Moderator Portfolio of Evidence 1

Portfolio of Evidence
Moderator
Learner: ______________________
Cohort: ______________________
Compliance (in orange): _____________________
Date of Compliance Check: _______________
Signature of Compliance: _________________
Compliance Result:
Assessor: _______________________ Khanyisela College (Pty) Ltd

Tel: 041 364 0224
Fax: 041 364 0233
Assessment Result: Email: info@khanyisela.co.za
Website: www.khanyisela.co.za
Moderator
(Total Credits: 10, NQF Level 6)
Portfolio of Evidence
Learner name: ____________________________
Company name: ____________________________
Due Date: ____________________________
First Submission Date:

Assessment Decision:
Assessor Name
Assessor Signature: ___________________
Date of Assessment:
Second Submission Date:

Assessor Name
Date of Assessment:
Third Submission Date

Please note: This assessment requires an additional payment of R150,
which has to be paid on submission of this portfolio.
___________________
Date of Assessment: ___________________
Assessor Signature: ____________________
Date of Assessment: ____________________
Page 2
National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education Training Development Practices
Moderator Portfolio of Evidence: Ver. 02 (2020)
© Khanyisela College (Pty) Ltd
Copyright
Khanyisela College has sole copyright of this Portfolio of Evidence.
Please be aware that the processes developed for delivering this portfolio of evidence as well as any other
supporting documentation is the intellectual copyright of Khanyisela College.
No part of the Khanyisela College portfolio of evidence may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by
any means to any other person without the prior written permission from the Managing Director of
Khanyisela College. If you are in doubt about the use or reproduction of any of the material contained in this
portfolio of evidence, please contact us on +27-41-364-0224 for approval.
Page 3
Welcome Letter
Dear Learner
Welcome to the Assessment Process for Moderator (115759)
This portfolio of evidence is set out clearly so that you will have no problem in compiling your evidence in a
manner that is clear to be assessed and maximise your chances of being judged competent. It is best to
prepare yourself thoroughly for the assessment to avoid having to be re-assessed. Should you be assessed as
“Not Yet Competent (NYC)” you will have the opportunity to be re-assessed. We will allow one
opportunity for re-assessment after which you will be required to pay R150 for a second (and final) re-
assessment. If you are still NYC after this final re-assessment, you will be required to attend additional
training and development, at your own expense.
We assume that you plan to do all the formative and summative exercises by the due date. If you require an
extension, please request it of the Portfolio Administrator who will allow the first one free of charge.
Subsequent extensions (up to a maximum of two) will be charged at an additional R150 on the previous
extension price.
Please do not hesitate to contact the Assessor via the email address provided to you in training should you
have any queries regarding the assessment process. Please allow 24 hours for a response.
Enjoy compiling your portfolio of evidence.
Learner signature: __________________________
Date: __________________________
Page 4
Contents
Copyright................................................................................................................................3
Welcome Letter......................................................................................................................4
SECTION 1 Learner Information.........................................................................................6
SECTION 2 Khanyisela College Documents.......................................................................9
SECTION 3 Unit Standards................................................................................................13
SECTION 4 Learner Evidence............................................................................................26
Use this Contents Page as your guide for preparing your portfolio of evidence. Your very
last check should be if all of the items above is included in your portfolio of evidence, and
numbered accordingly.
Please do not hesitate to contact the Assessor via the email address provided to you in
training should you have any queries regarding the assessment process. Please allow 24
hours for a response.
Enjoy compiling your portfolio of evidence.
Please sign below to indicate that you understand the format of the portfolio of evidence.
Learner signature: __________________________
Date: __________________________
Page 5
SECTION 1
Learner Information
Learner Profile
Please ensure that all your learner documentation has been

submitted (NOT inserted into this portfolio):
o Certified copy of your ID
o Certified copies of your certificates
o Most up-to-date CV
Authenticity Statements
Page 6
Learner Profile
Personal Details
Surname
Name/s
Contact Numbers (H) (B) (C)
Date of Birth
Nationality
Race
Gender
Language
Preference
Qualifications
High school
Post-school
Other
(Learnerships,
Skills training,
workshops and
seminars attended,
on-the-job training,
etc.)
Work Experience: A Short Summary
Learning Assumed to be in Place for module

