VERIFICATION REPORT
Verifier Name
Name of Assessment CentreModerated Assessments being verified
Assessor - ETQA number
Moderator being verified
Unit Standard / Qualification Title(s)
Unit Standard(s) /Qualification Number
Qualification/Unit Standard(s) Level
Qualification/Unit Standard(s) Credit
The Moderator must ensure that the following evidence is available for the verification
No / Verifier Focus Area / Documents / Evidence / Check
1 / The Assessor:
- Has the Assessor adhered to ETQA requirements?
- Is the Assessor registered as a SME with the MICT SETA?
- ETQA Registration Number
2 / The Assessment Guide:
- Use Assessment Activities checklist V1.
- Unit standards being moderated & Verified
- Assessment Guide
- Assessment Tools and activities
3 / The Assessment Process:
- Use Evaluation Checklist
- Use Evidence Evaluation Form
- Use Assessment Observation Checklist
- Assessment plan endorsed by assessor & candidate
- Completed Assessment documentation and candidate’s evidence.
- Completed evidence evaluation checklist
- Proof of pre-assessment meeting
- Proof of assessor feedback to the candidate
- Proof of completed appeals procedure
- Proof of re-assessment
4 / The Assessment Results:
- Use Achievements checklist V5
- Documented and endorsed candidate results
- Record of learner achievements
5 / The Moderator:
- Has adhered to ETQA Requirements
- Is Registered
- ETQA Registration Number
6 / The Moderation Process
- Use Moderation Process Checklist V6
- Moderation Plan
- Evidence of moderator’s evaluation tools and processes.
- Evidence of Moderators evaluation of assessment results
7 / The Verification Process
- Use Evaluate Verification process V7
- Use Irregularities Report V8
- Use Verification Report and results summary
- To be prepared by the verifier
OVERALL FINDING TABLE:
Verifier Focus Areas
/ Evidence Exists from the Assessors in each focus area / Moderator Findings on Assessor’s Evaluation in each focus area / Verifiers Findings on Moderator’s Evaluation in each focus area / Findings / CommentsYes / No / Endorse / Not Endorse / Endorse / Not Endorse
/ X / / X / / X
Is the Assessor registered
Assessment Guides and Tools were used
Assessment was fair and valid:
- Evidence of all necessary documentation witnessed.
Did Assessor :
- Come to the correct decisions based on the process followed.
- Documents signed
- Record of learner achievements
Is the Moderator registered
Moderation process
- Moderation Plan was used
- Evidence exist
- Moderator compiled report
1 of 17
ASSESMENT ACTIVITIES EVALUATION
Scope of the Principles:
Did the moderator consider each of these areas? This information is used in VO to consider the assessor, moderators views on the assessment tools, and ultimately to decide whether you endorse the moderators evaluation or not.
The Verifier is not to re-evaluate the assessment tools, but to use this checklist to see whether the moderator covered all areas of consideration,
Assessment Activity / / X / Evidence / Comment(e.g. Moderators Report)
1 / The assessment activity is FAIR
- Non Discriminatory
- Activities relate to what is being assessed
2 / The assessment activity is VALID
- Activity measures what it says
(Knowledge, understanding, skills, behaviors). - Assessment directly relates to specific outcomes and assessment criteria.
- All the knowledge and skills components are addressed.
- A variety of assessment tools are available to asses different situations / learner needs.
3 / The assessment activity is RELIABLE
- Instruction to Assessor and learner are clear
- Checklists are clear, and various model answers available to assessor.
- The assessment activity reflects the learners demonstration of competence
- Assessment guides are available for candidate, assessor and moderator.
- The tools are consistently interpreted by different assessors or different candidates
4 / The assessment activity is WORKABLE
- The assessment makes use of readily available resources, facilities, equipment and time.
- Assessment activity relays to the work context relevant to the candidate.
ASSESMENT PROCESS EVALUATION:
Scope of the Assessment:
Did the moderator consider each of these areas? This information is used in VO to consider the moderators views on the assessment tools and ultimately for you to decide whether you endorse the moderators evaluation or not.
