acceptable and in line with national standards:
Were the critical, developmental and specific outcomes addressed at the required level?
Was assessment applied consistently across sites and by different assessors?
Were the results at the required standard?

2. Checking if Functions are Carried Out

Any moderation plan would need to include ways to ascertain that all three functions can be carried out.
The components of a moderation system include:
● Appropriate timing

● The extent of the moderation

● Moderation materials

● Personnel

2.1 Appropriate timing

● When will moderation take place?

● Moderation can take place at different intervals

● However, all assessment guides should be moderated prior to the assessments. Recently trained assessors may require more regular
moderation of their ability to conduct assessments than more experienced assessors, but all assessors need to be moderated at designated
intervals

2.2 The extent of the moderation

● What and how much of the assessment is to be moderated?

● Each unit standard and qualification, assessment material and assessor falls within the moderation process
● Moderation activities need to be sufficient to protect the integrity of standards and qualifications
● The quality of the registered assessors and internal moderation systems will be a key factor. Initially, fairly frequent moderation might be a
requirement and there may be a need to conduct spot checks on a case-by-case basis in an evolving system. This could taper off once
providers have earned the right to conduct decentralised assessments by proving (over time) that they have the capacity to maintain
credible assessment systems
NOTE: The ETQA has to make a decision on how much of the candidate‘s evidence needs to be
scrutinised to ensure a true reflection of assessments done.

2.3 Moderation materials

● What materials do moderation activities require?

Materials might include the following:

Assessment activities or assessment activity exemplars
Assessment guides or assessment guide exemplars
Case studies or exemplars
Assessed learners‘ work samples
Providers need to know in advance when these materials are to be made available for external moderation. Where the materials have to be
in a specified format, for example, a portfolio of evidence, the requirements should be negotiated with providers. For the system to function
well, ETQAs must avoid making unreasonable demands or avoid intruding on the academic freedom of providers.

2.4 Personnel
● Who will be appointed as moderators?

● Moderators can be drawn from the providers and companies where assessments are being conducted, or they can be external appointees

● Regardless of where moderators are drawn from, they have to be of good standing and should have unquestionable skill in the curriculum
and assessment practices
● Also, they should have a good understanding of the expectations of all users

● Any person who is appointed as moderator or chair of a moderation panel, should have sound communication and interpersonal skills.
Criteria and procedures for the selection of moderators must be established
An appeal can also be brought against a moderation decision.
It may therefore be useful for providers and ETQAs to have an informal stage of discussion before any formal processes are invoked.

Unit 3.3: Planning and Preparation of Moderation: Methods, Purpose and Processes

1. Moderation methods
It will be necessary to plan for the moderation systems to evolve and develop. This will require changing the methods used over time.
The range from which one or the other combinations of methods are used could include:
● Revising examples of assessments and benchmarking materials against established criteria

● Doing statistical moderation

● Conducting external assessments which will serve as a moderating instrument and could possibly justify fewer moderations
● Common assessment activities and assessment guides
● Having external moderators undertake site visits

● Having external moderators conduct panel meetings

● Establishing site consultative committees

Whatever the form the moderation system takes, it is to be regularly reviewed at NSB, ETQA and SAQA level to ensure that it meets the
expectations and that the proposed arrangements are efficient, accessible and makes optimum use of resources

2. Planning moderation of learner assessments

Ask the following questions to stimulate thought when planning the moderation system for learner assessments:
What?
Will all registered standards be moderated?
Will all candidates be moderated? If not, what percentage?
Will all assessments be moderated? If not, what percentage?
Will all training programmes be moderated?
Who?
Who will conduct the moderation? (ETQA moderators, private consultants, agents of the ETQA, professional bodies?)
How?
How will moderation be done?
Moderation of assessment methods, instruments and materials
before assessment?
post assessment?
Or both?
Rolling over a five-year period with the moderation of different aspects each year?
When?
Continuously?
Monthly?
Quarterly?
Annually?
Cost?
Who will pay?
Cost-effective ways of moderation?
Reports?
Evaluation?
What system will be put in place to evaluate the effectiveness of the moderation system itself?
Who provides information?
To whom? (Internal moderator, external moderator, ETQA?)
3. Purpose and processes of moderation
Why moderate?
● The ETQA has verification processes in place. These processes will determine whether your learners are awarded national certificates as a
result of the training programmes and internal assessments at your learning site
● The moderation of internal assessments is a requirement of the ETQA

Department of Education Sites will have moderation requirements as directed by the Provincial and Regional offices. The ETQA will be the
Band ETQA for General and Further Education (formerly known as SAFCERT, now Umalusi). The ETQA will work with the provinces to ensure
that quality assurance (including moderation) guidelines are available.
What is the requirement?
Verifiers from the ETQA will ascertain:
● The number and frequency of assessments which are moderated. (this is in the plan submitted to the ETQA when you were accredited as a
provider)
● Your sampling process: for example moderation of assessment tools, standardisation and feedback and support after moderation

● Whether the moderation was conducted in accordance with the plan to ensure fairness, reliability, consistency and validity of assessments
at your site
Number and frequency:
● How many assessments must be moderated? This depends upon your assessment volumes. For example, a small provider or site with ten
assessments in a year will be expected to moderate all assessments. A large provider or site with hundreds of assessments would be
expected to moderate a representative sample.
● If learning programmes are presented over a number of weeks and repeated throughout the year, some assessments from each
programme should be moderated.
Sampling process:
● Where only samples of assessments are to be moderated, they should be randomly selected by the moderator and not presented or pre-
selected by the assessor
● The samples should be representative of a range of assessment results and represent a variety of levels of performance

● Sampling can have a number of different features. For example:

% Ratios can be decided

Per learning event
Across a number of courses or learning programmes
On a periodic basis
Random or systematic
Completely random from a batch
Selected according to criteria (for example only competent)
A focus upon samples from inexperienced assessors
Timing, for example, samples from mid-course or only end-of courses
● Your review committee is expected to monitor this process internally

● All the above steps will be outlined in your moderation plan and submitted with your accreditation file.

● The ETQA verifier approves the moderation plan and will monitor to make sure that the moderation conducted at your site is in line with
the plan which you submitted
Note: Department of Education sites will be verified against the Provincial plan

Unit 3.4: Planning and Preparation of Moderation: The Moderation Plan

1. The moderation plan

A moderator must ensure that the strategies put in place for his own plan conform to the overall provider plan submitted to the ETQA.
Planning involves:
● Selecting a focus (outcome)

● Identifying evidence which will show that the outcome has been achieved

● Identifying steps (a logical process)

● Designing the assessment (criteria and a tool that will measure the evidence)

● Reviewing the degree of success and or adjustments which need to be made

● Planning for feedback and target setting

Linking assessment and moderation planning:

Assessment takes place at different time intervals namely baseline or pre-assessment; formative and summative assessment. If at any of the
above stages, the assessment was ignored, corrupted, biased or only assessed internally, the moderator should identify these discrepancies.
Moderation planning therefore involves an understanding of:
● Assessment planning

● Assessment stages and

● Ways in which these can be checked

When moderation reviews are planned, assessors meet with the moderator to examine the assessment process and sample assessments.
The moderator will review the whole assessment process and confirm that the assessments were conducted correctly.

Unit 3.5: The Scope of the Moderation is Confirmed with Relevant Parties

1. Pre-moderation
The moderator sits with the assessor and explains that the assessment guidelines outlined in the stated policy must be followed, (principles,
frequency, records). The moderation plan is designed to ensure the quality and consistency of all assessments.
The moderator will check the following processes:

1.1 The assessor‘s pre-assessment process checklist, including evidence of:

● A pre-assessment meeting with the learner where learner clarified rights and responsibilities

● The time frames and assessment requirements were agreed between the assessor and the learner

● The learner understands the requirements of the unit standards

● The learner is familiar with the assessment methods, tools and techniques to be used

● The learner understands the role of the assessor during the assessment
● The learner guarantees the authenticity of the evidence submitted
● Assessment is to be conducted in a relevant context or reflects realistic conditions

● The learner and assessor agree upon re-assessment and appeals options in case of a not yet competent decision

● Pre-moderation – continues

1.2 Moderation of assessment tools

Once the moderator has checked the reliability of the assessor‘s preparation, the next step is to moderate a sample of assessment tools. The
moderator and assessors can work together to design suitable tools or the assessor can ask the moderator to evaluate tools.
Criteria for assessment tools – does the assessment tool include the following elements:
● Statement of outcome or assessment focus?

● Criteria which measure the evidence from the activity?

● Levels of performance against the criteria?

● Date of assessment?

● Space for learner names and written comments?

1.3 Which of the following design elements were applied:

● Criteria: how are criteria to be generated and explained to learners?

● Impartiality or Objectivity: Are the principles for good assessment practice included?

● Contents: Does the tool assess evidence related to outcomes which have been taught, practised, and developed?

● Is the tool part of a process to assess cumulative evidence? If so, are the links clear?

● Is the tool appropriate for the activity to be assessed?

● Stimulus: How familiar are learners with the way questions are posed and inputs are given?

● Is the assessment conducted in a way which matches the learning approach?

● Is the evidence requirement sufficient to meet the criteria?

● Is there provision for positive and constructive feedback?

● Pen and paper assessments should also be moderated for layout, clarity, questioning techniques, timeframes and language suitability

Unit 3.6: Ensure Sufficient Moderation Evidence to Enable a Reliable Judgement

1. Moderation after assessment: moderating evidence

1.1 Was it valid?

● It was the learner‘s own work, thus authentic evidence

● The assessment measured what it said it did (knowledge, skills, attitudes and values)

● The assessment was directly related to the SOs and assessment criteria of the latest unit standard
● The assessment reflected internalisation of skills so the learner would be able to apply or adapt the competency across different
circumstances
● If the assessment process was followed again by the same assessor a comparable judgement could be made

● If the assessment process was followed again by a different assessor a comparable judgement could be made

1.2 Was it fair?

● All learners had access to the resources needed to complete the activity

● Time allocated was sufficient

● The activity was non-discriminatory in terms of race, gender, and religion

● The assessment activity related to what was being assessed

● There was an appeals procedure

● All embedded knowledge requirements were covered in the learning programme

● Learners with special needs were catered for in the assessment (wheelchair access)

1.3 Was it reliable?

● The assessment instructions were clear

● The assessment tool was clear and objective

● The assessment tools were moderated prior to the assessment

● The activity reflects the learner‘s level of competence

● The evidence was sufficient to show competence

● The evidence was current against the standard (modern techniques, up to date apparatus)

1.4 Was it ethical?

● Both learner and assessor followed all procedures and the integrity of the assessment process was maintained

● Written assessments were securely prepared and stored

● Learner results are confidential

● An appeals process is in place and learners are aware of this

1.5 Was the assessment result recorded?

● Feedback was given in a positive and constructive manner

● Action steps were agreed to by the learner and assessor

● Results were formally recorded in line with database requirements

● Results were reported in line with ETQA requirements

1.6 Was the assessment at the required standard?

● Are a sample of assessments conducted by the assessor checked by the moderator (or other assessors) for reliability and standardisation?

Unit 3.7: Clarify the Contexts of the Assessment under Review, taking into Account Special Needs

1. Moderation during the assessment

This involves checking factors which affect the assessment event, for example, the security of the distribution process, the venue and
seating of learners, the invigilation, the collection and storage process. Learners with special needs need to be accommodated through, for
example, extra time, wheelchair access and so forth.
Moderation – observation of practical assessments:
● Were the instructions clear?

● Was the equipment available, suitable, and in working order?

● Was the assessment conducted in conditions of safety?

● Was the assessor‘s communication appropriate and objective?

● Was the time allocated fairly?

● Were learners with special needs catered for; extra time, wheelchair access etc.?

● Can the assessor demonstrate consistency (the same assessment process with other learners)?

