SAQA All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.
SOUTH AFRICAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY 
REGISTERED UNIT STANDARD THAT HAS PASSED THE END DATE: 

Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments 
SAQA US ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
115759  Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments 
ORIGINATOR
SGB Assessor Standards 
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY
ETDP SETA - Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority 
FIELD SUBFIELD
Field 05 - Education, Training and Development Higher Education and Training 
ABET BAND UNIT STANDARD TYPE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL CREDITS
Undefined  Regular  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  10 
REGISTRATION STATUS REGISTRATION START DATE REGISTRATION END DATE SAQA DECISION NUMBER
Passed the End Date -
Status was "Reregistered" 		 2018-07-01  2023-06-30  SAQA 06120/18 
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2026-06-30   2029-06-30  

In all of the tables in this document, both the pre-2009 NQF Level and the NQF Level is shown. In the text (purpose statements, qualification rules, etc), any references to NQF Levels are to the pre-2009 levels unless specifically stated otherwise.  

This unit standard replaces: 
US ID Unit Standard Title Pre-2009 NQF Level NQF Level Credits Replacement Status
7977  Moderate Assessment  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  10   
9929  Moderate an assessment  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  12   

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD 
This unit standard is for people who conduct internal or external moderation of outcomes-based assessments. The assessments could be in terms of outcomes defined in a number of documents, including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

Those who have achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessments in terms of the relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements. The candidate-moderator will be able to use the prescribed Quality Assurance procedures in a fair, valid, reliable and practicable manner that is free of all bias and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for redress: race, gender and disability.

In particular, people credited with this unit standard are 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, and
  • Review moderation systems and processes. 
    		•

    LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING 
    The credit calculation is based on the assumption that learners have previous assessment experience when starting to learn towards this unit standard, and in particular, recognition for the unit standard: NLRD 115753: "Conduct outcomes-based assessments". It is recommended that candidates should achieve NLRD 115755: "Design and develop outcomes-based assessments" before attempting this unit standard:

    It is further assumed that the person has evaluative expertise within the field in which they are moderating assessments. 

    UNIT STANDARD RANGE 
    1. This is a generic unit standard, and applies to internal and/or external moderation within all fields of learning. It is accepted that moderation happens in different ways and at different levels in different sectors, including different models for what constitutes internal versus external moderation. This standard is intended to cover any situation in which moderation occurs, whether this be internally, i.e. within the ambit of the provider-assessor, or externally through cooperating providers, or externally through professional bodies and quality assurance bodies.

    2. Assessment of candidate-moderators will only be valid for award of this unit standard if the following requirements are met:
  • Moderation is carried out for assessments that include candidates with special needs, and RPL situations. Where real assessments are not available to cover these situations, the candidate is able to demonstrate how special needs and RPL situations would be addressed within their moderation plan and process.
  • Moderation covers assessment instruments, assessment design and methodology, assessment records; assessment decisions, reporting and feedback mechanisms.
  • Moderation is carried out for assessments involving a variety of assessment techniques, such as work samples, simulations, role-plays, written items, oral, portfolios and projects.
  • Moderation activities include pre-assessment interactions with assessors, interactions during assessments and post-assessment interactions.
  • Moderation involves at least two sets of real assessment materials for the same standards and at least six assessor decisions.
  • The assessments that are moderated are in relation to a significant, meaningful and coherent outcome statement that includes assessment criteria and allows for judgements of competence in line with SAQA's definition of competence i.e. embraces foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. This means that moderation of simple, single-task assessments will not be valid for awarding this unit standard.

    3. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidate-moderators should have access to organisational assessment and moderation policies, procedures and systems. It is assumed the organisational policies and procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where candidate-moderators are assessed in organisations that do not have a moderation system in place, assessors of moderators should provide a mock system for the purposes of the assessment.

    4. This unit standard applies to all Moderators, regardless of whether a person carries out moderation internally, as part of an organisation's quality assurance system, or externally, as part of an ETQA or other process to verify assessment results supplied by the provider or assessment agency.

    Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria. 
    		•

    Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria: 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1 
    Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    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 is to take place within the context of an existing moderation system, whether internal or external, as well as an existing assessment plan. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    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 of the extent of moderation and methods of moderation ensures 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 prior to 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 be 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 CRITERIA     

    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 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 correct application of assessment procedures.
     

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 
    Advise and support assessors. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The nature and quality of advice facilitates 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 promotes assessment in accordance with good assessment principles and enhances 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 
    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 CRITERIA     

    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 CRITERIA     

    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). 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOME 
    N/A 

    UNIT STANDARD LINKAGES 
    N/A 


    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, 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 ones 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, 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. 

    UNIT STANDARD ASSESSOR CRITERIA 
    N/A 

    REREGISTRATION HISTORY 
    As per the SAQA Board decision/s at that time, this unit standard was Reregistered in 2012; 2015. 

    UNIT STANDARD NOTES 
    This unit standard replaces unit standard 9929, "Moderate an assessment", Level 5, 12 credits.
    This unit standard replaces unit standard 7977, "Moderate assessment", Level 6, 10 credits.

    Supplementary information

    Definition of Terms

    The following terms are defined as used within this and related unit standards:
  • 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 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 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, 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, testing products.
  • Assessment plan: - an assessment plan is produced at 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 delivery of modules/ programmes in terms of timeframes.
  • Assessment principles: - see more detailed definitions in 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, 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 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 means the comparison of the previous learning and experience of a learner against specified 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 the 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 pre-determined criteria within an outcomes-based paradigm, for various purposes including further development and recognition of learning achievements.
  • Verifier: - those who operate at systems level to monitor assessment and moderation practices, trends and results.


    Principles of assessment:

    Methods of Assessment
  • 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).

    Evidence
  • 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
  • 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: 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. 
    		•

    QUALIFICATIONS UTILISING THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
      ID QUALIFICATION TITLE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL STATUS END DATE PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QA FUNCTIONARY
    Elective  58581   National Certificate: Air Traffic Support  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  TETA 
    Elective  59201   National Certificate: Generic Management  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 
    Elective  50334   National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  79808   National Diploma: Occupational Safety  Level 5  NQF Level 05  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 
    Elective  50333   National Diploma: Occupationally Directed Education, Training and Development Practices  Level 5  NQF Level 05  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  73529   Advanced Certificate: Education: School Management and Leadership  Level 6  NQF Level 06  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 
    Elective  50330   Bachelor: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices  Level 6  NQF Level 07  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 
    Elective  50331   National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education, Training and Development Practices  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  58579   National Diploma: Air Traffic Control  Level 6  NQF Level 06  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  TETA 
    Elective  58008   National Diploma: Aircraft Piloting  Level 6  NQF Level 06  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2016-12-31  TETA 
    Elective  61729   National Diploma: Policing  Level 6  NQF Level 06  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  SAS SETA 
    Elective  20485   National First Degree: ABET Practice  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2018-12-31  ETDP SETA 


    PROVIDERS CURRENTLY ACCREDITED TO OFFER THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
    This information shows the current accreditations (i.e. those not past their accreditation end dates), and is the most complete record available to SAQA as of today. Some Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionaries have a lag in their recording systems for provider accreditation, in turn leading to a lag in notifying SAQA of all the providers that they have accredited to offer qualifications and unit standards, as well as any extensions to accreditation end dates. The relevant Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionary should be notified if a record appears to be missing from here.
     
