ETQA MODERATION REPORT

PART A

Training Provider:

Name of the training provider
Accreditation Number
Address
Telephone and Fax Number
e-mail address
Contact Person

Assessor Details:

Name of the Assessor
Registration Number
ID Number
Telephone and Fax Number
e-mail address

Moderator Details:

Name of the Moderator
Registration Number
ID Number
Telephone and Fax Number
e-mail address

Portfolios of Evidence:

Qualification/Unit Standard/s
Type/reason of assessment (e.g. RPL; FAIS; etc)
Number of PoEs and percentage sample
Names of the Learner portfolios that were moderated
Was any special needs indentified in the sample learner portfolios?


PART B

This report is based on an evaluation of the assessment process, the assessment instrument and evidence evaluated, against the following principles:

Methods of Assessment:
The assessment method: / Approved:
Yes/no
Appropriate: (suited to the outcome being assessed, i.e. capable of gathering evidence in relation to the intended outcome)
Fair: (the assessment method does not present any barriers to achievement, which are not related to the achievement of the outcome at hand)
Manageable: (the methods used make for easily-arranged and cost-effective assessments that do not unduly interfere with learning)
Integrated with work or the learning itself: (evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where appropriate and feasible,
ie. naturally-occurring evidence)
Comments/Recommendation:
Assessment evidence:
Assessment instruments show evidence that is: / Approved:
Yes/no
Valid: (evidence matches the requirements of the outcomes, under conditions that mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible)
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)
Authentic: (the assessor is satisfied that the evidence is attributable to the person being assessed)
Sufficient: (all criteria have been met and performance to the required standard can be repeated consistently in the future i.e. not as a “once-off”)
Consistency: (with respect to mark allocation; duration of assessment; learner support)
Fair and Constructive: (the assessment tool/instrument is appropriate, clear, questions are appropriate and language usage appropriate)
Moderated: (assessment plan and assessment instrument moderated prior to assessment taking place. Portfolio/s moderated for consistency)
Cost Effective: (assessment methods suitable, manageable, cost effective)
CCFOs: (confirm that the CCFOs assigned to the Unit Standards and Qualification are addressed appropriately)
Comments/Recommendation:
Assessment process:
The assessment process overall is: / Approved:
Yes/no
Systematic: (ensures assessment that is fair, effective, repeatable and manageable)
Open: (transparent i.e. candidates understand the assessment process and the criteria that apply, and can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence)
Consistent and reliable: (the same assessor would make the same judgment again in similar circumstances)
Resource allocation: (workplace prepared for workplace assessment, required equipment available, dispute handled, all stakeholders involved)
Types of assessment: (was assessment for Summative or Formative
Learner/s response: (were the learners able to respond to the questions in an appropriate manner)
Qualification achievement: (did the learners complete or work towards Unit Standards in terms of the Rules of Combination for the appropriate qualification and correct Learnership)
Assessor Report: (is the assessor report clear and relevant to the assessment)
Comments/Recommendation:
Assessments of Learners in Group: / Yes/No
Assessment Process: (is there evidence of plagiarism, that is, learners copying from each other or copying directly from the book showing that it is not the learner’s own work and interpretation)
Assessment tools: (is the assessment tools clear on group work and assignments/research requirements)
Evidence: (was evidence provided clear and relevant to the topic and brief)
Comments/Recommendation:


PART C

Learner Support and Guidance Available: / Yes/No
Assessment/RPL Policy exist
Assessor registered for the Unit Standards/Qualifications
Assessment/RPL design policy and procedures exist
Assessment Strategy
Assessment Plan
Candidate’s preparation/readiness
Moderation Policy
Assessment/RPL instruments were pre-moderated
Appeals procedures exist
SLA in-place for moderators
Confidentiality of records maintained and secured
Learners with Special needs accommodated
Feedback from Learners regarding assessment/RPL
Evidence exist of how the learner was prepared for the assessment/RPL
Workplace assessment conducted and evidence included
Types of evidence used: (mark with an X on the appropriate box/es)
Direct
Indirect
Supplementary
Historical
List the questions (if any) for which you had to request a re-mark or a review. Explain why this was done
Amendments to the marking memorandum, Why?


PART D

Methods of Moderation:
The moderation method: / Yes/no
Did the moderator mark and agree with totals given per question on all formative and summative assessments?
Did the moderator mark and agree the grand totals on all formative and summative assessments?
Is the moderator signature affixed next to the grand totals on all the assessments?
Is there evidence within the portfolio of moderation?
Did the moderator use a green pen for the moderation process?
Comments/Recommendation:
Your approach to moderation (e.g moderated the whole portfolio or part thereof, interviewed candidates; etc):
How do you rate the assessor’s performance
Poor / Average / Good / Excellent
Comments/Recommendation:
Assessors acknowledgement of feedback
Comments/Recommendation:
______
Assessors Signature
Final Results
Competent: Upheld Overturned:
Not Yet Competent: Upheld Overturned:
Reason:
Validation of the Learners experience of the assessment process:


PART E

WORKPLACE ASSESSMENT
Workplace Assessment evidence:
Assessment instruments show evidence that is: / Approved:
Yes/no
Valid: (evidence matches the requirements of the outcomes, under conditions that mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible)
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)
Authentic: (the assessor is satisfied that the evidence is attributable to the person being assessed)
Sufficient: (all criteria have been met and performance to the required standard can be repeated consistently in the future i.e. not as a “once-off”)
Consistency: (with respect to duration of assessment; learner support)
Moderated: (assessment plan and assessment instrument moderated prior to assessment taking place. Portfolio moderated for consistency)
Promote transfer of skills and knowledge
Comments/Recommendation:
Workplace Assessment process:
The assessment process overall is: / Approved:
Yes/no
Systematic: (ensures assessment that is fair, effective, repeatable and manageable)
Open: (transparent i.e. candidates understand the assessment process and the criteria that apply, and can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence)
Consistent and reliable: (the same assessor would make the same judgment again in similar circumstances)
Comments/Recommendation:

PART F

INTERNAL MODERATOR OVERALL COMMENTS
Assessment Approved: Yes/No
Overall Comments by the Moderator:
Moderator signature: ……………………………………………..
Date: …………………………………
ETQA Verification report
Achievements recommendations
Overall Comments by the External Moderator:
ETQA Report approved by (full name): ………………………………………………………..
Signed: ……………………………………………
Date: ………………………………………………

ETQA moderation report Page 1 of 14 4/20/2009