Entry requirement Learner Motivation
Completion of unit standard 115753:
Conduct outcomes-based assessments
An expert in your field of moderation
Learner’s Special Needs
Assistance with English Language
Mobility
Other Disability (Please identify, attach proof or speak to your Facilitator)
Learner Expectations of the Completion of the Portfolio of Evidence
Page 7
Authenticity Statements
Learner
I _________________________declare that the evidence provided in this portfolio of

evidence is my own work and that I have not committed plagiarism. I further declare that
the remediation is also my own work, not plagiarised from any other source, including
another learner.
Learner’s Signature: ____________________________
Date: ____________________________
Witnesses (including Facilitator, Assessor and/or Moderator)
I declare that I witnessed the above-mentioned learner complete this portfolio of evidence
and that the evidence provided is the learner’s own work.
I further declare that the learner has utilised whatever resources where needed frugally, and
not with undue expense.
Relationship to Signature of Date of

Name of Witness
Learner Witness Witnessing
Page 8
SECTION 2
Khanyisela College Documents

Pre-Assessment Meeting Minutes
Learner Assessment Plan
Evidence Summary
Summative Report
Learner’s Assessment Evaluation
Page 9
Pre-Assessment Meeting Minutes
Learner’s Name: _____________________________________
Learner’s Signature: ___________________________________
Date: ___________________________________
Pre-Assessment Minutes:
Yes No
You were welcomed to the program and Khanyisela College.
You were provided with information regarding the current developments
in education and training in South Africa.
You understand the purpose of and reasons for assessment of this
course.
The roles and responsibilities of both you and the Assessor have been
explained.
Your special and/or particular needs and potential barriers to assessment
and how these will be accommodated were discussed.
The unit standard/s was explained and you agreed to be assessed against
this unit standard/s.
The assessment tools that you will need to complete for this program
were explained.
The feedback process was explained.
The appeals process, its implications and your rights in this process, was
explained. The relevant document (Appeals and Disputes policy) was
signed and submitted to the College.
The roles of other role players that will be involved in the assessment
process were explained.
You were reassured that information will be treated as confidential and a
transparent process will be followed at all times.
You were told that you are welcome to ask questions before, during and
after training.
You agreed that you are ready for assessment against the unit standard/s
within the agreed time frames for assessment and re-assessment
Page 10
Learner Assessment Plan
Learner’s Name: ________________________________
Learner’s Signature: ________________________________
Date: ________________________________
Course name: Moderator (115759)

Proposed
US Ref. Evidence Generated Actual Date
Date
CCFO’s Attend Moderator training
CCFO’s Attend Moderator compliance workshop
CCFO’s Have pre-assessment meeting
115759 Complete Skills Practise Exercises
115759 Complete Knowledge Questionnaire
115759 Complete Assignment 1
115759 Complete Assignment 2
CCFO’s Ensure pages are all numbered
CCFO’s Insert page numbers in Contents Page
CCFO’s Insert page numbers in Evidence Summary
CCFO’s Sign all office documents
CCFO’s Review portfolio
CCFO’s Submit portfolio
Page 11
Evidence Summary
For Office use Only
Learner Assessor Moderator
Evidence
Meets
Assessment SO’s and AC’s Requireme
Page No. Comments Comments
Tool covered nts
Yes No
Skills Practise 115759 (SO1 )

FIRST ASSESSMENT
Exercise 1
SECOND ASSESSMENT
Skills Practise 115759 (SO2, SO3.4)
Exercise 2
Skills Practise 115759 (SO 3.1, 3.2, 3.3,

Exercise 3 3.5, SO4, SO5, SO6)
Summative 115759 (SO 2 – 6)

Assessment
Knowledge 115759
Questionnaire
3. General comment by Assessor:
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
4. General comment by Moderator:
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Page 12
Summative Report
Learner Name Learner Signature
Assessor Name Assessor Signature
Assessor Reg. No. Assessment Date
Moderator Name Moderator Signature
Moderator Reg. No. Moderation Date
Moderator Decision Uphold Reject
US No. US Title C NYC

115759 Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments
CCFO Description Evidence C NYC
IDENTIFYING Identify and solve problems by
planning for contingencies, candidates
with special needs, problems that arise
during moderation, suggesting changes
to moderation following review.
WORKING Work effectively in a team by working
with assessors and other relevant
parties during moderation, as well as
post-moderation.
ORGANISING Organise and manage oneself and one’s
activities by planning, preparing,
conducting and recording the
moderation.
COLLECTING Gathering, evaluating and judging
evidence and the assessment process.
COMMUNICATIN Communicate effectively with
assessors and other relevant parties
G during moderation, providing feedback.
DEMONSTRATIN Demonstrate the world as a set of