    1. ABM COLLEGE SA (PTY) LTD 
    2. Academy of Personal Mastery 
    3. African Training and Management Consultants 
    4. Akhule Development Institute cc 
    5. Arsa Holdings Training And Services Pty Ltd 
    6. ASORIP NPC 
    7. Atailpedia 
    8. Axolemahle Business Enterprise 
    9. Azanian Community Development Pty Ltd 
    10. Bensen Business Consulting And Training Pty Ltd 
    11. Boeenelo S Trading And Project Pty Ltd 
    12. Boitjhorisong Institutions Services Networks 
    13. Bokamoso Global Solutions 
    14. Boston City Campus (Pty) Ltd formerly Boston City Campus and Business College (Pty) Ltd 
    15. Charnash Enterprise Solutions Pty Ltd 
    16. Chithi Holdings 
    17. Corporate Safety Training Academy PTY Ltd 
    18. CTU Training Solutions 
    19. Curoplex PTY LTD 
    20. Distictions Pathways Pty Ltd 
    21. Ditlou Sons And Daughters Pty Ltd 
    22. Dolphin Avenue Enterprises Pty Ltd 
    23. EDEN ISLAND TRADING 632 CC 
    24. ELIMA CONSULTING 
    25. Elite Esthetics 
    26. Empirical Training Agency (PTY) Ltd 
    27. Enskills Training and Consulting 
    28. Five Training Skills Pty Ltd 
    29. G and K Module Developers 
    30. Giver of Givers Foundation Organisation 
    31. Grow Training Institute 
    32. Gugulungi Pty Ltd 
    33. HLOSI SECURITY SOLUTIONS 
    34. Howtotender 
    35. Ikage Sd College Pty Ltd 
    36. Ikamva Projects Pty Ltd 
    37. Ilearn Corporate Services Pty Ltd 
    38. Izinkanyezi Training and Development Pty Ltd 
    39. KDS Centre for Skills Development and Training Pty Ltd 
    40. Legacy New Vision Management and Marketing Con 
    41. Lehlabile Emergency Institute 
    42. Letlotlo Foundation 
    43. LICENCE WISE TRAINING SPECIALISTS 
    44. Linder General Trading Pty Ltd 
    45. Lionsden Africa Business Solutions Pty Ltd 
    46. LM MENT CONSULTING GROUP 
    47. Mabidi Funzani Trading And Projects Pty Ltd 
    48. Maite Business Consulting and Training Agency Pty Ltd 
    49. Malope A Phahla Security Services Pty Ltd 
    50. Masakhane Training and Consultant Pty Ltd 
    51. MASHUSHE ETDP TRADING AND PROJECTS 
    52. Mentor Me Corporate Foundation 
    53. Metro Minds 
    54. MGM Training and Consulting 
    55. Mia Secret Professional Nail System Pty Ltd 
    56. Millenials Holdings 
    57. Mogotlho Group Pty Ltd 
    58. MOKO SECURITY SERVICES 
    59. Mosihle Pty Ltd 
    60. Mpondo Zengwenya Trading 
    61. Myfamily Projects and Consulting 
    62. Nkotlo Kay Tshimole Corporate Solutions Pty Ltd 
    63. Ntho Ntho Spares Suppliers Pty Ltd 
    64. Ntshingila Group Pty Ltd 
    65. Pass It On Training Centre NPO 
    66. PHALANE SAFETY CONSULTANT AND TRAINING PROVIDERS PTY LTD 
    67. Phezulu Academy 
    68. Precision Skills Development Training (Pty) Ltd 
    69. Public Sector Accountancy and Audit Academy Pty Ltd 
    70. Regent Business School (Pty) Ltd t/a Regent Business School 
    71. Revo Quest Consulting 
    72. ROTO CONSULTANTS PTY LTD 
    73. School of Rail: Esselenpark 
    74. Seshego Risk Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd 
    75. Sinengomso Training Development Centre Pty Ltd 
    76. Siyabonga Consulting Pty Ltd 
    77. SSG Training Academy Pty Ltd 
    78. Synergistic Covenant Network NPO 
    79. TDM Management Consulting Pty Ltd 
    80. Technical Support Lab 
    81. The Finishing College (Pty) Lt 
    82. The Star Factory 
    83. Thuto Teach NPC 
    84. Totally Tailored Solutions Pty Ltd 
    85. Training Consultant and SD College 
    86. Trojan Training Solutions 
    87. TSWELOPELE TRAINING GROUP 
    88. Twilight Lehlabile Construction Pty Ltd 
    89. Tyme Training and Development 
    90. Ultraskills Pty Ltd 
    91. Ulwazi Five Tees Trading Enterprise Pty Ltd 
    92. UMO LEARNING SUPPORT SYSTEM 
    93. Ursivox Pty Ltd 
    94. Vicresco (Pty) Ltd 
    95. VUWA PROJECTS 
    96. Willshir Trading Pty Ltd 
    97. Workers Knowledge Centre Pty Ltd 
    98. Zizzy Printing and Projects 


    All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.