Unit 3.8: Prepare Documentation in line with the Moderation System

Procedural checklist for a routine, sampled moderation:

● Plan for moderation

● Design the moderation tools

● Prepare for the moderation

● Request other assessment documentation from the relevant assessor

● Ensure that other relevant documentation is available

● All arrangements for the moderation to take place are made with the relevant role players

● Conduct the moderation by the gathering the relevant evidence through assessing randomly selected assessment documents

● Ensure that any special needs of the candidate were met

● Evaluate the evidence collected to ensure the assessment was conducted according to the principles of good assessment

● Give feedback, verbally and in writing to the assessor

● Feedback entails advice for improvement and development

● Record findings

● Sign all documentation

● File all moderation documentation for possible future reference

● Should an appeal be lodged, manage the appeals process

● Discuss problems encountered at the regular assessment meeting for solutions to be found
● Review the moderation process and identify issues for adaptation and or improvement

Unit 3.9: Make Physical and Human Resources Available and Ready to Use

1. Designing a quality assessment system

Every education and training provider should establish an internal assessment and moderation system. This could include the formation of
an assessment centre. The moderator could be the person responsible for the setting up and coordination of this assessment system. There
are a number of components that must be put in place in order for an assessment system to be effective.
These include:
● A management system

● Physical resources

● Human resources

● Assessment instruments, guidelines and procedures

● Quality assurance mechanisms

● Employment equity policies

The management system:

● The moderator will need to put in place mechanisms to facilitate the achievement and awarding of qualifications. This necessitates a
comprehensive assessment management system
● The management system will be guided by the policies and procedures which have been agreed upon

● A major component of this system is the setting up of a database to record and store assessment information. The system should be a
centralised storage area for all assessment data
● In enterprises that have various sites of assessment, mechanisms will need to be set up for sending information to the central storage
area. Constant communication networks with these sites
● The moderator should develop generic documentation for the purpose of recording assessment information that can be inputted into the
database
● A moderator must ensure that all information entered into the database is correct and confidential

2. Availability of physical resources

● An effective assessment management system should ensure that sufficient physical resources are available to assess candidates

Physical resources include:

Accessible assessment sites
Necessary documentation, such as assessment tools and documentation for reporting assessment results
Arrangement to ensure the equipment and procedures are safe and fit for use
Arrangements to ensure that the workplace can accommodate the assessment without too much disruption

3. Human resources
The provision of an efficient assessment management system will necessitate sufficient human resource functions to meet the needs of
candidates. Including:
● Sufficient competent assessors to handle the assessment load
● Sufficient available time to provide information, advice and counselling for all candidates

● Sufficient competent internal moderators to ensure quality assessments

● Internal moderators must have sufficient access to the assessors

● Staff training and development needs must be consistently reviewed and training and development plans developed.

4. Assessment guidelines
In order to ensure a quality assessment system there should be specified and maintained guidelines:
● All information, guidance and advice regarding national standards that are applicable in

the workplace must be made available for candidates

● There must be an effective system to coordinate assessment activity

● There must be a system for reviewing the quality and fairness of the assessment process

● An effective appeals system must be put in place and candidates must be informed of the procedures for this system in an understandable
manner
● The assessors should use a range of assessment methods to ensure adequate assessment of competency is performed

● The candidate should be informed immediately on the result of the assessment and the certification thereof

● The candidate needs to know how to put in an appeal when they are not treated fairly

5. Quality assurance system

● In order to assure quality in workplace assessment practice, the quality assurance system must be effectively established and maintained

● The quality assurance system must lay out the procedures for internal moderation

● The system should establish how often internal moderation should be performed and time frames for systematic reviews of assessment
practice

6. Employment equity
● The assessment process plays an important role in ensuring the achievement of employment equity in the enterprise concerned

● The Employment Equity Act, 55 of 1998, requires employers to implement measures to identify and eliminate employment barriers which
affect people from designated groups. The act also requires that the employer create conditions for people from designated groups to have
equal opportunities to succeed within the workplace
● The achievement of employment equity places a particular responsibility on the assessment process. It requires that assessment practice
take particular cognisance of the needs of designated groups and that such needs are accommodated in the assessment system
 4. Unit 4: Conduct Moderation
Unit 4.1: Conduct a Moderation in Accordance with the Plan

1. Moderation of learner portfolios

Portfolios can assess the following:

1. The process of learning:

A portfolio provides a framework for a particular kind of learning process which leads to continuing personal and professional development.
This can include drawing on the learning gained from prior experience as well as reflecting on new learning.

2. The product of learning:

A portfolio contains a tangible record of what has been experienced or achieved on a learning programme or during a period of work
for the purpose of:
● Personal satisfaction

● Career development

● Certification

Moderation of portfolios will focus on the evidence required for certification. This is not a quick exercise and you will need help from the
assessors to identify the evidence requirements before you are able to evaluate the portfolio.
You will moderate the:
● Organisation of evidence

● Reliability of the evidence

● Assessment of the evidence as part of your moderation process

The number of portfolios to be moderated will depend on the number of learners assessed and whether the assessment is wholly or
partially portfolio based.
It will be very important to moderate towards a standardised approach to portfolio-building whilst the system is relatively new, as portability
is a crucial issue.

2. Moderation of RPL assessments

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) assessments should be moderated in the same way as other learner assessments. The table below
illustrates assessment in an RPL process.
Indicates where moderation would be needed.
Stage Action by Assessor Action by Learner

Learner applies for RPL Counselling Attending for counselling

 Identification and mapping of Counselling Career pathing Reflects on experience
achievements* Goal setting
Provides evidence
Assessment Decides methods of Complies and submits
assessment* Measuring against evidence
standards Evaluation evidence*
(portfolio)*
Deciding outcomes achieved*
Provides new evidence

Accreditation Articulation Continues to build portfolio

Accreditation

What RPL assessments are moderated?

● The only RPL assessments which are moderated are those which lead to the award of credits linked to unit standards registered on the
NQF
RPL assessments used for other purposes such as:
RPL for exemption from part of a course
RPL for advisement to allow learners to develop evidence
RPL baseline assessment and gap identification for admission into study programmes will not need to be moderated
Moderation of the RPL Process
● The RPL process will be moderated to ensure that it is valid, fair and reliable. The process of RPL accreditation should not be made too
complicated. The actual assessment used, such as pen and paper activities and practical demonstrations, will be moderated in the same way
as all other assessments
● Recognition of prior learning is a process, in the context of career pathing, to evaluate the relevance of experiential learning. Not all
assessors can be RPL assessors, as a particular skill is required to interview learners and to counsel learners through appropriate steps.
Many learners have high expectations of an RPL process and feel disappointed if it does not meet those expectations
● A moderation plan should mirror the RPL process and principles outlined in the provider accreditation file

RPL has the following steps, in order to decide:

● Where the learner is now and what relevant prior learning exists. This is usually established through an interview process. If the initial
interview shows that RPL is appropriate the process continues
● Where the learner needs to go, what courses and how relevant any prior learning is in terms of access to courses or accreditation for parts
or whole courses
● What official, formal, documented evidence exists as proof of relevant learning? How is the equivalence between the formal
documentation and the new standards or qualifications determined?
● What standards were researched and how? What decisions were made regarding the relevance of particular standards? Were all outcomes
(whole unit standard or part unit standards) considered? How did this relate to a certification process?
● How were competencies (practical or other) identified which were not documented but which the assessor decided to assist the learner to
document?
● What is the nature of the documentation for experiential learning? Is it sufficient, valid and reliable?

● What competencies are still needed to build onto existing competencies to gain a qualification?
● How will these be obtained?
● What actual assessments were done - was the assessment process valid, fair and reliable?

● Learner portfolios, which have been used as evidence to accredit prior learning, will need to be moderated. The process to map
equivalencies against unit standards will need to be checked.

Unit 4.2: Judge Assessment in Terms of the Principles

1. Moderation of Learnerships
A learnership has to lead to a qualification, which in turn consists of unit standards. These unit standards are grouped into skills programmes
by the curriculum committee. The learnership is structured in such a way that the learner progresses through a number of both formative
and summative assessments throughout the course of the learnership. These assessments need to be moderated according to the policy
and procedure of the ETQA and the provider.
We suggest the following process to minimise both assessments by registered assessors and moderators.
● Formative evidence evaluation for outcomes

An on-site evidence collection facilitator will help the learner compile a portfolio of evidence against the outcomes in each unit standard.
The evidence collection facilitator will progressively sign off the learner‘s evidence as appropriate against the assessment principles
● Formative evidence evaluation for unit standards

The learner will be required to provide evidence for a formative assessment against each of the prescribed unit standards in the skills
programme. This assignment will be evaluated by the evidence collection facilitator and presented to an assessor for assessment as part of
the skills programme assessment.
● Summative integrated assessment

Once the evidence collection facilitator has signed off all the outcomes and unit standards in the skills programme, the learner submits his
or her portfolio to the assessor for a formal summative assessment of the skills programme
● Final summative integrated assessment

Finally the learner will be required to do an integrated summative assessment against the outcomes of the qualification. This assignment will
be evaluated by an assessor who is a subject-matter expert.
The evidence collection facilitator is not permitted to make a judgement of competence unless he or she is also an assessor.
The moderation policy will determine what ratio of assessments is to be moderated. The moderator also needs to evaluate the formative
and summative assessment instruments and activities before assessments commence.
Evidence collection, assessment and moderation
● Throughout the learning process the learner works very closely with the evidence collection facilitator, using the Evidence Guides. The
learner participates in project-related activities in his working environment. The evidence collection facilitator helps the learner to collect
relevant evidence against all of the outcomes spelt out in the assessment criteria.
● As the learner generates this evidence he or she must include it in the portfolio of evidence.

● Depending on what the unit standard is, evidence may include examples of work the learner has produced, such as letters, memos, project
plans, work breakdown structures, project progress reports and customer reports.
● Once the evidence collection facilitator feels confident that enough evidence has been collected against all of the criteria in all of the unit
standards in that particular skills programme, he or she must call in an assessor to do the summative assessment for that skills programme.
● The learner‘s response plus documents produced in the final integrated summative assessment are submitted as part of the portfolio of
evidence under the following heading: summative integrated assessment. If the evidence collection facilitator feels satisfied that the
evidence provided in this assessment is adequate he or she gives the learner the go-ahead to submit it to the registered assessor.
● The assessor must then evaluate each specific outcome of each unit standard and tick them off in the instrument provided in this
document.
● If the assessor is satisfied with the evidence provided, he or she then declares the learner competent against each individual unit
standard.
● Should the assessor feel that the evidence does not comply with the rules of evidence he or she must make the necessary comments. The
comments must be comprehensive enough for the evidence-collection facilitator and the learner to understand what should be done in
order to achieve competence.
● The moderator must ensure that the above processes are executed with due care according to the principles of assessment and the policy
and procedures of the organisation.

2. Integrated assessment against skills programmes

Once the assessor has found the candidate competent against each unit standard, he or she should focus on the integrated assessment
exercise done at the end of the skills programme. This exercise should reflect the learner‘s competence against the entire skills programme,
as well as his or her ability to integrate the concepts. In this case, the assessor may not deviate from the requirements of the assessment
criteria as that will amount to an invalid assessment.
He or she should particularly focus on the learner‘s:
● Understanding of the theoretical concepts (foundational competence)

● Ability to apply what he or she has learned (competence), and

● Ability to integrate knowledge and skills across a number of unit standards (reflexive competence)

If the assessor is confident that the evidence provided reflects the learner‘s competency he or she has to find the learner competent against
the entire skills programme. Should the assessor doubt the learner‘s ability to integrate the concepts and skills of the various unit standards
he or she may request the learner to collect more evidence or propose an alternative assessment exercise.
Over the course of the learnership the assessor will receive the portfolio after each skills programme. Once the learner has been found
competent against all the skills programmes and the fundamentals, he or she will be required to do the elective unit standard of choice that
will form the basis of the final summative assessment.

3. Final summative assessment

In the final summative assessment the assessor must once again evaluate the evidence submitted in the portfolio of evidence. If the
assessor is satisfied with the evidence the learner will be requested to do a final integrated assessment. A proposed final summative
assessment is suggested in this document.
Once the learner is found competent against this final assessment activity he or she will be certificated as competent against the
qualification. It is recommended that the final summative assessments are moderated on a more regular basis than the skills programme
assessment. Please note: Only a registered assessor may do assessments.

Unit 4.3: Ensuring the Special Needs of the Learners are Catered for

Moderation is not only conducted after assessments but also before and during assessments:
● Before the assessment the moderator needs to review the instruments

● During the assessment the moderator could observe the assessor to ensure that the assessment process conforms to the assessment
procedures of the organisation, to observe the behaviour of the assessor towards the learner
After assessment the moderator can monitor the assessment documentations and reports. In submitting evidence for assessment as
moderator, you need to show that you:
● Understand how to moderate to ensure fair treatment of learners with special needs
● Understand the different approach that needs to be taken in RPL assessments

● Have gathered evidence of on-site and off-site moderation

● Have gathered evidence of your moderation upholding the assessment results and where it overturns the results

Once the plan has been prepared and discussed with the assessor, the moderator will:
● Agree on times for moderation which meet the requirements of the moderation plan (for example once for every learning programme)

● Moderate the number of assessments required by the moderation plan

● Moderate assessment preparations

● Moderate a selection of assessment tools

● Attend assessment to observe, using a range of moderation tools

● Moderate assessment results using the tools

● Moderate an internal standardisation process

● Give feedback to the assessor based on the results.

