Moderator Course SAQA US: 115759

Moderator: Conduct Moderation of OB Skills Course ID:115759, NQF Level 6 with a total of 10 credits.

This moderator course will equip you with the required knowledge and skills to conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments. The Moderator training course will further your understanding of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) and will assist you in developing your skills.

It is the responsibility of the Moderator to moderate assessments according to relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements. The responsibility of the Moderator is significant, and they need to meet a high standard of criteria and have to be registered before they are allowed to moderate.

The homework is part of completing your Portfolio of Evidence which will be used to determine if you are competent. Usually, the moderator training course will be completed in three months depending on the amount of time the learner puts toward their studies.

The class dates and days will be shared with you on your call with Hupernikao Warriors. This will ensure you choose the time that will suit you best.

Course Duration	Certification	Course Fee: R3300
Duration: 3 Consecutive days – 3 Months to submit POE (Portfolio of Evidence will be completed)	SAQA US: 115759 - 10 Credits – Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments	The course price includes all the study material that will be required to complete the course.
Please Call me!	SOR (Statement of Results) from ETDP SETA Certificate of Competence - Hupernikao Warriors in proud association with G-Cube	Full payment before the course starts is required. Group Discounts can be discussed.

 

Click here for a list of Frequently Asked Questions regarding the Moderator's course

On completion of this programme you will be able to:

• 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

Delivery Method

The programme is facilitated by a competent subject matter specialist/s, who utilises the following techniques to ensure that the session is practical and experiential:

• Discussion
• Roleplay
• Exercises and Case Studies
• Simulation
• Videos/DVDs
• Learner Assessment

Who should attend:

Individuals who are responsible for moderating the OBE assessment practices at the workplace or independent training providers and/or assessment centre

• Become an Accredited Moderator
• Want to work with outcome-based education
• Freelance Moderator
• People who want to work with the SETA’s
• People who want to open their own Training Companies
• Training Companies who want to be Accredited with the SETA
• People who want to moderate learners on unit standards
• People who want to moderate learners on Qualifications
• Training Manager
• Mentors & Coaches
• HR Persons
• Training Administrators
• Training Providers or newly registered Training Providers
• Accredited and NON-Accredited Employee / Training Providers
• Lecturers at Technicon’s, Private Colleges, or Universities
• Managers who need to assess their staff
• Persons with no formal experience of the SETA and the NQF
• Recruitment Staff
• Learning material developers looking to enhance their programmes
• Anyone else who can benefit from assessment methodologies
• New training providers applying for accreditation
• Employers running learnerships
• Learners studying towards their ETDP Qualifications
• People who want to work internationally, as my country accepts this certificate in Africa and internationally

Course Description

MODULE 1

Understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system

• Moderation’s contribution to quality assured assessment.
• Moderation within the context of an OBE system
• Moderation and assessment methods and activities
• The moderator’s role and responsibilities

MODULE 2

Plan and Prepare for Moderation

• Planning the extent of moderation and methods of moderation
• Clarifying the context of the assessments under review
• Considering special needs
• Planning the moderation methods and processes
• Moderation techniques and processes
• Sampling of assessments

MODULE 3

Conduct Moderation

• Checking and judging the assessment instruments and process
• Confirming that special needs of learners have been provided for
• Handling appeals against assessment decisions
• Moderating recognition of prior learning
• Making the moderation decision
• Moderation checklists
• Confirming the assessment decisions

MODULE 4

Advise and Support Assessors

• Giving feedback to assessors
• The VARCCS report

MODULE 5

Report, Record and Administer Moderation

• Reporting to designated role players
• Report format and content
• Maintaining records

MODULE 6

Review Moderation Systems and Processes

• Using a SWOT Analysis
• Management Systems and Policies

Entry Requirements

• Moderator qualification (US ID: 115759: Conduct moderation of Outcomes-based Assessments)
• It is further assumed that the person has evaluative expertise within the field in which they are moderating assessments

The Reason Why Your Employer Would Pay for This Training

• They gain a registered and qualified Moderator
• You can Implement and quality assure skills development
• They will have access to skills development funds (Grants)
• You can address skills gaps
• You can develop, implement and review the training QMS
• You can liaise with SETAs
• They will have an improved BEE scorecard

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1

Demonstrate an understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1

Moderation is explained in terms of its contribution to quality-assured assessment and recognition systems within the context of principles and regulations concerning the NQF.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2

A variety of moderation methods are described and compared in terms of strengths, weaknesses and applications. The descriptions show how moderation is intended to uphold the need for manageable, credible and reliable assessments.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

Key principles of assessment are described in terms of their importance and effect on the assessment and the application of the assessment results. Examples are provided to show how moderation may be effective in ensuring the principles of assessment are upheld.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

See "Definition of Terms" for a definition of assessment principles.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4

Examples are provided to show how moderation activities could verify the fairness and appropriateness of assessment methods and activities used by assessors in different assessment situations.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

Assessment situations for gathering evidence of abilities in problem solving, knowledge, understanding, practical and technical skills, personal and attitudinal skills and values.

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2

Plan and prepare for moderation.

OUTCOME RANGE

The planning and preparation are to take place within the context of an existing moderation system, whether internal or external, as well as an existing assessment plan.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1

Planning and preparation activities are aligned with moderation system requirements.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2

The scope of the moderation is confirmed with relevant parties.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

Parties include the assessors and moderating bodies where these exist.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

Planning the extent of moderation and methods of moderation ensures the manageability of the process. Planning makes provision for sufficient moderation evidence to enable a reliable judgement to be passed on the assessments under review.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4

The contexts of the assessments under review are clarified with the assessors or assessment agency, and special needs are taken into consideration in the moderation planning.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5

Moderation methods and processes are sufficient to deal with all common forms of evidence for the assessments to be moderated, including evidence gathered for recognition of prior learning.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6

The documentation is prepared in line with the moderation system requirements and in such a way as to ensure moderation decisions are clearly documented.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7

Required physical and human resources are ensured to be ready and available for use. Logistical arrangements are confirmed with relevant role-players before the moderation.