related systems by understanding the
G impact of moderation assessment on
individuals, organisations and the
credibility of recognition through NQF
systems.
CONTRIBUTING Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive
with planning, conducting moderation
and giving feedback in a culturally
sensitive manner.
VARCS Evidence Reason C NYC
for Compliance/Non-Compliance
Valid
Authentic
Reliable
Consistent
Current
Sufficient
Page 13
Khanyisela College support received by Learner
Date Type of Support
Page 14
Learner’s Assessment Evaluation
Complete AFTER first assessment (please add comments in Learner’s Response)
Please tick the relevant block
No Areas of Evaluation Learner’s Response (1=Least; 5=Most)
1 2 3 4 5
1 Were you told about the
assessment process after
the training? What could
we do better?
2 Did you understand the

way that you were
assessed? Please tell us
what you did not
understand.
3 Were your special needs

taken into consideration?
Explain how. (Only if
applicable.)
4 Did you have enough time

to prepare and complete
your portfolio of
evidence? If not, please let
us know what kinds of
challenges you faced.
5 Was your Assessor

supportive before, during
and after the assessment?
If not, please let us know
how we could have better
supported you.
6 If you received support

from your Assessor,
mention which form of
support you appreciated
most.
7 Was the feedback you

received from your
Page 15
Assessor after your
portfolio was assessed
helpful? Did it help you
complete the remediation
successfully?
8 In general, did the

assessment process meet
your expectations? If not,
what would you request to
be changed?
9 General Comments by
Learner
Learner’s Signature Date