● Prepare moderation report for the ETQA verifiers

When conducting moderation, the following should be kept in mind:

● The moderation process must be in line with the organisational procedures of the company

● The principles of assessment are used to make judgements

● Any special needs must be accommodated without jeopardising the fairness and validity of the process

● The moderator must find out if the appeals procedure has been explained to the candidate

● Comments made by the moderator are important aspects of feedback and therefore these should be in writing

● The volume of moderation completed must satisfy the principle of sufficiency

● Ensure that the moderation is conducted within the scope of the moderation plan

Ensure that unforeseen circumstances do not interfere with the validity of the moderation
Check the assessment instruments and judge them in terms of the principles of assessment
Check the assessment process and judge in terms of the principles of assessment
Check the assessor‘s interpretation of the assessment criteria
Check that the special needs of candidates have been addressed in the appropriate manner
Confirm the assessment decision in terms of fairness, reliability and consistency
● If necessary, indicate where the assessment failed to meet requirements

● Ensure that a sufficient volume of moderation has taken place, according to the requirements and the circumstances

● Check that the Appeals Procedure is in place and that appeals are handled in the correct manner

Unit 4.4: The Proportion of Assessment Checked are in Accordance wih the Quality Assurance Bodies Requirements
1. Moderation of a Quality Management System (QMS)
All organisations involved in facilitating and assessing learning programmes, RPL candidates and learnerships are required to apply for
accreditation as providers, including workplaces providing the workplace-learning component of learnerships.
To meet SAQA‘s ETQA regulations the providers must:
● Have a quality management system relating to education and training in place

● Be able to develop, deliver and assess learning programmes culminating in registered standards and qualifications

● Have the necessary resources, policies and procedures to facilitate and assess the learning programme and achieve the desired outcomes

SAQA has clear criteria and guidelines for providers regarding quality management policies and procedures as well as review mechanisms.
The purpose of these mechanisms is to ensure that the degree of excellence in provision and assessment (as described in the provider‘s
mission statement and objectives) is achieved.
Although these requirements may seem overwhelming at first, providers that have established the mechanisms outlined in this document
would have largely met the ETQA quality requirements.
The quality management system should include:
● A business and operational plan

● Mechanisms to monitor and review the implementation of policies and plans

● Mechanisms to ensure that the evaluation and amendment of policies and plans are implemented, maintained and recorded (depending
on the type and form of provision) to achieve the desired outcomes

2. Maintaining standards

2.1 Standardising processes

Moderators and assessors should agree on a common interpretation of standards. This professional agreement is the key to the concept of
quality control:
● Instead of monitoring only the progress of individual learners, assessors look at their learners‘ achievements in relation to standards of
performance agreed upon by groups of assessors and moderators and in relation to nationally registered standards.
● At sites where one assessor is moderated, the assessor should meet with the moderator to compare and standardise the way in which the
work is assessed.
● If workplace mentors are involved they should be included in all moderation meetings.

● Samples of the evidence of outcomes achieved during assessment tasks (e.g. written learner examples, artefacts, practical etc.), the
learner portfolios and comments on assessment record sheets would be compared and moderated during the moderation meetings. A
moderator may reassess certain samples to confirm the standard.
● Where internal assessments are moderated across several sites it may be possible to have a common assessment task which is designed
by the assessors and assessed internally.
● An externally administered assessment is often required, for example, specialised trade tests or external written examinations. This
external assessment should be moderated and used to develop externally accepted standards and to supply information for systemic
evaluation.
● In addition to standardisation meetings, assessors should be encouraged to support each other and compare notes in relation to the
effectiveness of their assessment policies and in relation to a review of unit standards. The ETQA will encourage moderators‘ meetings for
this purpose and moderators should take comments and examples from their assessors to these meetings.

2.2 Levels of performance

The kind of question an assessor asks when assessing a learner against a particular outcome should be:
● At what level is she performing?

● It is not enough to ask if he can do this or does she know this?

● We need to know how well he can do this. or how well and at what level can she apply this knowledge?

● In this way the progress of learners is tracked or mapped, needs are identified and records are kept

If assessors develop different ideas about levels of performance, what is acceptable to one assessor may be unacceptable to another. A
moderator must step in and determine the acceptable standard and encourage all assessors to work to that standard and those levels. That
is why it is vital to have internal and external standardisation processes so that a standard can be agreed upon and maintained.

2.3 Adjustment of results

An assessment guideline or policy should have detailed procedures to be followed if a moderator feels that an assessor‘s results need to be
adjusted.
The policy should deal with issues such as:
● Does the individual learner who has been moderated have her results adjusted or is the whole group who has been assessed by that
assessor adjusted?
● Are the results allowed to stand and then special attention is paid to that assessor for the next set of learner assessments?

● What are the implications for consistency across assessors and across a specific time frame?

2.4 Using moderation to assist in the development or review of unit standards

An element of standardisation is the promotion of good quality standards. As part of the moderation process, a moderator should ask the
assessors to comment upon the relevance and scope of the unit standards. Unit standards have to be reviewed, updated, rewritten and re-
submitted regularly. Information from assessors will be useful in this process, as they can comment on the quality of the unit standards with
which they work and identify any gaps which need to be addressed.

Unit 4.5: Appeals Against Assessments are Handled

Moderators are required to deal with learner appeals against the judgement of an assessor.
A learner:
● Has the right to appeal against any assessment which he considers to be unfair or unreliable

● Has the right to object to a particular assessor if she fears a biassed or subjective result

● Can request an independent assessment if he fears that an assessor or moderator is biassed in any way

If a learner is not satisfied with the appeal even after it is moderated, the ETQA will intervene. In a continuous assessment process, formative
strategies should allow for reworking and re-submissions. An appeal would usually be against a formal, summative assessment judgement.
The provider's assessment policy will give details of how learner appeals should be handled.
● All appeals must be recorded

● All processes during an appeal must be noted

● A report of the outcome of the appeal should be submitted with a moderator's report
The first step should always be to resolve the appeal at site level, as and when the appeal is lodged. If the learner and assessor can reach an
agreement, the assessor records the appeal and the outcome is reported. A moderator would check the appeal report to see if correct
procedures were followed and in the case of any adjustments, that the amended results were recorded.
If there appears to be too many appeals, a moderator would check the assessor‘s interaction with learners and judge whether any
intervention, support or guidance was needed.
If a learner and an assessor cannot reach an agreement, the moderator will re-assess the learner.
It is important in such cases to record all the procedures and to include the learner in the planning for re-assessment.
If the judgement is upheld, the feedback to the learner should illustrate how her objections were considered and on what basis they were
rejected. A moderator should then monitor that the learner and the assessor can still work together.
If the assessor‘s judgement is overturned, both the learner and the assessor should be involved in the feedback and again the assessor and
learner relationship should be monitored.
Heading oS
1 scene
script
 5. Unit 5: Advise and Support Assessors
Unit 5.1: Giving Advice and Guidance to Assessors

1. The feedback dialogue

This is a process moderators will want to model for their assessors. It outlines what any assessor would find useful to know from his own
learners after each session.
At the end of the activities, assessors are asked to give information on the content, process and atmosphere of the activities they assessed
and to say how and what they feel they learnt from the process. The moderator writes up extracts from this feedback and includes it when
giving the moderation feedback about the same activities.
It is useful to say – “Why did you think this was happening?” or “How did this differ from your expectation?” and so on. In this way, you do not
just deliver your feedback but you use an assessor‘s own perceptions to guide your discussions. Although this stage of the process is
feedback on feedback, it does not involve any evaluation and it is not a one-way process.
The main purpose of using this strategy is that it serves as a link, reminding the assessor of what happened during the session and what she
was thinking and feeling as a result.
Remember:
In any feedback discussion, phrase your criticism in a constructive way. If you do not agree with something that was done, you could first
find out the assessor‘s intention for what was done. Getting cross with the assessor or making disparaging comments may relieve some of
your anger or frustration but does not create an effective, supportive relationship. Feedback is important, but it must be supportive and
constructive.

2. Steps for feedback

1. Acknowledge what has been done (Use a positive approach).

2. Describe what still needs to be done

3. Set targets and new criteria which will be included for the next task. Whatever method of assessment is used, assessors and learners
should always receive constructive feedback
3. Giving appropriate support
If an assessor is not coping, despite several support sessions, the moderator needs to analyse what is wrong. It could be that the assessor is
unfamiliar with a new learning programme or new equipment. It could be that there are problems other than the assessment of learners –
these can range from family problems to a lack of social skills.
It is your responsibility to identify a problem but it is not only your responsibility to solve the problem. It may be that your management
would need to be involved or some ETQA support is required. It is important that the moderator identifies a problem.
If the moderator can‘t address the problem, it should be reported to the training institution and the verifiers as soon as possible. Evidence of
the problem will be needed as well as details of attempts to solve the problem. Early identification and resolution of problems is essential.

Unit 5.2: How to Contribute to the Development of Assessors

1. Reviewing your own feedback procedures as a moderator

This is also a good time to allow for reflection on yourself as a moderator. Have you followed through on your promises? Have you made
enough time to play this role? Are you giving the support required?
Some examples of feedback areas:
1. Feedback about concepts and content areas
An assessor and moderator may have different interpretations about particular concepts in the context of the learning taking place.
Feedback is used to clarify each others‘ views and come to a mutual understanding. The assessor may revise the approach as a result of the
discussion or ask you to rethink.

2. Trust-building and shared dynamics

The assessor should trust your feedback because it is based not just on experience but on an understanding of learning processes and
expertise in the field. The assessor should feel that the moderator is open to new ideas and not intent on imposing a set way of doing things

3. There is whole-person involvement

Assessors should feel that the moderator cares about what they do and how they do it. The purpose of feedback is so that the moderator
can help the assessor to succeed and improve

4. Use imagination and visualisation

Feedback should give hints and tips, such as, “What would have happened if you had….?”
Ask the assessor to rethink for himself rather than saying, “If you had done….this would have been the result.”

5. Use learner assessments as resources

Practical examples such as, – “I see that you assessed Thembi as… when he did…” and “Perhaps next time you could see if he can…”

6. Goal setting and careful timeframes for suggested improvements

If improvements are suggested in feedback there should be some criteria for achieving these and a definite time frame for when
improvement will be checked.

7. Review the language instruction

Many assessors need help in clarifying their language when giving feedback to learners, especially if they are not first language speakers.
There are lots of hints and tips which a moderator can give but again, this must be done with tact, in ways which explore possibilities and do
not dictate set formats.
The feedback process is a source of learning for both assessors and moderators. It illustrates new purposes for activities and it can be a
means of finding out more about where the assessor is in her development.
 6. Unit 6: Report, Record and Administer Moderation

Unit 6.1: To whom will you Report your Moderation Findings to and what is the Agreed Timeline? Part 1

What must be recorded and checked:

The ETQA will have requirements regarding the format, content, role players and timeframes for recording and reporting of assessment and
moderation processes. The validation and certification process for learner achievements will depend upon these reporting processes.
● All records kept by assessors must be moderated and comments noted in the moderator‘s report

● If the moderator is satisfied with the moderation results he must sign off the learner records to show that they have been moderated. The
external verifier will check this.

1. Record checklist
Here is an example of the kind of checklist a moderator could use:
Criteria Yes No Comment
Check that all learners are enrolled with the provider or workplace
assessor
All learner information is captured on a database so that learner
information, learner achievements and learner certification is in
place
The learner database is up to date
The database is compliant with SETA requirements
There is policy and practice to ensure that the confidentiality of
learner records is maintained

The record of learner achievements is endorsed by the assessor

and moderator
NOTE: There will be special sorts of records to be submitted if there are any irregularities

2. Organisational records
● All learner information is captured on a database at registration so that learner information can be sent to the SETA. The database must
be compatible with the SETA database
● A verifier will check the number of learners enrolled for a course and the number of learner achievements against the enrolment.
Discrepancies will need to be moderated and explained in the moderator‘s report
● Records such as attendance registers may need to be coordinated with the workplace skills development officer and compliance with rules
regarding non-attendance, sickness should be moderated
● If learners have problems such as learning difficulties or gaps in learning which have been identified, records of these problems and
conferences with learners and assessors should be kept

3. Assessment records
● An assessor may only be responsible for certain fundamental skills or core elements of a programme but accurate and organised
administration will be necessary to coordinate all data to ensure that learners receive credits for all completed programmes and modules.
The moderator may need to coordinate this process
● Learner portfolios should be organised in ways which are understood by all the participants involved in the programme, including the
learners. These should meet the requirements of the moderation process

4. Moderation report
All details of the moderation of assessment must be recorded and summarised in a report:
● The plan

● The sampling process

● The standardisation process

● Assessor evaluations

● The findings

● Learner appeals

● RPL issues

● Feedback and support

● Adjustments made as a result of the moderation

Unit 6.2: To whom will you Report your Moderation Findings to and what is the Agreed Timeline: Part 2

1. ETQA Requirements for Reporting Learner Achievements

1.1 Reporting categories

ETQA will probably have standardised procedures for reporting learner achievements for
● Qualifications that they are responsible for

● Learnerships

● Unit standards-based programmes

Reporting will follow SAQA requirements and formats for entry of results in the NLRD register.