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3

Conduct moderation.

OUTCOME RANGE

• Moderation to address the design of the assessment, activities before, during and after assessment, and assessment documentation.
• Moderation to include assessments of candidates with special needs and for RPL cases. Where assessments do not include special needs or RPL cases, evidence for this may be produced through scenarios.
• Evidence must be gathered for on-site and off-site moderation.
• Evidence must show candidate-moderators are able to moderate in situations where:
  • The moderation process confirms the assessment results, and where
  • The moderation process finds it cannot uphold the assessment results.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1

The moderation is conducted in accordance with the moderation plan. Unforeseen events are handled without compromising the validity of the moderation.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2

The assessment instruments and process are checked and judged in terms of the extent to which the principles of good assessment are upheld.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

See "Definitions of Terms" for definitions of assessment principles.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

Moderation confirms that the special needs of candidates have been provided for but without compromising the requirements specified in the relevant outcome statements.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4

The proportion of assessments selected for checking meets the quality assurance body's requirements for consistency and reliability. The use of time and resources is justified by the assessment history or record of the assessors and/or assessment agency under consideration.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5

Appeals against assessment decisions are handled in accordance with organisational appeal procedures.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6

The moderation decision is consistent with the quality assurance body's requirements for fairness, validity and reliability of assessments to be achieved.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

The "moderation decision" includes agreement or disagreement with the results of the assessments.
requirements include the interpretation of assessment criteria and the correct application of assessment procedures.

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4

Advise and support assessors.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1

The nature and quality of advice facilitate a common understanding of the relevant outcomes and criteria, and issues related to their assessment by assessors.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2

The nature and quality of advice promote assessment in accordance with good assessment principles and enhance the development and maintenance of quality management systems in line with ETQA requirements.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

Advice on quality management systems includes planning, staffing, resourcing, training and recording systems.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

The support contributes towards the further development of assessors as needed.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4

All communications are conducted in accordance with relevant confidentiality requirements.

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 5

Report, record and administer moderation.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1

Moderation findings are reported to designated role-players within agreed time frames and according to the quality assurance body's requirements for format and content.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE

Role-players could include ETQA or Moderating Body personnel, internal or external moderators and assessors.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2

Records are maintained in accordance with organisational quality assurance and ETQA requirements.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

Confidentiality of information relating to candidates and assessors is preserved in accordance with organisational quality assurance and ETQA requirements.

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 6

Review moderation systems and processes.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1

Strengths and weaknesses of moderation systems and processes are identified in terms of their manageability and effectiveness in facilitating judgements on the quality and validity of assessment decisions.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2

Recommendations contribute towards the improvement of moderation systems and processes in line with ETQA requirements and overall manageability.

ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

The review enhances the credibility and integrity of the recognition system.

UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS

• A candidate-moderator wishing to be assessed, against this unit standard may apply to an assessment agency, assessor or provider institution accredited by the relevant ETQA.
• Anyone assessing a candidate-moderator against this unit standard must meet the assessor requirements of the relevant ETQA. In particular, such assessors of candidate-moderators must demonstrate that they assess in terms of the scope and context defined in all the range statements.
• Any institution offering learning towards this unit standard must be accredited as a provider with the relevant ETQA.
• External moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at its discretion.

UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE

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
• The role and function of moderation - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'Moderation is explained in terms of its contribution to quality assured assessment and recognition systems within the context of principles and regulations concerning the NQF.' and indirectly assessed throughout the unit standard.
• Moderation methods - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'A variety of moderation methods are described and compared in terms of strengths, weaknesses and applications. The descriptions show how moderation is intended to uphold the need for manageable, credible and reliable assessments.' and 'Moderation methods and processes are sufficient to deal with all common forms of evidence for the assessments to be moderated, including evidence gathered for recognition of prior learning.', and indirectly assessed through application throughout the standard.
• Principles of assessment - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'Key principles of assessment are described in terms of their importance and effect on the assessment and the application of the assessment results. Examples are provided to show how moderation may be effective in ensuring the principles of assessment are upheld.', and indirectly assessed via a requirement to judge whether the principles are applied by assessors.
• Principles and practices of RPL - assessed in terms of the requirement for candidate moderators to moderate RPL-related assessments.
• Methods of assessment - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'Examples are provided to show how moderation activities could verify the fairness and appropriateness of assessment methods and activities used by assessors in different assessment situations', and indirectly when checking the appropriateness and fairness of assessment methods used by assessors
• 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
• Knowledge of quality assurance policy and procedures
• Understanding of organisational or institutional contexts
• Understanding the curriculum (where applicable).

Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO)

UNIT STANDARD CCFO IDENTIFYING

Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking: planning for contingencies, candidates with special needs, problems that arise during moderation, and suggesting changes to moderation following review.

UNIT STANDARD CCFO WORKING

Work effectively in a team using critical and creative thinking: working with assessors and other relevant parties during moderation, as well as post-moderation.

UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANISING

Organize and manage oneself and one's activities: planning, preparing, conducting and recording the moderation.

UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING

Collect, analyse, organize and critically evaluate information: gather, evaluate and judge evidence and the assessment process.

UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING

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

UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING

Demonstrate the world as a set of related systems: understanding the impact of moderation assessment on individuals, and organisations and the credibility of recognition through NQF systems.

UNIT STANDARD CCFO CONTRIBUTING

Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts: plan, conduct and give feedback on moderation in a culturally sensitive manner.