Assessor’s Signature Date
SECTION 3
Page 16
Unit Standard
115759: Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessment
Page 17
Level TBA:
Moderate an
9929 Level 5 Pre-2009 was 12 Complete
All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National assessment
L5
Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only
payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD
It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is This unit standard is for people who conduct internal or external moderation of
reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority outcomes-based assessments. The assessments could be in terms of outcomes
(SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source. 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
SOUTH AFRICAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development
REGISTERED UNIT STANDARD: Practices and Human Resource Development.
Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments
Those who have achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessments
SAQA ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
in terms of the relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements.
115759 Conduct moderation of outcomes-based assessments 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
ORIGINATOR
and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for
SGB Assessor Standards redress: race, gender and disability.
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY In particular, people credited with this unit standard are able to:
ETDP SETA - Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education  Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-
and Training Authority based assessment system,
 Plan and prepare for moderation,
FIELD SUBFIELD
 Conduct moderation,
Field 05 - Education, Training and Higher Education and Training  Advise and support assessors,
Development  Report, record and administer moderation, and
 Review moderation systems and processes.
ABET US TYPE PRE-2009 NQF NQF LEVEL CREDITS
BAND LEVEL
LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR
Undefined Regular Level 6 Pre-2009 was L6 10 LEARNING
REGISTRATION REGISTRATION REGISTRATION SAQA DEC The credit calculation is based on the assumption that learners have previous
STATUS START DATE END DATE NUMBER assessment experience when starting to learn towards this unit standard, and in
particular, recognition for the unit standard: NLRD 115753: "Conduct outcomes-
Reregistered 2018-07-01 2023-06-30 SAQA based assessments". It is recommended that candidates should achieve NLRD
06120/18 115755: "Design and develop outcomes-based assessments" before attempting
LAST DATE FOR LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT this unit standard:
ENROLMENT
It is further assumed that the person has evaluative expertise within the field in
2024-06-30 2027-06-30
which they are moderating assessments.
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
UNIT STANDARD RANGE
Levels are to the pre-2009 levels unless specifically stated otherwise.
1. This is a generic unit standard, and applies to internal and/or external
This unit standard replaces:
moderation within all fields of learning. It is accepted that moderation happens in
US Unit Standard Pre-2009 Replacement different ways and at different levels in different sectors, including different
NQF Level Credits
ID Title NQF Level Status models for what constitutes internal versus external moderation. This standard is
Level TBA: intended to cover any situation in which moderation occurs, whether this be
Moderate
7977 Level 6 Pre-2009 was 10 Complete internally, i.e. within the ambit of the provider-assessor, or externally through
Assessment
L6 cooperating providers, or externally through professional bodies and quality
assurance bodies.
Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-
2. Assessment of candidate-moderators will only be valid for award of this unit based assessment system.
standard if the following requirements are met:
 Moderation is carried out for assessments that include candidates with special ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
needs, and RPL situations. Where real assessments are not available to cover ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1
these situations, the candidate is able to demonstrate how special needs and RPL Moderation is explained in terms of its contribution to quality assured assessment
situations would be addressed within their moderation plan and process. and recognition systems within the context of principles and regulations
 Moderation covers assessment instruments, assessment design and concerning the NQF.
methodology, assessment records; assessment decisions, reporting and feedback
mechanisms.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2
 Moderation is carried out for assessments involving a variety of assessment
techniques, such as work samples, simulations, role-plays, written items, oral, A variety of moderation methods are described and compared in terms of
portfolios and projects. strengths, weaknesses and applications. The descriptions show how moderation is
 Moderation activities include pre-assessment interactions with assessors, intended to uphold the need for manageable, credible and reliable assessments.
interactions during assessments and post-assessment interactions.
 Moderation involves at least two sets of real assessment materials for the same ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3
standards and at least six assessor decisions. Key principles of assessment are described in terms of their importance and effect
 The assessments that are moderated are in relation to a significant, meaningful on the assessment and the application of the assessment results. Examples are
and coherent outcome statement that includes assessment criteria and allows for provided to show how moderation may be effective in ensuring the principles of
judgements of competence in line with SAQA's definition of competence i.e. assessment are upheld.
embraces foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. This ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
means that moderation of simple, single-task assessments will not be valid for See "Definition of Terms" for a definition of assessment principles.
awarding this unit standard.
3. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidate-
Examples are provided to show how moderation activities could verify the fairness
moderators should have access to organisational assessment and moderation
and appropriateness of assessment methods and activities used by assessors in
policies, procedures and systems. It is assumed the organisational policies and
different assessment situations.
procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where candidate-
moderators are assessed in organisations that do not have a moderation system in ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
place, assessors of moderators should provide a mock system for the purposes of Assessment situations for gathering evidence of abilities in problem solving,
the assessment. knowledge, understanding, practical and technical skills, personal and attitudinal
skills and values. In an SPE
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 SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2
system, or externally, as part of an ETQA or other process to verify assessment Plan and prepare for moderation.
results supplied by the provider or assessment agency. OUTCOME RANGE
The planning and preparation is to take place within the context of an existing
Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where moderation system, whether internal or external, as well as an existing
they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria. assessment plan.
Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1 ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1
Page 19
Planning and preparation activities are aligned with moderation system evidence for this may be produced through scenarios.
requirements.  Evidence must be gathered for on-site and off-site moderation.
 Evidence must be show candidate-moderators are able to moderate in
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 situations where:
The scope of the moderation is confirmed with relevant parties. - The moderation process confirms the assessment results, and where
- The moderation process finds it cannot uphold the assessment results.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
Parties include the assessors and moderating bodies where these exist.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
The moderation is conducted in accordance with the moderation plan. Unforeseen
Planning of the extent of moderation and methods of moderation ensures
events are handled without compromising the validity of the moderation.
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 2
The assessment instruments and process are checked and judged in terms of the
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 extent to which the principles of good assessment are upheld.
The contexts of the assessments under review are clarified with the assessors or ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
assessment agency, and special needs are taken into consideration in the See "Definitions of Terms" for definitions of assessment principles.
moderation planning.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 Moderation confirms that special needs of candidates have been provided for but
Moderation methods and processes are sufficient to deal with all common forms of without compromising the requirements specified in the relevant outcome
evidence for the assessments to be moderated, including evidence gathered for statements.
recognition of prior learning.
The proportion of assessments selected for checking meets the quality assurance
The documentation is prepared in line with the moderation system requirements
body's requirements for consistency and reliability. The use of time and resources
and in such a way as to ensure moderation decisions are clearly documented.
is justified by the assessment history or record of the assessors and/or
assessment agency under consideration.
Required physical and human resources are ensured to be ready and available for ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5
use. Logistical arrangements are confirmed with relevant role-players prior to the
Appeals against assessment decisions are handled in accordance with
moderation.
organisational appeal procedures.
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3
Conduct moderation.
The moderation decision is consistent with the quality assurance body's
OUTCOME RANGE requirements for fairness, validity and reliability of assessments to be achieved.
 Moderation to address the design of the assessment, activities before, during ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
and after assessment, and assessment documentation.
The "moderation decision" includes agreement or disagreement with the results of
 Moderation to include assessments of candidates with special needs and for
the assessments.
RPL cases. Where assessments do not include special needs or RPL cases,
Page 20
requirements include the interpretation of assessment criteria and correct ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2
application of assessment procedures. Records are maintained in accordance with organisational quality assurance and
ETQA requirements.
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