1.2 Documentation required from the assessor by the ETQA

This information is in addition to the assessment records. It includes information about:
● Learners - basic information about learners, ID, gender and address as requested by the NLRD
● Assessors - the details of the registration and qualifications of assessors will be required

● Unit Standard Achievement - this information is required if a learner has completed a unit standard only. If learners achieve individual unit
standards as part of a full qualification a decision will be taken whether to record each Unit Standard achieved or to report only the
qualification
● Qualification Achievement - this information gives details of the full qualification credits

● Evidence of Moderation of assessments according to the Assessment Policy - a representative sample of learner achievements must be
moderated and available to be part of the verification process of the ETQA
● Evidence that the Confidentiality of Learner Achievements is Maintained - access to the database of learner information, the results of
learner assessments, portfolios and learner records must be controlled and secure. Learner results are to be treated as confidential at all
times. The ETQA will require that learner records are kept for a specific length of time

1.3 Additional reporting requirements

The timeframes for reporting will be specified by the ETQA. As a guideline, the type of information to include in reports is:
● The number of learners enrolled for programmes

● Credits, certificates and qualifications achieved

● Access to additional learning or employment opportunities following the achievement of standards and qualifications. (This relates to the
relevance of the qualification and the career opportunities provided by the qualification.)
● Proposals for amendments or new standards

● All unit standards have dates for review, adjustments and adaptations. In your work as a moderator you will note any anomalies in range
statements or assessment criteria and general comments
● If you feel that the unit standards do not address all the skills a learner would need, you can suggest outlines for other outcomes or new
unit standards

2. Moderation of records
A moderator will moderate that the assessment system is properly managed and that all records are organised and accessible. A comment
on this will appear in the moderation report.
Originals or copies of record forms are to be kept on file in an organised system.
● Learnership registration form

● Learnership agreement

● Employment contract

● Job description

● Code of conduct, terms and conditions of employment

● Timetable (instructional learning and structured workplace experience)

● Attendance register

● Feedback forms

● Performance reviews

● Progress reports
● Record of assessments
● Counselling, grievance, disciplinary discussions

● References, testimonials

● Certificates

● Termination documentation

● Record of learnership meetings, project team meetings, training forum and Employment EquityForum meetings

● Minutes or notes for the record from Task team meetings

● Financial records pertaining to all aspects of the learnership

● Notes from union agreements relating to learnerships

● Placement records

Reports of Learner Achievements will be sent to the SETA to be recorded on the National Learner
Record database.
The previous modules have prepared you for moderation, yet the aftermath is probably as important as the actual moderation.
We need a paper or audit trail of the moderation so that:
● The training provider can continue to develop and improve their systems

● The learners can be assured that fairness and validity (amongst others) are being applied to their work.

● A complete recording and reporting system is in place so that our Seta‘s ETQA can check the work and quality of our learning

To start here are some notes from RTS‘s quality management system on reporting and
administration:
● Read these notes and highlight sections as a reminder to yourself.

Unit 6.3: How to Maintain Records in Accordance with the Quality Management System

1. RTS system procedure for document and record management

1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this procedure is to describe the methods used to manage all documents and records that relate to the implementation of
the Quality Management System.

1.2 Scope
The scope of the procedure includes the receipt, identification, review, approval, filing, distribution and maintenance of the following
documents and records:
● Management system documents and records

● Learner documents and records

● Staff documents and records

● SAQA, ETQA and DoE documents and records
● Council for Higher Education

● General correspondence

● Faxes

● Registered letters

1.3 References
● SAQA Regulation No R1127 of 1998

● Further Education and Training Act 98 of 1998

● National Education Policy Act (Act 27 of 1996)

1.4 Definitions
● Document - information and its supporting medium, for example paper, magnetic or electronic

● Record - document stating results achieved or providing evidence of activities performed

1.5 Responsibilities
The responsibility for implementing requirements of this procedure rests with the training provider management board chairman, the
training provider principal, the training provider principal‘s secretary and training provider administration staff.

1.6 Procedure
Management System Documents and Records
Management system documentation, for example Quality policies and System Procedures, will be uniquely identified by a Training
provider number and revision status and reviewed and approved by the Training provider Principal and Chairman of the Management
Board prior to issue and use
Revisions to these documents will be reviewed and approved in the same manner as the first issues and the nature of all changes made
will be identified in the document revision record sheet in each document.
The issue of these documents will be controlled by an issue register
All documentation relating to the operation of the Training Provider Management System, for example minutes of meetings, Management
Reviews, and Quality Committee records, will be filed separately in files reserved only for this purpose and maintained by the Principal's
secretary
Learner documents and records
Learner documents and records will be received and checked by Training provider administration staff, to ensure all relevant documents
have been completed correctly and receipts have been issued for all submissions
Learner documents and records will be filed by student number and the files maintained by the Principal‘s secretary
Staff documents and records
Staff documents and records will be maintained by the Principal‘s Secretary
SAQA, ETQA and DoE documents and records
 SAQA, ETQA and DoE documents and records will be filed in separate, uniquely identified files, and be maintained by the Principal‘s
Secretary
General Correspondence
All correspondence, for example letters, circulars, and memos, will be received for processing by the principal's secretary
All letters (except personal mail) will be opened, date stamped, sorted, distributed or filed as necessary by TRAINING PROVIDER
administration staff
Circulars will be listed, numbered and filed for reference
Memos will be distributed as per the distribution shown on the memo
Letters of complaint will be date stamped, registered and filed in the "Complaints File", maintained by the Principal's secretary, ready for
resolution by the Principal and the chairman of the Management Board
Registered Letters
Incoming registered letters will be received by the signature of the postal receipt slip and processing in accordance with the nature of the
letter
Outgoing registered letters will be recorded, prior to posting, showing details of the date sent and the recipient
Documentation.
The following documentation is required for the implementation of this procedure:
Management System Document issue register
Date Stamp
Document file registers
Fax file register
Records.
The following records are required to be maintained by implementation of this procedure:
Management system records
Learner records
Staff records
SAQA, ETQA and DoE records
General correspondence
Registered letters
Assessments
Moderation

Unit 6.4: How to Preserve Confidentiality of Information

Administrative systems will be computerised and all forms will be provided on the Standard Form disk. The actual implementation of the
various systems will be detailed in the applicable operational system
Critical success factors, (CSFs) for measurement of performance on the whole operation will be:
● Credits assessed and achieved by learners through the database (provided under separate cover and written in MS Access)
● Net profit before tax as provided by the accounting officer
● Qualitative measurements as detailed, checked and found with corrective action by the Quality Audit Committee

Administrative systems will therefore only be implemented to ensure achievement of the above CSF‘s which will become objectives.

1. Communications
The preferred method of communication is via e-mail on the Internet as all training teams will be connected to this media.
Communication will include, but not be restricted to:
● Weekly reports from each Mentor on progress

● Minutes of centres in the Associates

● Newsletters weekly on happenings and progress

● Promotional advices and information

● Learning information and data or product sheets

● Training and guidance notes

● Quality audits and results, corrective action and suggestions

● Learning programme development, new products, amendments and updates

All information relayed will be classified as follows:

● General information, for unrestricted distribution

● Restricted distribution, as stated on the communication

 7. UNIT 7: Review Moderation Systems and Processes

Unit 7.1: Prepare a SWOT Analysis of Moderation Systems and Processes

1. Write a short report with SWOT on a moderation policy and procedure

The notes starting on the following page include12
● ETDP Moderation requirements

● A policy and procedure on moderation

So, finally…
● Review these systems and prepare a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis on these systems and processes

● Suggest ways of improving the system and processes

2. Reviewing the moderation

It is important to review the moderation process and determine to what extent it was successful in achieving the specific objectives. A
critical look at the process enables one to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the system and to make recommendations which would
improve the system in some way. Evaluation of your own performance therefore becomes important.
When evaluating the process, consider the following:
● What would you leave as is?

● What would you change?

● Why would you change it?

● Identify the strengths of the moderation system

● Identify the weaknesses of the moderation system

● Assess the moderation process in terms of the assessment principles of fairness, validity and consistency

● Make recommendations where necessary and in accordance with policy

● Identify future changes which have to be made

The SAQA document on Moderation states that the process ensures that people who are being assessed are assessed in a consistent,
accurate and well-designed manner. It ensures that all assessors who assess a particular unit standard or qualification, are using comparable
assessment methods and are making similar and consistent judgements about learners' performance.
Moderation of assessment occurs at both the level of the provider (internal moderation), and at the level of the ETDQA (external
moderation). The importance of moderating systems can therefore not be overemphasised. This will ensure that the system is credible and
that assessors and learners behave in ethical ways.
Furthermore, moderation in the NQF means professional interaction and up-skilling of practitioners so as to continuously improve the
quality of assessment.
Therefore the main functions of moderation systems are:
● To verify that assessments are fair, valid, reliable and practicable

● To identify the need to redesign assessments if required

● To provide an appeals procedure for dissatisfied learners
● To evaluate the performance of assessors

● To provide procedures for the de-registration of unsatisfactory assessors

● To provide feedback to the NSB‘s on unit standards and qualifications

When designing a moderation system, the following points must be considered :

● The management structure of the moderating body (ETDQA)

● The functions allocated to the moderation system

● The components of the moderation system

● The moderation methods to be used

Unit 7.2: Make Recommendations that Contribute Towards the Improvements of Moderation Systems

1. Who will be appointed as moderators?

Moderators can be drawn from the providers and companies where assessments are being conducted, or they can be external appointees.
Regardless of where moderators are drawn from, they have to be of good standing and should have unquestionable skill in the curriculum
and assessment practices.
Also, they should have a good understanding of the expectations of all users. Any person who is appointed as moderator or chair of a
moderation panel, should have sound communication and interpersonal skills. Criteria and procedures for the selection of moderators must
be established.
An appeal can also be brought against a moderation decision.
It may therefore be useful for providers and ETQA to have an informal stage of discussion before
any formal processes are invoked.
ETDQA Moderators:
● Moderators who wish to carry out the moderation function for standards and qualifications in the ETDQA primary focus must be
registered with the ETDQA from the beginning of 2005
● The ETDQA will only register moderators who are already practising ETDQA registered assessors

● They must have achieved the unit standards – Moderate assessment and design and develop assessment

● Moderators must be subject matter experts in the field or subfield in which they carry out their moderation activities

Moderators should be able, if required, to moderate the assessment instrument including the instructions to the assessor, instructions to the
candidate, recording format, scoring guide and so forth. These detailed instructions are an essential part of an assessment task or
instrument. They are often made into a handbook to guide the assessors and standardise their approach to conducting an assessment task
or a series of tasks. This set of instructions is usually known as an assessment guide.
ETQA constituent providers are to ensure that a sample of all assessments conducted is moderated, with the aim of enhancing the quality of
assessments in the ETD sector.
Moderators are expected to follow the process set out in the specific outcomes, entitled:
● Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system,

● Plan and prepare for moderation

● Conduct moderation

● Advise and support assessors

● Report, record and administer moderation
● Review moderation systems and processes

In addition, the overall range is stated:

● Evidence must be gathered for moderation of assessments of candidates with special needs, and RPL cases

● Moderation must cover a range of assessment practices including assessment instruments, assessment design and methodology,
assessment records; reporting and feedback mechanisms
● Evidence must be gathered for the moderation of assessments involving a variety of assessment techniques, including work samples,
simulation, role-plays, written, orals, portfolios, projects
● Moderation interactions could include pre-moderation interaction; standards discussion; recording and record keeping; reporting and
feedback mechanisms; post-moderation interaction, support and recommendations

Unit 7.3: Review the Credibility of Recognition Systems

1. Introduction
Moderation ensures that learners are assessed in a consistent, accurate and well-designed manner.
It ensures that assessors are using standardised methods, comparable irrespective of the subject so that consistent and accurate
judgements on learners‘ performance is made.

2. Policy
The main functions of moderation therefore shall be:
Ensure and verify the assessment is
● Open: Learners can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence. Assessment candidates understand the assessment process
and the criteria that apply
● Consistent: The same assessor would make the same judgement again in similar circumstances. The judgement made is similar to the
judgement that would be made by other assessors
● Appropriate: The method of assessment is suited to the performance being assessed

● Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievement, which are not related to the evidence

● Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost-effective assessments which do not unduly interfere with learning

● Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and feasible

● Valid: The assessment focuses on the requirements laid down in the Standard; for example the assessment is fit for purpose

● Direct: The activities in the assessment mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible

● Authentic: The assessor is satisfied that the work being assessed is attributable to the person being assessed

● Sufficient: The evidence collected establishes that all criteria have been met and that performance to the required Standard can be
repeated consistently
● Systematic: Planning and recording is sufficiently rigorous to ensure that the assessment is fair

● Identify the need to redesign the assessment if required

● Allow appeals against any assessment and result thereof

● Evaluate the performance of assessors

● De-register any unsatisfactory assessors
● Contribute to our quality assurance by providing feedback on learning materials and results thereof

● Check the choice and design of assessment methods and tools to ensure that these are appropriate to the unit standard, NQF level and
qualification being assessed
● The methods and procedures as outlined in our procedure KTASP Assessment management are fully implemented and that the forms are
correctly completed
● At least twenty percent of all learning will be moderated

● Moderation must contribute to the overall quality of performance, delivery and learning

3. Procedure
● Each programme when aligned and developed will provide a Moderator‘s guide according to the subject matter and aligned with the
registered unit standard, as part of the learning material pack
● Internal moderators will check this Assessment Guide prior to implementation and report on their findings for an amendment if required

● Assessments for each programme will be carried out in accordance with procedure KTASP

● Assessment Management as required according to the assessment guide provided for each programme, using the necessary forms

Internal moderators, with the relevant subject matter expertise according to the programmes will be contracted to review at least ten
percent or a minimum of 3 assessments. These Internal moderators will be responsible for:
● Monitoring consistency of assessments

● Coordinate assessor meetings

● Liaise with external moderators

● Providing appropriate support, advice and guidance to assessors

External moderators will be employed once per quarter to review assessments from that quarter and the results thereof. These external
moderators will:
● Check the systems required to support the provision of learning programmes across the learning site are appropriate and working
effectively
● Provide advice and guidance to providers

● Maintain an overview of provision.