This form is only a prompt to check that the assessment process was considered adequately.
The Verifier is not to re-evaluate the assessment process, but to use this checklist to see whether the moderator covered all areas of consideration.
Assessment Process / / X / Evidence / Comment(E.g. Moderators Report)
1 / A pre-assessment discussion was conducted.
The candidate acknowledges their rights, roles and responsibilities. (Signed form )
2 / The assessment plan (Including time frames) is agreed by the candidate and the assessor prior to assessment.
3 / The assessment methodologies and activities is agreed by the candidate and the assessor prior to the assessment. (Assessment guide)
4 / Documented assessment methods are compiled and readily available for all outcomes that need to be assessed.
5 / The assessor informed the candidate of the evidence requirements in relation to the unit standard
6 / The assessor explained what the candidate and the assessor would be doing during the assessment
7 / The candidate acknowledge the authenticity of the evidence they submitted
8 / The assessment was conducted during circumstances that reflect realistic or lifelike conditions
9 / There is an indication that reasonable arrangements had been made for candidates with disabilities.
10 / Assessments were conducted without any obtrusive disruptions to the candidate.
11 / The assessor accurately evaluated the candidate’s evidence during the assessment, where appropriate.
12 / Candidate had access to an appeal procedure if they wished to challenge assessment decisions.
13 / The assessor gave clear and constructive feedback during and following the assessment decision
14 / The candidate and assessor agree a re-assessment option in the case of a not yet competent decision
15 / Assessment results and consequent action were formally recorded and actioned by the assessor
EVIDENCE EVALUATION FORM:
Scope of the Assessment:
Did the moderator consider each of these areas? This information is used in verification to consider the moderators views on the assessment tools and ultimately for you to decide whether you endorse the moderators evaluation or not.
This form is only a prompt to check that the scope of the assessment process was covered
The Verifier is not to re-evaluate the assessment process, but to use this checklist to see whether the moderator covered all areas of consideration.
The Assessor considered the following in evaluating the candidate evidence / / X / Evidence / Comment(e.g. Moderators Report)
1 / The evidence was VALID
- Was the evidence appropriate for the specific Outcomes and assessment criteria?
- Did the learner have any difficulties in performing the assessment due to circumstantial reasons such as: a lack of resources, or time, fatigue after night shift
2 / The evidence was AUTHENTIC
- Is there proof that the evidence was the candidates own work?
- Were testimonials of observed work signed by a responsible individual
3 / The evidence was CURRENT
- Did the evidence relate to the latest version of the unit standard
- Does the evidence relate to current competencies
4 / The evidence was CONSISTENT
- Does the evidence reflect consistent competence across different circumstances
.
5 / The evidence was SUFFICIENT
- Is there evidence for ALL selected specific outcomes and assessment criteria?
- Is there evidence for the ENTIRE selected range statements
ASSESMENT PROCESS EVALUATION:
Scope of the Assessment Process:
Did the moderator consider each of these areas? This information is used in VO to consider the moderators views on the assessment tools and ultimately for you to decide whether you endorse the moderators evaluation or not.
This form is only a prompt to check that the assessment process was considered adequately.
The Verifier is not to re-evaluate the assessment process, but to use this checklist to see whether the moderator covered all areas of consideration
Assessment Process / / X / Comment(e.g. Moderators Report)
1 / The Assessor asked questions that were clear and did not unfairly lead the learner towards the answer
2 / The Assessor gave feedback relating to the candidates performance.
3 / The Assessor gave feedback within an agreed timeframe
4 / The Assessor gave feedback on all outcomes and assessment criteria.
5 / The Assessor provided constructive feedback in instances of the candidate being
Not Yet Competent
6 / The Assessor was sensitive in instances of the candidate being upset or nervous
7 / The Assessor listened effectively
8 / The Assessor clarified or confirmed his/her understanding wherever necessary
9 / The learner was made aware of the outcome of the assessment and the reason for the decision.