Advise and support assessors. Confidentiality of information relating to candidates and assessors is preserved in
accordance with organisational quality assurance and ETQA requirements.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 SPECIFIC OUTCOME 6
The nature and quality of advice facilitates a common understanding of the Review moderation systems and processes.
relevant outcomes and criteria, and issues related to their assessment by
assessors. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 Strengths and weaknesses of moderation systems and processes are identified in
The nature and quality of advice promotes assessment in accordance with good terms of their manageability and effectiveness in facilitating judgements on the
assessment principles and enhances the development and maintenance of quality quality and validity of assessment decisions.
management systems in line with ETQA requirements.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2
Advice on quality management systems includes planning, staffing, resourcing, Recommendations contribute towards the improvement of moderation systems
training and recording systems. and processes in line with ETQA requirements and overall manageability.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3

Support contributes towards the further development of assessors as needed. The review enhances the credibility and integrity of the recognition system.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS

All communications are conducted in accordance with relevant confidentiality  A candidate-moderator wishing to be assessed, against this unit standard may
requirements. apply to an assessment agency, assessor or provider institution accredited by the
relevant ETQA.
SPECIFIC OUTCOME 5  Anyone assessing a candidate-moderator against this unit standard must meet
Report, record and administer moderation. the assessor requirements of the relevant ETQA. In particular, such assessors of
candidate-moderators must demonstrate that they assess in terms of the scope
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 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.
Moderation findings are reported to designated role-players within agreed time-
 External moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at
frames and according to the quality assurance body's requirements for format and
its discretion.
content.
ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE
UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE
Role-players could include ETQA or Moderating Body personnel, internal or
The following knowledge is embedded within the unit standard, and will be
external moderators and assessors.
assessed directly or indirectly through assessment of the specific outcomes in
Page 21
terms of the assessment criteria:
 Knowledge of quality assurance policy and procedures
 Outcomes-based education, training and development
 Understanding of organisational or institutional contexts
 The role and function of moderation - directly assessed through assessment
criterion 'Moderation is explained in terms of its contribution to quality assured  Understanding the curriculum (where applicable).
assessment and recognition systems within the context of principles and
regulations concerning the NQF.' and indirectly assessed throughout the unit UNIT STANDARD DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOME
standard.
N/A
 Moderation methods - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'A variety UNIT STANDARD LINKAGES
of moderation methods are described and compared in terms of strengths,
N/A
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 Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO):
recognition of prior learning.', and indirectly assessed through application UNIT STANDARD CCFO IDENTIFYING
throughout the standard. Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking: planning for
contingencies, candidates with special needs, problems that arise during
 Principles of assessment - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'Key moderation, suggesting changes to moderation following review.
principles of assessment are described in terms of their importance and effect on
the assessment and the application of the assessment results. Examples are UNIT STANDARD CCFO WORKING
provided to show how moderation may be effective in ensuring the principles of Work effectively in a team using critical and creative thinking: working with
assessment are upheld.', and indirectly assessed via a requirement to judge assessors and other relevant parties during moderation, as well as post-
whether the principles are applied by assessors. moderation.
 Principles and practices of RPL - assessed in terms of the requirement for UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANISING
candidate moderators to moderate RPL-related assessments. Organize and manage oneself and ones activities: planning, preparing, conducting
and recording the moderation.
 Methods of assessment - directly assessed through assessment criterion
'Examples are provided to show how moderation activities could verify the fairness UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING
and appropriateness of assessment methods and activities used by assessors in Collect, analyse, organize and critically evaluate information: gather, evaluate and
different assessment situations', and indirectly when checking the appropriateness judge evidence and the assessment process.
and fairness of assessment methods used by assessors
UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING
 Potential barriers to assessment - assessed when dealing with special needs. Communicate effectively: communicate with assessors and other relevant parties
during moderation, and provide feedback.
 The principles and mechanisms of the NQF - this knowledge underpins the
standard UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING
Demonstrate the world as a set of related systems: understanding the impact of
 Assessment policies and ETQA requirements moderation assessment on individuals, organisations and the credibility of
Page 22
recognition through NQF systems. Guide (see definition below).
UNIT STANDARD CCFO CONTRIBUTING  Assessment facilitator (or evidence facilitator): - a person who works within
Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts: plan, particular contexts, under the supervision of registered assessors, to help
conduct and give feedback on moderation in a culturally sensitive manner. candidates/learners gather, produce and organise evidence for assessment.
UNIT STANDARD ASSESSOR CRITERIA  Assessment Guide: - this is a complete package based on a thorough analysis
N/A of specified outcomes and criteria, assessment requirements and a particular
assessment context. Assessment Guides are designed primarily for use by
REREGISTRATION HISTORY 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.
As per the SAQA Board decision/s at that time, this unit standard was
Assessment Guides address the following key aspects in detail:
Reregistered in 2012; 2015.
- How will the assessment take place?
- What is needed to make the assessment happen?
UNIT STANDARD NOTES - How will evidence be gathered, recorded and judged?
This unit standard replaces unit standard 9929, "Moderate an assessment", Level In general, Assessment Guides include descriptions of the approach to the
5, 12 credits. assessment, assessment conditions, assessment activities, instructions to
This unit standard replaces unit standard 7977, "Moderate assessment", Level 6, assessors and candidates/learners, assessment methods, assessment instruments
10 credits. (e.g. scenarios, role-plays, questions, tasks), resource requirements, guidance for
contextualising assessments, relevant standard operating procedures,
Supplementary information administrative procedures, moderation requirements, assessment outcomes and
criteria, observations sheets, checklists, possible or required sources of evidence
Definition of Terms and guidance on expected quality of evidence including exemplars, memoranda or
rubrics.
The following terms are defined as used within this and related unit standards:
 Assessment instruments: - those items that an assessor uses or a candidate
 Assessment: - a process in which evidence is gathered and evaluated against uses as part of the assessment e.g. scenarios with questions, case studies,
agreed criteria in order to make a judgement of competence for developmental description of tasks to be performed, descriptions of role play situations.
and/or recognition purposes.
 Assessment method: - for the most part, assessment methods relate to what
 Assessment activities: - what a candidate does or is involved in as a means of an assessor does to gather and evaluate evidence. Assessment methods include
producing evidence e.g. designing things, making things, repairing things, observing candidates, questioning candidates, interviewing
reporting on something, answering questions, solving problems, demonstrating supervisors/colleagues/managers of candidates, listening to candidates, reviewing
techniques. written material, testing products.
 Assessment criteria: - descriptions of the required type and quality of evidence  Assessment plan: - an assessment plan is produced at provider level, and gives
against which candidates are to be assessed. an overview of the timeframes and responsibilities for assessment and moderation
for the agreed delivery period. The plan addresses practical implementation
 Assessment design: - the analysis of defined outcomes and criteria to produce details, including, for example, decisions about the clustering of certain outcomes
a detailed description of how an assessment should take place, including all or unit standards/outcomes for integrated assessment, any planned RPL, and the
instructions and information regarding the assessment activities and assessment relation of assessment and moderation to delivery of modules/ programmes in
methods. The product of assessment design could be termed an Assessment terms of timeframes.
Page 23
for:
 Assessment principles: - see more detailed definitions in next section. - The award of credits for a specified unit standard or qualification,
- Access to further learning,
 Candidate/learner: - person whose performance is being assessed by an - Recognition in terms of meeting minimum requirements for a specific job,
assessor. Such people include those who may already be competent, but who - Placement at a particular level in an organisation or institution, or
seek assessment for formal recognition (candidates), as well as those who may - Advanced standing or status.
have completed or are in the process of completing learning programmes This means that regardless of where, when or how a person obtained the required
(learners). 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
 Candidate-moderator: - the person who is being assessed against this
judging evidence in relation to defined criteria, giving feedback and reporting
particular unit standard.
results. Given that the all candidates are assessed against the same criteria,
credits awarded through RPL are therefore just as valid as credits awarded