● Ensure all people are qualified and experienced to provide quality assessment in

● accordance with our QMS

● Check the credibility of assessment methods and instruments

● Check internal moderation systems

● Check assessment decisions

The reports from External Moderators will therefore provide invaluable input to our quality management, forming part of the quality audits.
Moderators will choose at random twenty percent of the completed assessments and complete such tasks according to the
abovementioned policy on moderation.
Moderators will check the procedure followed by Assessors and report on the results
Moderators will report in writing to the Senior Partner and Quality Committee on their findings
Moderators will also be used to check and audit any appeals as per the procedure
The Quality Committee must at all times consider reports from Moderators – both internal and external – including such reports and
recommendations in their findings for constant improvement and quality learning of added value.

Annexure A
ModerationForms
MOD01 Notification of Moderation 105
MOD02 Moderator Plan - Learner POE List to be moderated 106

MOD03 Moderator Booking out of POE‘s 107

MOD04 Moderator Report - Every moderation per POE 108 -
112
MOD05 Moderator Report - Every moderation Per Programme 113
MOD06 Moderator Non-conformance Report 114 -
115

MOD07 Moderator Code of Conduct 116 -

117
MOD08 Moderator Report - Once-off Moderation of Learning Programme 118 -
120
MOD09 Moderator Report - Once-off Moderation of Assessment Guide 121 -
123
MOD10 Moderator Report - Once-off Moderation of Assessment Plan 124 -
128
MOD11 Moderator Report - Once-off Moderation of QMS 129 -
130

Annexure B
Assessment Forms (Check when moderating - they must be available)
ASS01 Assessment Request 131
ASS02 Notification of Assessment 132
 ASS03 Assessment Plan 133
ASS04 Learner Feedback Report 134 -
138
Annexure C
Assessment and Moderation Policy
Assessment and Moderation Policy 139 -
147
Annexure D
Umalusi Handout
Notes from Umalusi 148-
149

Notification of Moderation
(To be completed before moderation)

To:

From:
Tel No:
Email:
Date:
Notification of Moderation:
This memorandum serves to notify you that the assessment with the below mentioned details will be moderated for Quality Assurance
purposes, to ensure that assessments are conducted according to quality assurance processes.
Particulars of Assessment:
Learner:
 Unit standard no:
Date:
Time:
Venue:
Thank you for your cooperation

MODERATOR‘S PLAN -
ASSESSMENT OF LEARNERS/POE‘S
(To be completed by assessor before and moderator after moderation)

Moderator:

Moderator Reg Nr:

Assessor:

Assessor Reg Nr:

Date of moderation:
Nr POE Competent Unit Unit Standard Title Comments
Nr
Learners Assessed Standard
1
2
3
 4

Comments:

Assessor: Date:
Internal Date:
Moderator:
Form: MOD02
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

MODERATOR BOOKING OUT OF POE‘s

(To be completed when moderator collects the POE’s or take them out of the system)

MODERATOR NAME:
MODERATOR REG. NR:
DATE - received:
DATE – to be returned:
DATE – returned:

Number POE nr Name of candidate

1.
2.
3.
I, the undersigned, hereby acknowledge the receival of the POE‘s listed above.
I undertake to return them on the agreed upon return date.
Signature of Moderator:

Date:

Signature of Administrator: Date:

Form: MOD03
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

MODERATOR‘S REPORT
(To be completed by moderator during moderation per portfolio selected)

Skills Programme:
Unit Standard:

Candidate‘s Name:

ID Number:

Assessor Name: Signature: Reg. No:

Moderator Name: Signature:

Reg. No:

Date of Moderation:
Has the assessor complied with (the provider‘s) assessment policy?
The moderator is satisfied that:
The planning for the assessment and preparation of the candidate conducted properly

All administrative procedures have been correctly followed

All recording sheets have been accurately and appropriately completed showing

understanding of the criteria

The assessor‘s assessment is consistent/reliable (in line with other assessments by same
assessor, and in line with other assessors)

The evidence follows the assessment guide which has been moderated and is therefore valid, fit for purpose, covers the relevant CCFO‘s,
covers practical, foundational and

reflexive competence, and demonstrates applied competence where appropriate

Form: MOD04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
Checklist for Principles of Assessment Y N Comments
Appropriate Method of assessment is
suited to the performance
being assessed.
Fair The method of assessment
does not represent any
barriers to achievements
related to the evidence.
Manageable The methods used make
for easily ar- ranged, cost
effective assessments.
Integration Evidence collection is
integrated into the work or
learning process where this
is appropriate and feasible.
Valid The assessment focuses on
the requirements laid down
in the standard

Direct The activities in the

assessment mirror the
conditions of actual
performance as closely as
possible.
 Authentic The assessor is satisfied
that the work being
assessed is attributable to
the person being assessed.
Sufficient The evidence establishes
that all criteria are met and
that performance can be
repeated consistently.
Systematic Planning and recording is
sufficiently rigorous to
ensure that assessment is
fair.
Open Learners can contribute to
the planning and
accumulation of evidence.
Learners understand the
assessment process and
criteria that apply.
Consistent The same assessor would
make the same judgement
again in similar
circumstances.
Checklist for the Internal Moderation Process
Fairness Y N Comments
The learner was prepared for the formal
(summative)
assessment(s)

Assessment procedures were open and

well explained to the learner during the
assessment-planning phase
There was no discrimination against a
learner based on gender, race, age,
disability and social class
The learner was given the opportunity to
lodge an appeal.
Assessment approaches, methods,
instruments and materials were chosen to
accommodate learners’ differences and
special needs
The learner was assessed against the unit
standard and the
The learner's work was not compared with
other learners.
The appeal mechanisms and re-
assessments were accessible to the learner

Validity Y N
The assessment measures what it is
supposed to measure in relation to the unit
standard and assessment criteria
The procedures, methods, instruments and
materials matched what is supposed to be
assessed
An assessment guide was used to conduct
an assessment against this unit standard
The assessor stated clearly the outcome(s)
being assessed
The assessor used an appropriate type, or
source, of evidence
The assessor used an appropriate method
of assessment.
The assessor selected the appropriate
instrument of assessment.
The evidence form was a reliable and
objective source
The evidence can be supported
The assessment did not assess more or
less than what is required in the unit
standard
Form: MOD04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
Reliability Y N Comments
The assessor was familiar with the
assessment methods, assessment
instruments and the application
environment.
The assessment instruments were
clear, consistent and unambiguous.

The assessment activities were

administered in the same way for all
the learners.
The assessment results were not
perceived to have been
influenced by variables such as:
∙ different assessors applying
different standards;
∙ assessor stress and fatigue;

∙ not enough evidence gathered;

∙ assessor’ bias in terms of the

learner’s gender, ethnic
origin, sexual orientation, religion,
like/dislike,
appearance and such likes.
Assumptions about the learner did
not influence the as-
sessor’s judgments.
The assessment criteria and
guidelines for the unit stan- dard
were adhered to.

The Assessor has knowledge of the

learning field
(technically competent).
The assessment guide provided the
learner and assessor with a clear
indication of competent performance.
The recording of assessment results
was clear an
systematic.
Practicability Y N Comments
The assessment focused on gathering
evidence that occurred naturally in
the workplace.
Financial resources, time equipment
and facilities were considered for a
simulation.
Costs, facilities, equipment and time
were considered when the
assessment was planned.
Opportunities for assessing the
learner outside the
learner’s current work environment
were considered in
terms of the cost and practicality.
Tools used allowed for the necessary
evidence to be
collected.
There was room for an appeal.
The assessment methods used were:
∙ Appropriate: A variety of assessment
methods were
used to ensure that the assessment
methods were suited to the
performance being assessed.
∙ Integrated with work or learning

∙ Manageable: The methods used to

collect evidence
were straightforward, readily
arranged and did not
interfere unduly with learning or
work.

The assessment was Consistent;

Systematic and Open
The Evidence was:
∙ Direct: Evidence was as direct as
practicable,
collected from activities that were as
similar as possible
to the conditions of the actual
performance.
∙ Authentic: The assessor was
confident that evidence
is attributable to the person being
assessed, that out- side assistance is
not distorting the assessment.
∙ Sufficient: The quality and quantity
of evidence was
established with confidence that the
assessment
criteria have been met.
Records are kept.
Records are accurate.
Records are stored in a safe place but
are accessible
Form: MOD04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
Reports were compiled on the assessment
conducted.
The Assessment was performed according to
the requirements/
specifications of the appropriate SETA/ETQA.
Feedback was provided.
Reviews were conducted on the assessment
process/
procedures.
Gaps were identified and appropriate
measures were taken, e.g. re- training of
assessors.
Assessment documentation Y N Comments
Was the assessment documentation
available, if not, state the reasons

Evidence checklist Y N Comments

All the personal details of the learner and
the assessor have been completed.
The place where the assessment(s) took
place has been
indicated i.e. on-the-job or off-the-job.
The date(s) on which the assessment(s) took
place have been indicated.
The date(s) indicated on the evidence
checklist are the same dates as the dates
reflected in the assessor guide.

The corresponding colour of pen has been

used for recording on the guidelines for the
assessor and the evidence checklist.
Both learner and assessor have signed the
document after each assessment occasion.

Assessment methods have been identified.

Results for each assessment occasion are
indicated and dated.
Appropriate judgements are cross-
referenced with the assessor guide.

Dates correspond with dates indicated in the

assessor guide.
Provide comments about the assessment
occasion.
Provide details about the evidence the
assessor has collected.
 Sufficient and specific notes were taken in
order to provide
comprehensive feedback to the learner.

General Y N Comments
Has the assessment been conducted
according to the Rules of
Evidence (VACS)?
Does the assessment process adhere to the
national assessor unit standard?
Have the issues stemming from the previous
moderation report been addressed? (Please
indicate how.
State your conclusion about the competence
of the assessor based on the national
assessor unit standard.
Summarise the feedback to the assessor
about the assessment practice.
Form: MOD04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
Moderator‘s comments:

Declaration of understanding:

I hereby declare that I agree with the outcome of the internal moderation process, and that the moderation report is clear to me. I am
satisfied that the written feedback given to me was relevant, and done in a constructive manner. I accept the report and have no obligations
to this particular internal moderation
Assessor: Date:
Moderator: Date:
Form: MOD04
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
 MODERATOR‘S FEEDBACK REPORT
ON LEARNING PROGRAMME TO ASSESSOR
(To be completed with every moderation on each programme moderated)

Moderator:

Moderator Reg Nr:

Assessor:

Assessor Reg Nr:

Learning Programme:
Date of moderation:
1. Issues raised

2. Actions to be taken by assessor

3. Support from Provider organisation (if required)

4. General Comments

Assessor: Date:
Internal Date:
Moderator:
Form: MOD05
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
 Non-conformance Report
(Only to be completed if necessary - if the moderator comes upon non-conformance)

Assessor’s information
Name:
Registration number:
Employee number:

Department:
Telephone number:
E-mail:

Moderator’s information
Name:

Registration number:
Employee number:
Department:
Telephone number:
E-mail:

Date of previous
Moderation visit:
 Date of current
Moderation visit:
Venue:
Form: MOD06
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
Type of Non-conformance
Unfair assessment (no consistency/ Contravention of the assessment
process
discrimination)
Invalid assessment (not reach same outcome) Assessor not technically compe-
tent

Unreliable assessment (evidence produced not Learner not technically compe- tent
relevant/not sufficient)
Unethical behaviour (ethics/ Contingency plans influenced
assessment
professionalism)
Unfair barriers to assessment Inability of the assessor to make
judgement based on SME knowl-
edge
Other
(Stipulate)
The reason for the type of non-conformance is motivated.
Assessors reason(s) for non-conformance is noted.

Assessor: Date:
Internal Date:
Moderator:
Form: MOD06
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
 MODERATORS‘ CODE OF CONDUCT
(To be completed once-off yearly by moderator)

As a RTS Moderator, I herewith agree to adhere to this code of conduct.