QUALITY ASSURANCE OF LEARNER ACHIEVEMENT CHECKLIST:
Items / / X / Comment(e.g. Moderators Report)
1 / All assessed learners are enrolled with the provider or workplace provider
2 / A database for the recording of learner information, achievements and certification is in place
3 / The learner database is current
4 / The database enables the organization to submit reports to the SETA and ETQA
5 / A policy to protect the confidentiality and security of the data is in place
6 / Access to the database is controlled
7 / The record of the learner achievement is endorsed by the assessor and moderator
8 / An appeals & grievance policy and procedure for assessments are in place
MODERATION PROCESS CHECKLIST:
The Verifier will consider whether the Moderator followed a fair, and valid process in evaluating the assessor, and assessment process. The Moderator will need to indicate, through various forms, that they considered each of the following in the moderation process.
Moderators report – Check for the following / / X / Comment(e.g. Moderators Report)
1 / There is evidence of a moderation plan which complies with the ETQA requirements
2 / There is evidence that the moderator has provided feedback to the assessor on the moderation findings
3 / There is evidence that the assessment tools were moderated prior to the assessment
4 / There is a system in place to audit, moderate and update the validity, currency and accuracy of the assessment tools on an ongoing basis
5 / Moderation results and findings of the moderation are recorded
6 / The moderation process includes consideration of:
- The assessment tools
- The assessment process
- The assessor
- The assessment results
7 / The moderation process is consistent and rigorous
8 / There is evidence of the moderator’s report and it is available to the verifier
9 / The moderator’s results include recommendations for non-conformance areas.
10 / A valid and representative sample of assessments was moderated according to ETQA sampling criteria.
11 / The moderator considered whether the assessor’s behaviors was reasonable
12 / An appeals & grievance policy and procedure for assessments are in place
IRREGULARITIES REPORT:
The Verifier uses this form to capture and summarise their findings relating to irregularities and to assist them to decide on the consequences. The final decision is captured in the final report, V9. The Verifier must make recommendations as how the situation may be rectified, possible through providing moderators support.
Irregularities / Consequence / Recommendations1 / Assessment instruments not available:
The assessment instrument and assessment specifications for the unit standard were not available
2 / Inappropriate assessment instruments:
The assessment tools selected did not assess the relevant outcomes validly. E.g. Where a practical competency is assessed by a written test.
3. / Incorrect or Inappropriate assessment specifications:
Either the assessment criteria or the range and evidence requirements in the unit standard were not followed
4. / No evidence or insufficient evidence of candidate performance:
Sufficient evidence of assessment of all relevant units was not supplied
5. / Inappropriate judgment of candidates performance:
The assessor has incorrectly interpreted the evidence supplied by the candidates and has judged the candidates competent when the standard specified in the assessment criteria, hasnot been met or not yet competent when the evidence is sufficient.
6. / No record of candidates achievements:
The centre has failed to keep records about candidates competence
7. / Moderation arrangements unsatisfactory:
The provider or workplace provider has failed to:
- Show that the outcomes of the assessments are consistent between assessors.
- Show that the outcomes are consistent across candidates
- Show that all assessments designed for a particular unit standard are comparable in terms of demand made on the candidate
8. / Other:
The learning / assessment site has failed to meet the following requirements
- Venue unsuitable or difficult to access
- Equipment unserviceable for the purpose of the assessment
- Unsuitable time for the candidate, imposing unnecessary pressure
- Use of substandard materials for the assessment
VERIFICATION REPORT AND RESULT SUMMARY
This form to be submitted to the ETQA
The remainder of the completed Verifiers Tools is to be retained by the verifiers as their evidence
VERIFIER DETAILS:
RESULTS OF VERIFICATION
Moderated Assessment endorsedModerated Assessment endorsed, with minor revisions
Moderated Assessment
NOT Endorsed
Comments and Recommendations
Identified irregularities
Recommendations regarding the irregularities
Verifier’s Name / Signature: / Date:
Moderator’s Name / Signature: / Date:
Training Provider’s Name: / Training Provider’s Signature: / Date:
1 of 17