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: 

Moderate Assessment 
SAQA US ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
7977  Moderate Assessment 
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" 		 2003-12-03  2004-08-11  SAQA 1351/03 
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2005-08-11   2008-08-11  

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 is replaced by: 
US ID Unit Standard Title Pre-2009 NQF Level NQF Level Credits Replacement Status
115759  Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  10   

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD 
This unit standard is for people who moderate or intend to moderate assessments against unit standards and/or qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development related qualifications.

A candidate-moderator who has achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessment activities against the relevant standards and qualifications. 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:
  • Plan and prepare for moderation
  • Conduct moderation
  • Advise and support assessors and assessment agencies
  • Report, record and administer moderation
  • 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: "Conduct assessment of learning outcomes".

    It is further assumed that the person is competent within the filed in which they are moderating assessments. 

    UNIT STANDARD RANGE 
    The following scope and context applies to the whole unit standard:
  • 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 involving a variety of assessment techniques, including work samples, simulations, 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
    interaction and support and recommendations.

    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 
    Plan and prepare for moderation 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
    The planning and preparation is to take place within the context of an existing moderation system. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    1. A moderation system is confirmed to be in place and planning and preparation activities are aligned with moderation system requirements. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    2. The scope of the moderation is confirmed with relevant parties. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Parties include the assessors or assessment agencies and moderating bodies.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    3. Planning of the scope and nature of the moderation activities ensure the manageability of moderation and enable a fair judgement to be passed on the assessments under review. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    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 planning. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    5. Moderation processes are sufficient to deal with all common forms of evidence including evidence gathered for recognition of prior learning. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    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 
    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. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 8 
    8. A variety of moderation techniques are described and compared in terms of strengths, weaknesses and applications. The descriptions address the need to uphold the principles of assessment and the need for manageable, credible and reliable moderation. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    See "Supplementary information" for a definition of assessment principles.
     

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2 
    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.
  • Evidence must be gathered for on-site and off-site moderation.
  • Evidence must be gathered for moderation 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 
    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 
    2. The assessment instruments and process are checked and judged in terms of their appropriateness, fairness, validity and sufficiency for assessment. The moderation decision enables the quality assurance body's requirements for fairness, appropriateness, validity and sufficiency to be achieved. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Requirements include the interpretation of assessment criteria and correct application of assessment procedures.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    3. Confirmation of assessment decisions enables the quality assurance body's requirements for consistency to be achieved. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    4. Moderation confirms that special needs of candidates have been provided for but without compromising the required standards. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    5. The proportion of assessment decisions selected for verification meets the quality assurance body's requirements for consistency and reliability and the use of time and resources. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    6. Appeals against assessment decisions are handled in accordance with the appeal procedures. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    7. Key principles of assessment are described in terms of their importance and effect on the assessment and the application of the assessment results. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 8 
    8. A variety of assessment methods are described and compared in terms of strengths, weaknesses and applications. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    The description of methods should cover situations for gathering evidence of abilities in problem solving, knowledge, understanding, practical and technical skills, personal and attitudinal skills and values.
     

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3 
    Advise and support assessors and assessment agencies. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    1. The nature and quality of advice facilitates a common understanding of the relevant standards and issues related to their assessment by assessors. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    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 
    See definition of assessment principles under "Supplementary information".

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

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    3. All communications are conducted in accordance with relevant confidentiality requirements. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 
    Report, record and administer moderation. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    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 
    2. Records are kept and maintained in accordance with ETQA requirements. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    3. Confidentiality of information relating to candidates, assessors and assessing agencies is preserved in accordance with the requirements of the assessing agency and ETQA requirements 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 5 
    Review moderation systems and processes. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    1. Strengths and weaknesses of moderation systems and processes are identified in terms of their manageability and potential to make judgements on the quality and validity of assessment decisions. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    2. Recommendations to moderation systems and processes have the potential to facilitate their improvement in line with ETQA requirements and overall manageability. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    3. The review enhances the credibility and integrity of the recognition system. 


    UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS 
  • An individual wishing to be assessed, (including through RPL) 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 be registered as an assessor with the relevant ETQA.
  • Any institution offering learning that will enable achievement of this unit standard must be accredited as a provider with the relevant ETQA.
  • Moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at its discretion. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE 
    The following essential embedded knowledge will be assessed through assessment of the specific outcomes in terms of the stipulated assessment criteria. Candidates are unlikely to achieve all the specific outcomes, to the standards described in the assessment criteria, without knowledge of the listed embedded knowledge. This means that for the most part, the possession or lack of the knowledge can be directly inferred from the quality of the candidate's performance. Where direct assessment of knowledge is required, assessment criteria have been included in the body of the unit standard.
  • Principles of assessment - see assessment criterion 2.7
  • Principles and practices of RPL
  • Methods of assessment - see assessment criterion 2.8
  • The principles and mechanisms of the NQF
  • Assessment policies and ETQA requirements
  • Moderation techniques and systems and specific moderation requirements -see assesment criterion 1.8
  • The role and function of a moderator
  • Knowledge of quality assurance policy and procedures
  • Understanding of organisational or institutional contexts 
    		•


    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 NOTES 
    This unit standard has been replaced by 115759 which is, Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments, 10 credits, NQF Level 6, as from 11 August 2004.


    Definition of Terms:
  • Assessment - a process in which evidence of performance is gathered and evaluated against agreed criteria.
  • Performance - includes skills, knowledge, understanding and attitudes, and the ability to transfer these to new situations.
  • Assessment criteria - state the type and quality of performance against which the candidate is assessed.
  • Candidate - person whose performance is being assessed by the assessor.
  • Moderation - a process for making judgements on the quality and result of assessments, with the purpose of confirming assessment judgements.

    Principles of assessment:
  • Appropriateness: The method of assessment is suited to the performance being assessed.
  • Fairness: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievements, which are not related to the evidence.
  • Manageability: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost effective assessments which do not unduly interfere with learning.
  • Integration into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and feasible.
  • Validity: 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
  • Authenticity: 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 assessment is fair.
  • 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 judgment made is similar to the judgment that would be made by other assessors. 
    		•

    QUALIFICATIONS UTILISING THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
      ID QUALIFICATION TITLE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL STATUS END DATE PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QA FUNCTIONARY
    Elective  23113   Post Graduate Certificate: Higher Education and Training  Level 7  NQF Level 07  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 


    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. M P van Rooy Training Consultant 
    2. SKU Training and Assessment 


    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.