Registered Moderator Number:

I, the undersigned, hereby commit myself to abide by the ETDP SETA Code of Conduct in relation to all my work conducted as an ETDQA
registered moderator.
The Code of Conduct to which I agree is as follows:

1. Responsibilities:
plan and conduct moderation as outlined in the unit standard ‘Moderate Assessment’;
moderate candidates with reference to the relevant unit standard (s) and or qualification;
be guided by the provider‘s moderation guide, tools and reporting format,
be guided by the assessment manager‘s selection of the sample and reasons given for the selection;
moderate in a fair and transparent manner, avoiding bias and interviewing candidates if this should prove necessary;
moderate evidence observing the rules of evidence;
give constructive written feedback to assessors; and
give feedback to the ETDQA on unit standards and qualifications.

2. Declaration of Interest:
On being requested to moderate a group of assessment, moderators must inform the provider in confidence:
whether they have (past or present) a family relationship with any of the candidates or assessors;
whether they might have, or be seen to have, difficulty in moderating any assessments objectively because of friendship or other
obligation; and
any other actual or potential conflict of interest involving candidates, assessors or other relevant parties.
Form: MOD07
Reviewed: 01-01-2009

3. Working Practices and Quality Standards:

I undertake to:

act professionally, accurately and in an unbiased manner and be responsible for their actions in the moderation process.
 not to accept any inducements, commission, gift or any other benefit (apart from fair payment), or respond to any threats or harassment
from providers, their employees or any interested party, or keep silent about any colleagues who do so.
report any assessment irregularities, complaints or appeals and any attempts to threaten or bribe to the ETDQA in their reports.
not intentionally communicate false or misleading information that may compromise the integrity of any assessment.
keep relationships with candidates, assessors and providers on a professional basis.
4. Confidentiality
Information on a provider‘s practices and procedure gained during the moderation process remains confidential to the provider.
Information about individual learners and their organisations should remain confidential.
5. Relationship with ETDQA
Moderators are registered with the ETDQA; this constitutes a licence to practise in the sector;
Complaints submitted by moderators to the ETDQA will be ad- dressed by the Irregularities Committee;
Complaints submitted about moderators to the ETDQA will be investigated, and, should the moderator be in breach of the Code
of Conduct, the moderator will be de-registered, and not longer able to practice as a moderator in the sector.
Should a moderator believe that he or she has been unfairly refused registration, extension of registration, or been unfairly de-registered,
the ETDQA has a proper appeals procedure which should be fol- lowed.
Signature of Moderator: Date:
Signature of MD:

Date:

Form: MOD07
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
Reviev

MODERATION OF LEARNING PROGRAMME

(To be completed once-off per programme by moderator to approve new learning programme)

Learning Programme:
Unit Standard/s targeted:
Names of Designers:

Name of Moderator:
Date of moderation:
Reg nr:
SPECIFIC OUTCOMES TARGETED:
∙ Demonstrate understanding of outcomes-based assessment

∙ Prepare for assessments

∙ Conduct assessments

∙ Provide feedback on assessments and

∙ Review assessments

SO 1 SO 2 SO 3 SO 4 SO 5
TASK 1
TASK 2
TASK 3
TASK 4

REFLECTIVE TASK
SUMMATIVE TASK
CRITICAL CROSS-FIELD OUTCOMES:
CO 1 CO 2 CO 3 CO 4 CO 5 CO 6 CO 7
TASK 1

TASK 2
TASK 3
TASK 4
REFLECTIVE TASK
SUMMATIVE TASK
Form: MOD08
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE

KNOWLEDGE ELEMENT Y/N COMMENTS
Unit Standard: 115753 –The following knowledge
is embedded within the unit standard, and will be
assessed directly or indirectly through assessment
of the specific outcomes in terms of the
assessment criteria
Outcomes-based education, training and
development

Principles of assessment - directly assessed

through assessment criterion `Key principles of
assessment are described and illustrated
in practical situations. The descriptions highlight
the importance of applying the principles in terms
of the possible effect on the assessment process
and results.`, and indirectly assessed via a
requirement to apply the principles throughout the
standard.
Principles and practices of RPL - directly as-
sessed through assessment criteria `RPL is
explained in terms of its purpose, processes and
related benefits and challenges.
Ex- planations highlight the potential impact of
RPL on individuals, learning organisations and the
workplace.`, `Inputs are sought
from candidates regarding special needs and
possible sources of evidence that could contribute
to valid assessment,
including RPL opportunities. Modifications made to
the assessment approach on the basis of the
inputs do not affect the validity of the assessment.`
and specific outcome
`Conduct assessments.`, as well as through
application in the rest of the standard.
Methods of assessment - directly assessed
through assessment criterion. A variety of
assessment methods are described and compared
in terms of how they could be used when
conducting assessments in different situations and
indirectly assessed through application of the
methods

Potential barriers to assessment - assessed when

dealing with special needs.
 The principles and mechanisms of the NQF - this
knowledge underpins the standard
Assessment policies and ETQA requirements
Moderation requirements
Signature of moderator:
Date of moderation:

MODERATION OF ASSESSOR GUIDES

Assessor guide on unit standard(s):
CRITERION PRE- COMMENTS POST- COMMENTS
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
MODERATION MODERATION
Is each assessment task
clearly described and
outlined?
Is the purpose of each task
clear and clearly linked to
the purpose of
the learning programme?
(relevance)
Are clear and appropri- ate
criteria against
which evidence will be
judged stated?
(transparency)
Are instructions to can-
didates unambiguous and
easy to understand?
Are instructions to asses-
sors about the conduct of
the assessment clear and
unambiguous?
Is enough guidance given
to assessors about written
or oral
questioning to ensure a
standardised approach and
reliability of the assess-
ment? (reliability/
consistency)
Are the tasks relevant to
the candidate‘s
con- text? (relevance and
authenticity)
Form: MOD09
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
CRITERION PRE- COMMENTS POST- COMMENTS
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
MODERATION MODERATION
Do the tasks really assess
what they claim to
assess? (validity)
Are the assessment
methods and tasks fit for
purpose? (validity)
Do the assessments
tasks and evidence
requirements allow for
cost effective, easily
arranged assessments?
(practicability)
Are the evidence
requirements clear and
unambiguous?
Do the evidence
requirements address the
principles of validity,
authenticity, reliability,
currency and sufficiency?
(credibility)
Do the evidence
requirements allow
assessors to address
barriers to learning?
(fairness)
Is the evidence collection
integrated into the
workplace where
appropriate?
(authenticity, validity and
practicability)

Is the proposed process

unbiased in terms of
race, class, gender,
language, culture, etc?
(fairness)

Do the recording
formats:
∙ clearly state criteria and
evidence requirements?
∙allow for third party
testimony/witness
statements?
∙allow for clustered
assessments to be
recorded in relation to
the relevant standards,
outcomes, and
assessment criteria?
∙allow for levels of
performance to be
recorded?

∙ allow for qualitative

judgements to be
recorded?
∙ enable accurate
recording of
administrative
information?
Form: MOD09
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
Action taken as a result of pre-assessment moderation of assessor guide;

Action as a result of post-assessment evaluation by moderator:

PRE-ASSESSMENT MODERATION
Signature of Moderator:
Date:
Any post-assessment comments on the validity of the assessment plan (strategy and assessor guide) are included here. This is required if
the assessment plan/strategy is new for this learning programme, but is not part of every moderator‘s report.
However, it may be used by moderators whenever they feel that they have something useful to contribute. This includes any problems or
comments about the validity, authenticity, sufficiency, currency, fitness for purpose, transparency, fairness, balance, reliability, practicability
or credibility of the assessment plan (strategy) for this learning programme.
POST-ASSESSMENT EVALUATION

Signature of Moderator:

Reg Nr:

Date:
Form: MOD09
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

MODERATION OF ASSESSMENT PLAN

Learning Programme: Client:
Unit Standard/s targeted:
Names of Designers:
Name of Moderator:
Date of moderation:

Reg nr:

CRITERION PRE- COMMENTS POST- COMMENTS

ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
MODERATION MODERATION

Does the assessment plan

satisfy the requirements of
the unit standard(s)/
qualification, including range
statements and assessment
notes?

Does the assessment

plan/strategy cover all the
unit standards, including
CCOs and embedded
knowledge?

Does the assessment plan

state who (e.g.
mentor/supervisor/
facilitator/assessor/
evidence facilitator) is
responsible for
generating/collecting what
pieces of evidence, and state
clear time-frames?
Does the assessment plan
outline points at which
sample moderations may take
place?
If this programme leads to a
qualification, is there an
integrated assessment at
qualification level?
Form: MOD10
Reviewed: 01-01-2009

CRITERION PRE- COMMENTS POST- COMMENTS

ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
MODERATION MODERATION
Does the assessment
plan cluster unit
standards and/or
outcomes where
appropriate so as to
ensure that assessment
tasks are integrated into
meaningful learning
activities where
possible?
Does the assessment
plan cover foundational,
practical and reflexive
competence as well as
applied competence at
appropriate points?

If the ETDQA has an

assessment guide, does
this assessment plan
meet requirements and
follow guidelines?
Do the tasks really as-
sess what they claim to
assess, and do the
evidence requirements
support this? (validity)
Are the assessment
methods and tasks fit for
purpose and do the
evidence requirements
support this? (validity)
If it is a learnership or
skills programme, does
the weighting of the
assessment reflect the
emphasis on workplace
-based learning, and do
the evidence
requirements support
this? (validity)
Are the tasks relevant
to the candidate‘s con-
text, and do the
evidence requirements
support this?
(relevance and
authenticity)
Are a variety of
assessment methods
used ? (fairness)
Form: MOD10
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
CRITERION PRE- COMMENTS POST- COMMENTS
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
MODERATION MODERATION

Is a sufficient part of the

evidence generated
under the supervision of
the registered assessor,
to ensure the evidence
presented really origi-
nates from the candi-
date? (authenticity)
Is enough guidance
given to assessors about
written or oral
questioning to ensure a
standardised approach
and reliability of the
assessment?
(consistency and
reliability)
Do the assessor guides
state in the evidence
requirements when
currency is an important
criterion for judging
evidence and when it is
not, and how defined?
(currency)
Are the evidence
requirements clear
enough in terms of what
kinds of evidence
(qualitatively), how much
(quantitatively) and what
scope is required (range)
to ensure a consistent
interpretation of
(consistency and
sufficiency)

If RPL assessments are

being conducted by this
provider, is there an
adapted version of the
assessment plan to suit
RPL? (flexibility, access
and redress)
Form: MOD10
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
CRITERION PRE- COMMENTS POST- COMMENTS
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
MODERATION MODERATION
If this learning
programme has more
than one mode of
delivery,
(e.g. full-time, multi-
media or distance edu-
cation) or very different
contexts, or accelerated
and slower versions, is
the assessment plan
adapted to the specific
context?
Do the assessment tasks
and evidence
requirements allow for
cost-effective, easily
arranged assessments?
(practicability)
Is provision made to
address barriers to
learning? (fairness)
 Is there provision for
interpretation in case of
disputes or learning
difficulties? (fairness,
access, redress)
Action taken as a result of pre-assessment moderation of assessment plan:

Action as a result of post-assessment evaluation by moderator:

Form: MOD10

Reviewed: 15-01-2019
PRE-ASSESSMENT MODERATION
Signature of Moderator:
Date:
Any post-assessment comments on the validity of the assessment plan (strategy) are included here. This is required if the assessment
plan/strategy is new for this learning programme, but is not part of every moderator‘s report.
However, it may be used by moderators whenever they feel that they have something useful to contribute. This includes any problems or
comments about the validity, authenticity, sufficiency, currency, fitness for purpose, transparency, fairness, balance, reliability, practicability
or credibility of the assessment plan (strategy) for this learning programme.
POST-ASSESSMENT EVALUATION
Signature of Moderator: _______________________________
Date: ________________________
Form: MOD10
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
MODERATION OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Organisation:
Names of Designers:
Name of Moderator: Date of moderation:

Reg nr:

ELEMENTS OF CRITERIA RATING EVIDENCE REQUIRED

1 2 3
Quality statement or There is a clear commitment by the organisation's
commitment to quality by the management to quality that includes policy
organisation. statements.
ETD staff policy and The organisation has Education, Training and
procedures.
Development staff policy and procedures that
outlines the following:
∙ ETD staff recruitment

∙ Staff selection and criteria for selecting

∙ Performance appraisal

∙ ETD staff development

Learner entry or admission pol- The organisation has clear entry or admission
icy and procedures. policy and procedures that include criteria used
for admission into learning programmes.
Learning programme design, The quality management system has policy and
development, and delivery and procedures that outlines the following:
evaluation policy and
procedures. ∙ Designing of learning programmes that includes
curriculum design;
∙ Development of learning materials

aligned to NQF registered qualifications or unit

standards;
∙ Delivery of learning programmes by the

organisation using various methodologies,

∙ Continuous evaluation of learning programmes
to ensure relevancy and adaptation to learner
needs.
Learner support policy and The organisation has policy and procedures that
procedures. outlines the support provided to learners based
on the methodology of provision used
including the guidance, counselling, referral, extra
tuition, online support ect.
Form: MOD11
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
Annexure ―A‖

ELEMENTS OF CRITERIA RATING EVIDENCE REQUIRED

1 2 3
Financial policy and proce- The organisation has financial policy and
dures. procedures in place in accordance to Generally
Acceptable Accounting Principles to ensure
accountability and sustainability of the
organisation.
Administration policy and The organisation has administration policies and
procedures. procedures in place which include record keeping,
safety and security, storage of documents and
electronic data and information as well as general
document control.

Reporting policy and Reporting policy and procedures outlines types of

procedures. reports produced in the organisation, report- ing
lines, frequency of reporting for each type
of the report.
Certification policy and Certification policy and procedures outlines the
procedures. format and details of learner certificates, when
learners will be issued with certificates, safety
and security measures to avoid production of
fraudulent certificates.
 Quality management system The audit process should include the following:
audit process.
 Official accountable for quality audits
 When are quality audits conducted
(Scheduling)
 Representative structure that ensures that
quality audits are conducted
 Documentation of quality audit meetings
 Corrective action based on quality audit
findings
Review mechanisms for quality The audit process should include the following:
management system.
 Official accountable for the review of the
quality management manual
 When are quality management manual is
reviewed (Scheduling)
 Representative structure that ensures that the
quality management manual is re-
viewed
 Documentation of quality management manual
review meetings
130
Moderator‘s comments:

Declaration of Understanding:

I hereby declare that I agree with the outcome of the internal moderation process, and that the moderation report is clear to me. I am
satisfied that the written feedback given to me was relevant, and done in a constructive manner. I accept the report and have no obligations
to this particular internal moderation
Organisation: Date:
Moderator: Date:
Form: MOD11
Reviewed: 01-01-2009
 ASSESSMENT REQUEST
To:
From: Learner Name:
Learner Registration Number:
Employed by:
Employer address:
I, the undersigned, hereby request / confirm my readiness to undergo assess- ment on the following specific outcome/s from the related unit
standard/s:
Unit standard: [E.G.7403) Specific outcome(s):

I confirm that, for the above listed unit standards, I have attended the required number of
formal facilitation sessions and have logged the minimum number of hours re- quired in gaining workplace experience. I have also
communicated this request
to my supervisor.
Suitable dates for the assessment are: A suitable time for assessment is:

Form: ASS01
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

Date:
To:
Address:
NOTIFICATION OF ASSESSMENT
I would herewith like to notify you of your assessment on
―facilitating learning through stories, songs and rhymes:
Date Venue Time
I‘m looking forward to the assessment.
Kind regards

Joyce Khoza
Assessor
Form: ASS02
Reviewed: 01-01-2009

ASSESSMENT PLAN: 7403

Candidate Name Assessor Name
School: Qualification
Unit Standard No. 7403 Date
Unit standard Facilitate Learning through stories; songs and rhymes.

NQF Level 3 Credits 8

Refs to Assessment Activity List of Evidence to be Planned Changes
Collected Dates; or Re-
US Times & scheduled
Locations
Dates;
Times &
Locations
 SO 1,4,5 Evaluation of required Product Evaluation Checklist
products listed below:
CO completed by assessor
 Daily planner
1,3,6,7  Copies of daily programme
 Collection of stories
 Samples or copies of one
 Collection of songs ex- ample of stories
 Collection of rhymes  Samples or copies of one
ex-
 Resource bank of
puppets ample of Rhymes
 Copy of book made  Samples or copies of one
for/ example of songs
by children  List of books used
 Material/books that  List of rhymes used
make children deal with
emotions  List of songs used.
 understand cultural  Material/books that make
diversity children deal with emotions
 traditional /folk tales  Material that make children
understand cultural diversity
 Sample of traditional /folk
tales
SO  Facilitating story while Observation checklist
observed by assessor. completed by assessor
2&3
 Respond to questions  Cassette or tape
CO
asked by assessor during  Copy of book made for/by
2,3,4,5 the structured interview children
 Knowledge Oral interview (structured)
questionnaire
Knowledge questionnaire
Feedback to the Feedback report
facilitator
Candidate’s signature
Assessor’s signature
Date:

Form: ASS03
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
5 Blue Street
POLOKWANE
0700

Rainbow Training Services

Tel: 015 123 4567

Fax: 015 321 7654
Date:
Dear
FEEDBACK ON YOUR PORTFOLIO OF EVIDENCE
Thank you for submitting your Portfolio on ―Facilitate Learning through Songs, Stories and
Rhymes for assessment.
The result of your assessment is that you have been declared competent against the specific outcomes of the Unit Standard:
7403 - Facilitate Learning through Songs, Stories and Rhymes, NQF level 3, 8 credits.
A detailed evaluation of your Portfolio is attached.
The candidate exhibited evidence of competence against all the outcomes namely:
 Use a repertoire of stories, songs and rhymes in the language of the child to promote listening skills
 Provide a variety of developmentally appropriate children‘s books and other print
materials to promote children‘s developing understanding of literacy
 Use a range of strategies to help children re-tell known stories and create their own stories
 Use books and stories to help children understand themselves and develop a
positive self-concept
 Use stories, rhymes and songs to promote holistic learning and development
We at Rainbow Training Services would like to congratulate you on this achievement and want to wish you well.
Kind regards
J Khoza
Assessor
Form: ASS04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

US 7403 - ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

Documents Check Comments
 Product Evaluation Checklist
Daily planner
Example of story
Example of rhyme
Example of song
Resource bank of puppets

List of books
List of rhymes
List of songs
Book – dealing with emotions
Book – dealing with cultural diversity

Sample of traditional / folk tale

Observation Checklist
Oral Interview Checklist
Audio cassette
Form: ASS04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
PRINCIPLES OF ASSESSMENT EVALUATION FORM

Assessor: Candidate: Date:

Assessment Process Y/N Comment

Is the Assessment FAIR?

∙ Candidate was prepared for this assessment

∙Candidate has access to re- sources during

assessment.
 ∙Assessment was non discriminatory to the
candidate with regards to
gender, race etc.
∙Special needs of the candidate
were taken into consideration.
Is the assessment activity VALID?
∙ Assessment measures what it says it is
measuring (SKVA)
∙Activities relates to the Specific
Outcomes and Assessment Crite- ria.
∙All Specific Outcomes and Criteria are
addressed.
Is the Assessment PRACTICAL?
∙ Parties make use of readily avail- able
resources, equipment, facili- ties and time.
∙The whole process relates to the context
that is relevant to the can-
didate.
Is the assessment RELIABLE?
∙ The instructions are unambiguous, clear and
consistent.
∙The process encourages Candi- dates to
demonstrate their competence.
∙Same judgments can be made in similar
contexts.
Form: ASS04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
QUALITY OF EVIDENCE
Unit Standard Assessed: 7403
NQF level: 3
Credits: 8
Candidate: Assessor:
Date:
Evidence Valid Authen- Current Cosis- Suffi-
tic tent cient

Product Evaluation Checklist

Daily planner
Example of story
Example of rhyme
Example of song

Resource bank of puppets

List of books
List of rhymes
List of songs
Book – dealing with emotions
Book – dealing with cultural diversity

Sample of traditional / folk tale

Observation Checklist
Oral Interview Checklist
Audio cassette
Form: ASS04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019
ASSESSOR‘S FEEDBACK AND REPORT
Unit Standard: Facilitate Learning through stories, songs and rhymes
NQF level: 3
Credits: 8
Candidate: Assessor:
Date:
Summative Assessment Decisions Assessment Results:
SO 1 SO 5

SO 2
SO 3
SO 4

Reference Assessor‘s Comments

to US

SO 1
SO 2
SO 3
SO 4
SO 5
Action Plan: (If any)

Assessor‘s Signature Candidate‘s Signature

Date:

Date:

Form: ASS04
Reviewed: 15-01-2019

ASSESSMENT AND MODERATION POLICY

ASSESSMENT POLICY AND PROCESS
Management of Assessment

1.1 Definition:
Assessment is defined as a process of making judgements about an individual‘s competence through matching evidence collected to the
appropriate national standard.
1.2 Principles regarding the process of assessment :
Assessments – wherever they take place – will have the following characteristics:
Validity: They must test/assess what they are supposed to assess. In other words, assess the evidence of the outcomes and their
assessment criteria. They must not test things that are merely connected to the outcome – but the outcome itself.
Reliability: Each time a particular assessment is given it must assess, test for, and judge the evidence of the same outcomes.
Fairness: All candidates for assessment must be given the same chance to give evidence of their achieving the outcome – none must be
disadvantaged.
Flexibility: There may be circumstances in which the way in which the assessment is actually given may need to be a little different for
certain candidates because of, for example, a dis- ability. The assessment must still assess the same skills.

1.3 Principles regarding the evidence:

Sufficiency: There must be enough evidence for the assessor to be able to make the judgements. There must not be unnecessary
repeats. There must be sufficient evidence to be sure that the competence is truly embedded in the person.
Authenticity: The evidence provided by the candidate (the learner) must be the evidence of that person – and not of someone else.
Currency: The evidence that is gathered must be evidence of the skill that the learner possesses at present.
Valid: The evidence relates to the specific standards that the candidate is being as- sessed against.

Stages to the assessment process:

Stage 1: Inform the candidate of the assessment process

Conduct an initial meeting
Select appropriate nationally approved standards Decide what evidence to collect and how to collect it Draw up an assessment plan for the
candidate

Stage 2: Collect the evidence

Design assessment documentation
Observe candidate
Ask candidate questions
Obtain any other forms of evidence

Stage 3: Keep records

Accumulate the evidence in a portfolio of evidence
Record and document all forms of evidence and decisions

Stage 4: Provide candidate with feedback

● Discuss outcomes of observation and knowledge with the candidate
● Inform candidate of achievement
● Complete assessor‘s report

● Put candidate forward for certification if the have proved competent

1.4 Levels of assessment outlining the quality system of Megro Learning:

Level Who MEGRO LEARNING LOWVELD
5 Awarding body SAQA
4 External ETDP ETQA
moderator
3 Internal The Quality Assurance Administrator/Manager who carries out a
moderator checking of the assessment.
This process must be quality assured by the external moderator
to make sure that the verify- ing process is consistent with
other relevant processes, namely ETDQA

2 Assessor / RPL An ETD Facilitator in the same trade from a different Centre
Advi- sor competent on the applicable unit
standard on level 5 of the NQF.
1 Candidate Any learner working towards a qualification
Summative assessment will be scheduled three to six months after the train- ing intervention. This date will be agreed upon between NCL
and the participants during the workshop.

1.5 Roles and responsibilities: Candidate:

Identify units, elements that make up the qualification that they wish to go for and be assessed against
Produce evidence of prior achievement and current competence
Produce evidence in structured format
Assessor:
Agreement is reached on the evidence presented
An assessment plan is drawn up with the candidate
The candidate is told about the assessment process
Follows the assessment procedures
Records all questions and responses of the candidate
Gives prompt, accurate and constructive feedback to the candidate Tells the candidate if they are competent or not yet competent
against the element and evidence produced Agrees a new assessment plan with the candidate if further evidence is required
Internal moderator
 Identifying appropriate assessors
Developing paperwork to be used by assessors for assessment
Developing a bank of questions to be used by assessors for assessing
Monitoring assessors by observing them and examining the products of their work
Giving advice and support to assessors
Giving feedback to assessors
Setting up, maintaining and monitoring recording systems
Setting up moderation meetings
Liaising with the Quality Assurance Practitioner (Group Assessor) Verifier
The primary role of the Verifier is to ensure Total Quality Assurance
Must be a subject specialist
Is appointed by the Awarding Body (SAQA)
Visits venues on a regular basis to ensure quality (At least once a year)
Will need to liaise with the internal moderators and assessors, but not candidates

Assessment process
This organisation will be offering programmes and assessment services leading to a number of nationally recognized qualifications, and
one of its key functions will be to ensure that assessment arrangements are in total accordance with awarding body specifications
(ETQA‘s) so that national standards are maintained.
Whilst the requirements in this policy are generally applicable, the lines of evidence are tailored to the SAQA‘s requirements for ETQA
awarding bodies, thus setting a high standard of good practice.
In the case of any other qualification offered by this organisation ap- proved by SETA's and other funding bodies, it will be ensured that
they have evidence which satisfies any variation in the requirements of other awarding bodies.
The requirements in this policy are met when there is evidence:
of concern for learners as individuals;

that the assessment instruments for each unit, module or award comply with awarding body specifications;

arrangements for assessment are clearly set out for candidates, Megro Learning upheld their rights of appeal, and that staff know and
understand the procedures;

staff prepare valid and reliable assessment instruments to pro- vide candidates with opportunities to demonstrate their sustained
competence against the standards defined for the award (whether a single module or a complete Qualification).

The assessments are carried out in as natural conditions as possible to avoid unnecessary pressure and to ensure that irrelevant factors
do not intrude on the assessment.
The evidence of candidates' competence is judged correctly and objectively by the assessor against the unit standards required for the
award;
The evidence of candidates' work and the record of its assessment are retained for verification.
There will be an internal verification system to monitor the quality of design and operation of assessment instruments and methods and
to check that the design of assessment and evaluation of candidates' work is consistent across all assessors for an award.
Corrective action will be taken promptly where identified by the internal verification system.
 The appeals system will make clear to candidates the grounds on which appeals can be based, the mechanism for appeals, and the
timescale within which the mechanism operates (as defined by the ETQA).
When an external verifier visit is to take place, evidence of candidates' work, of assessors' judgements of that work, and of internal
verification should be available. Corrective action will be taken promptly where identified by the external verifier.
There will be a mechanism for systematic review of assessment and internal verification so that necessary refinement to programme
design or delivery can be affected.
Responsibilities for assessment will be clearly allocated. There will be evidence of the systematic review of the assessment system.

Appeals process:
MEGRO LEARNING‘s appeals and dispute procedure:

Stage 1
Where a candidate disagrees with the assessment given he/she must explain the reasons for this to the assessor concerned as soon as
possible. In most circumstances this will be immediately after receiving the assessment decision
The assessor should consider the candidate‘s explanation and provide a response through:
A clear explanation or a repeat explanation of the assessment decision following a re-evaluation of the evidence
Completion of the Candidate‘s Appeal Form (ASSMT11)
Completion of Part A of the Assessment Procedure Appeal Form (ASSMT13)
Amendment of the candidate‘s assessment record, if appropriate

Stage 2
The assessor forwards, to the Moderator within 5 working days of stage one:
The original assessment record and candidate evidence, where appropriate
The Candidate Appeal form with Section 1 of Assessment procedure appeal form (ASSMT13) completed
The Moderator will reconsider the assessment decision, normally involving and evaluation of the:
Candidate evidence and associated records
Assessor‘s rationale for the decision
Opinion of another assessor
Opinion of the candidate
The Moderator should complete Section 2 of the Assessment Procedure Appeal Form (ASSMT13) and provide the candidate with the
reconsidered decision within 14 working days of receiving the appeal.
Where the candidate remains unhappy with the reconsidered assessment decision, the Appeal must proceed to the Quality
Assurance Practitioner (Group Assessor) (Stage 3)

Stage 3
If no resolution has been reached, the Stage 2 Moderator will forward details to the Quality Assurance Practitioner. These should include:
Candidate Appeal Form
 Assessment records
Any written comments from the Internal Verifier (e.g. back- ground details)
The Quality Assurance Practitioner will then, within 10 working days, convene a panel comprising:
The Quality Assurance Practitioner
The Stage 2 Internal Verifier
Another Internal Verifier from the same programme area
The panel will evaluate the situation and complete Section 3 of the Candidate Appeal Form and the candidate will be informed of its
decision within 5 working days.
If the candidate is still not satisfied with the outcome s/he has the right to take the appeal to the Appeals Panel (Stage 4)

Stage 4
The Quality Assurance Practitioner (Group Assessor) will forward relevant details to the ETQA Manager of the ETDP SETA, and these
should include:
Candidate Appeal Form, appropriately completed (including the reason for the decision of the Investigatory Panel)
Assessment record sheets
Written comments from the Moderator (as supplied to Stage 3 Panel)
The ETQA Manager of the ETDP SETA decision must reach and in- form the candidate of the result within 10 working days, in writing.
The decision of the ETQA Manager of the ETDP SETA is final.
Records of all appeals should be logged and made available as appropriate to the Awarding Body (SAQA).
MODERATION POLICY AND PROCESS

Management of Assessment

1.1 Definition:
Moderation is a process that ensures that assessments conducted by registered assessors meet the specified outcomes as described in the
NQF standards and qualifications, and are fair, valid and reliable.

1.2 Principles regarding the process of assessment:

Assessments – wherever they take place – will have the following characteristics:
Validity: They must test/assess what they are supposed to assess. In other words, assess the evidence of the outcomes and their
assessment criteria. They must not test things that are merely connected to the outcome – but the outcome itself.
Reliability: Each time a particular assessment is given it must assess, test for, and judge the evidence of the same outcomes.
Fairness: All candidates for assessment must be given the same chance to give evidence of their achieving the outcome – none must
be disadvantaged.
Flexibility: There may be circumstances in which the way in which the assessment is actually given may need to be a little different for
certain candidates because of, for example, a disability. The assessment must still assess the same skills.
1.3 Principles regarding the evidence:
Sufficiency: There must be enough evidence for the assessor to be able to make the judgement. There must not be unnecessary repeats.
There must be sufficient evidence to be sure that the competence is truly embedded in the person.
Authenticity: The evidence provided by the candidate (the learner) must be the evidence of that person – and not of someone else.
Currency: The evidence that is gathered must be evidence of the skill that the learner possesses at present.
Valid: The evidence relates to the specific standards that the candidate is be- in assessed against.
1.4 Frequency of Moderators duties:
Summative assessment will be scheduled three to six months after the training intervention. This date will be agreed upon between NCL
and the participants during the workshop. Note that each learner‘s personal circumstances will be taken into consideration when the
summative date of assessment is determined.
Moderation will be scheduled six weeks after the summative assessment date of each workshop based on a skills programme that covers
the mini- mum of one unit standard. This time span will allow the assessor six weeks to assess an average of 10 – 15 portfolios of Evidence,
depending on the num- ber of participants enrolled for the specific skills programme. Feedback to learners will be done within 14 days after
moderation results had been re- leased and verified
The time-frame between submitting assessment tasks or portfolios and deadlines for feedback to candidates, should not exceed eight
weeks in total. The moderator should bear this in mind when they moderate assessments and check on turn-over rates, giving feedback to
assessors about this.

1.5 Roles and responsibilities:

1.5.1 The Quality Assurance Practitioner:

liaise with the ETDQA, particularly in relation to verification proce- dures;
ensure policy is agreed upon, recorded and followed;
ensure assessors and moderators are trained and registered, and follow the ETDQA code of conduct;
arrange for on-going professional development meetings for as- sessors (facilitated by moderators);
arrange for on-going professional development meeting for moderators (through meetings amongst themselves, with the quality
manager, and with ETDQA verifiers);
request moderation in line with ETDQA criteria and organisational policy, responding to circumstances appropriately;
request moderation in line with ETDQA guidance on frequency of moderation;
request moderation of assessment instruments and guides if they are new or being piloted;
coordinate appropriate responses to feedback from candidates, assessors and moderators;
coordinate feedback from assessors and moderators to the ET- DQA on unit standards and qualifications in their primary focus;read and
respond to candidate evaluation forms and feedback from clients;
oversee that administration is efficient and filing effective and accessible.

1.5.2 The administrator for assessment:

submit registration forms for candidates to the ETDQA on the re- quired forms;
ensure all candidates receive copies of appropriate documentation, have access to assessors for explanations where necessary, and sign
off on the standard check-list that the proper proce- dures have been followed (unit standards, assessment plan, re- assessments
arrangements, appeals system) for each learning programme;
 submit candidate results to the ETDQA on the required forms;
prepare for verification visits, ensuring all appropriate documents are available;
ensure internal assessment and moderation procedures are fol- lowed, forms completed and filed appropriately;
ensure candidate records (including portfolios) are kept for two years for reference in case of appeals, complaints, verification processes,
etc.

1.5.3 Moderator
respond timeously to requests for moderation;
conduct moderations in line with NCL‘s policy and the ETDQA code of conduct;
complete all appropriate documentation and give to administra- tor for filing;
give written feedback to assessors and participate in the internally organised professional development meetings, including agreement
trials‘, where examples of assessment are compared and discussed to establish common interpretation of standards.

1.5.4 Verifier
The primary role of the Verifier is to ensure Total Quality Assurance b) Must be a subject specialist
Is appointed by the Awarding Body (SAQA)
Visits venues on a regular basis to ensure quality (At least once a year)
Will need to liaise with the internal moderators and assessors, but not candidates

1.6 The moderation process:

The Moderator is expected to follow the process set out in the unit standard Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments.
These are summarised in the specific outcomes, entitled:
Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system,
Plan and prepare for moderation,
Conduct moderation,
Advise and support assessors,
Report, record and administer moderation, and f) Review moderation systems and processes.
In addition the other need to be stated:
Evidence must be gathered for moderation of assessments of candidates with special needs, and RPL cases.
Moderation must cover a range of assessment practices including:
assessment instruments
assessment design and methodology,
assessment records;
reporting and feedback mechanisms.
Evidence must be gathered for moderation of assessments involv- ing a variety of assessment techniques, including work samples,
simulations, role-plays, written, oral, portfolios and projects.
 Moderation interactions could include pre-moderation interac- tion; standards discussion; recording and record keeping; report- ing and
feedback mechanisms; post-moderation; interaction and support and recommendations.

1.7 The overall average percentage of assessments to be moderated:

a random sample of 10%;
a sample of assessments conducted by any new assessors or less experienced assessors;
a sample across a variety of assessors in order to check reliability and consistency in the interpretation of standards;
a sample including assessments where the candidate was found Not yet Competent, as well as those found Competent; the feed- back to
candidates should be appropriate and constructive;
a sample including RPL candidates and candidates with special
needs, where these exist;
Notes for handout if required, from Megro:
Quality Assurance of Assessment Unit
The main function of this unit is to make sure that assessment leading to the award of certificates in schools, adult education centres and
further education and training colleges is of the required stan- dard. This is in order to make sure that the certificates issued by Umalusi are
credible. This is achieved through:
Moderation of question papers Moderation of internal assessment Monitoring examinations Moderation of marking Standardisation of
results
These processes are outlined briefly below
Moderation of question papers
In order to accomplish this function, Umalusi utilises the services of external moderators who are highly qualified and experienced
professionals in their respective subjects. The moderation process focuses on ensuring that question papers are of an acceptable standard,
cover the appropriate content as prescribed in the syllabus, and are presented in a professional manner.
Moderators are required to consider the following criteria:
Adherence to policy;
Content coverage;
Cognitive challenge;
Technical criteria;
language usage;
Quality and standard of internal moderation;
Monitoring the conduct of examinations
Over the last four years, Umalusi and its predecessor, SAFCERT, have engaged in rigorous and extensive monitoring of the Senior Certificate
examination.
The monitoring focuses on three main aspects:
auditing the assessment bodies‘ monitoring systems;
monitoring their state of readiness to administer the Senior Certificate examination; and
monitoring the administration and conduct of the Senior Certificate examination. With regard to monitoring the administration and
conduct of the examination, Umalusi uses uniform criteria and an elaborate monitoring instrument.
The criteria focus on the following:
management of examination and marking centres; ii. delivery of question papers and collection of scripts; iii. invigilation and suitability of
examination centres;
security and storage of scripts;
credibility of markers;
training of markers;
checking of marked scripts;
transfer of marks to mark sheets;
accommodation of markers.
Notes for handout if required, from Megro — continue
Moderation of the marking process
Umalusi moderates the marking of scripts by deploying external moderators to marking centres during the marking process, and also by
moderating a sample of marked scripts after the release of the results. External moderators are deployed to the marking centres to ensure
that:
the memoranda are correctly interpreted;
the standard of marking and internal moderation of scripts is maintained across all examining bodies and throughout the marking
process;
all the systems and processes that relate to marking are in place and effective;
the product of marking is a true reflection of the performance of individual candidates.
Verification and moderation of continuous assessment
In the new educational dispensation, internal assessment, often referred to as continuous assessment (CASS) has become an integral part of
assessment. Internal assessment is a feature in schools, FET colleges and adult education centres. Umalusi‘s approach to the verification and
moderation of internal assessment is based on specific subjects and all aspects relating to internal assessment in that subject.
The moderation focuses on:
the input into the internal assessment system;
the process of implementation of internal assessment;
the criteria for good internal assessment tasks.
A sample of portfolios within selected subjects is identified for moderation. Subject experts evaluate these in accordance with the set
criteria.
Statistical moderation of Senior Certificate results
Umalusi standardises both the examination and internal assessment scores. Standardisation is necessary to address the variation in the
standard of question papers and marking that may occur from year to year and across examining bodies. Statistical moderation of
examination marks consists of comparisons between the current mark distributions and the corresponding average distributions over the
last three to five years. Standardisation meetings take place between the completion of marking and publication of results. These meetings
are attended by a team from Umalusi‘s Statistics Working Group and, in the case of the provincial examinations, by a contingent from the
examinations section of the relevant province‘s education department. The meeting for the national examinations is attended by
representatives from the National Department and from all the provincial departments.