 Evaluative expertise: - the ability to judge the quality of a performance in through any other assessment process.
relation to specified criteria consistently, reliably and with insight. Evaluative
expertise implies deep subject matter understanding and knowledge about the
 Outcomes-based assessment: - a planned process for gathering and judging
outcomes being assessed at a theoretical and practical level, but does not
evidence of competence, in relation to pre-determined criteria within an
necessarily include practical ability in the outcome.
outcomes-based paradigm, for various purposes including further development
and recognition of learning achievements.
 Evidence: - tangible proof produced by or about individuals, that can be
perceived with the senses, bearing a direct relationship to defined outcomes and
 Verifier: - those who operate at systems level to monitor assessment and
criteria, based on which judgements are made concerning the competence of
moderation practices, trends and results.
individuals. Evidence includes plans, products, reports, answers to questions,
testimonials, certificates, descriptions of observed performances, peer review
Principles of assessment:
reports.
Methods of Assessment
 Evidence facilitator: - see assessment facilitator  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,
 Moderation: - a process that supports and evaluates the assessment and not something else.
environment, process and instruments with a view to confirming the reliability and  Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to
authenticity of assessment results and improving the quality of assessments and achievements, which are not related to the achievement of the outcome at hand.
assessors.  Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost-effective
assessments that do not unduly interfere with learning.
 Performance: - includes demonstration of skills, knowledge, understanding and  Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work
attitudes, and the ability to transfer these to new situations. or learning process where this is appropriate and feasible. (Often referred to as
naturally occurring evidence).
 Portfolio of evidence: - a carefully organised and complete collection of
evidence compiled by candidates/learners to prove competence in relation to Evidence
defined outcomes.  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
 RPL - Recognition of Prior Learning means the comparison of the previous conditions that mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible
learning and experience of a learner against specified learning outcomes required  Current: The evidence is sufficient proof that the candidate is able to perform
Page 24
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.
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.
Page 25
SECTION 4
Learner Evidence
Formative Assessments:
o Skills Exercise 1 – 3
Summative Assessments:
o Workplace Assignment
o Knowledge Questionnaire
Page 26
Skills Practice Exercise 1
1. This question deals with the function and role of the moderator in an OBE learning construct:
a. What is your understanding of Outcomes-Based Education and Training?
b. How does assessment in the OBE paradigm differ from that in traditional assessment?
c. Explain how the NQF works across the bands in terms of:
i. Theory, skills
ii. Problem solving
iii. Independent learning
d. How would moderation ensure the integrity of the learning system in:
i. A training provider
ii. Providers across a particular sector
2. Consider the following moderation methods, and make notes on the potential advantages and
disadvantages of each.
a. Moderation of a portfolio of evidence
b. Observation of a live assessment
c. Audit of Materials
d. Audit of Learner Management System
3. Explain the following assessment principles fully, and how each can be upheld through a moderation
process:
a. Fairness
b. Validity
c. Reliability and
d. Practicability
4. Consider the following assessment evidence. Describe how you would apply the principles of
assessment to each of these:
a. A collection of evidence in a portfolio which is valid and relevant but is not signed or dated
b. An observation checklist which has not been completed or signed by the assessor. You notice this
in another checklist too
c. The assessor has accepted evidence where only four of the five topics were covered
d. The learner has a learning disability and has requested that they submit an oral assignment
e. Training took place on a virtual platform and learner have requested to submit voice notes
instead of written evidence
Page 27
Bay Learning College is preparing for an internal moderation for next month. The following is a status of
their current assessment situation:
There are three qualifications that they are attempting to round up so that all the cohorts can be entered
into the moderation. These are as follows:
o Further Education and Training Certificate: Generic Management NQF level 4
15 learners, 14 portfolios in total
 10 have handed in all portfolios
 4 have handed in some portfolios
 1 has not handed in at all. This learner has a learning disability, it has recently surfaced
o National Certificate: Business Administration NQF level 3
 10 have handed in all ten portfolios
 12 have handed in between 3 and 9 portfolios, therefore partially complete
 3 have handed in no portfolios
o National Certificate: Business Practice NQF level 1
 13 have handed in all their portfolios
 17 have handed in less than 7 portfolios
 20 have handed in no portfolios
There are five Assessors currently doing assessments:

o Jenny is the lead Assessor and assesses at a rate of 50 portfolios a week. She works unprompted
and supports learners to completion
o Betty is also a Facilitator and assesses when she is not in the class. She assesses about 15
portfolios a week
o Henry is part time and only comes in when needed. He is paid per assessment when the learner
is competent.
o Frank is involved with materials development, and while he has made a great contribution
towards improving the assessments, he is hardly available for assessments. He can assess about
3 to 5 portfolios a week
o Marcia is a new Assessor. She is hesitant and slow. She needs constant supervision and her
work needs to be overseen by another of the Assessors. She works best when together with
another Assessor. She assesses about three portfolios a week.
Now answer the following questions:

1. You have to sample from the list of learners in the cohort. They have done the Generic Management
qualification. Use the RAGED principle: RPL, Age, Gender, Ethnicity and Disability.
2. Explain what strategy you have used to choose the sample. You have to choose a sample of 25% or 3,
whichever is the greater.
Page 28
Name Age Ethnicity Gender Notes Yes/No
Alunamda 24 BC F Has epileptic seizures when it is very
hot
Bonginkos 35 BA M None
i
Chuma 52 BA M
Delphine 30 W F
Erick 26 BI M New to the program
Frederick 38 BC M Wears spectacles
Gary 43 BC M
Hlumela 28 BA F Is Tswana
Indira 32 BI F
Janine 29 BC F In a wheelchair, but can write
Khaya 18 BA M Has just completed matric the previous
year
Larry 24 BI F Is an acting supervisor at work
Melissa 39 W F
Nellie 36 BA F She has been deemed NYC for 3
modules in the past
Oprah 36 BA F Is progressing very well through the
qualification
3. What are the moderation requirements of Bay Learning College?
4. Develop a moderation plan for the College.
5. What is the scope of the moderation?
6. What will be moderated at the next moderation?
7. What are the time lines for this moderation?
8. What are the requirements of Moderators?
9. Are there any learners with special needs? What preparations can be made for these learners?
10. Who will all participate in the moderation?
11. How would you support and advise these assessors?
Page 29
1. A learner has submitted an appeal against Marcia, the new Assessor. See below for the appeals form
submitted. How will you deal with this situation?
2. How can you support Marcia so that this situation does not occur in the future?
3. Imagine that you have been sampling the assessment decisions of your Assessors and you pick up the
following problems:
a. One of your Assessors has let candidates use the same answers for the knowledge tests and
signed the candidates off as competent.
b. One of your Assessors has given candidates a percentage (e.g. 76%) for the knowledge
components and then signed the candidates off as competent, although Bay Learning College
only accepts 100% competency.
c. One of your Assessors has not completed assessment documentation correctly – forgot to sign
and date some forms and get the candidate’s signatures and details.
4. Explain which moderation records you would keep, and explain why you think they are necessary.
5. Do a review of the Bay Learning College moderation using the SWOT analysis. Please add
recommendations.
Page 30
Summative Assessments
Pre-moderation activity
Pre-Moderation Meeting
Moderation reports: Assessor 1 and 2
Moderation Strategy
Sampling plan
Knowledge Questionnaire
Page 31
Moderation Plan
CONTINGENC
DOCUMENTS ACTION COMMENT
SO’s ACTION PERSON/S Y DATE
REQUIRED DATE for contingency
if applicable
Invite Assessors to pre- Moderator-Candidate Invitation for each Assessor
moderation meeting
Provide agenda to Assessors Moderator-candidate Agenda for each Assessor
for pre-moderation meeting
Conduct pre-moderation Moderator-candidate Pre-mod. checklist
Pre-moderation meeting Moderator-Candidate Minutes for pre-moderation
Assessor 1 template
Assessor 2 Special and Particular
Witness needs form
Moderation plan
Agreement of date for Moderator-Candidate Moderation plan
handing in of assessment Assessor 1
batches – to be done in pre- Assessor 2
moderation meeting Witness
Review sample and write Moderator-candidate Internal Moderator’s
Moderator’s Report for Report – Assessor 1
Assessor 1 and Assessor 2 Internal Moderator’s
Report – Assessor 2
Review moderation process Moderator-candidate Witness Status List
Assessor 1 Cost Effectiveness Report
Assessor 2 Assessor 1 Evaluation
Report
Assessor 2 Evaluation
Report
Moderator-Candidate
Report on Moderation
Systems and Processes
Page 32
INVITATION: Assessor 1
Date: ____________________
Dear: ____________________
As part of the process for becoming a Moderator I am required to carry out certain moderation
activities within my work environment. I am required to work with and moderate two staff
members and I would like to ask your permission to work with you as a Candidate-Moderator.
If you are comfortable for me to progress with the moderation activities, please can you sign
acknowledgement below.
I would value any input you would like to give to this process and would invite you to review some
of the documentation I generate. It is important that I respect your candidate’s right to
confidentiality, so we would need to confirm with your candidate that they are comfortable with
information being shared with other parties.
Should you wish to discuss anything in more detail, please contact me on:
__________________________________ (Cell)
Yours sincerely
________________________ Signature: __________________________

Candidate-Moderator
Acknowledgement of receipt:
__________________________________________
Assessor 1
Page 33
INVITATION: Assessor 2
Date: ____________________
Dear: ____________________
As part of the process for becoming a Moderator I am required to carry out certain moderation
activities within my work environment. I am required to work with and moderate two staff
members and I would like to ask your permission to work with you as a Candidate-Moderator.
If you are comfortable for me to progress with the moderation activities, please can you sign
acknowledgement below.
I would value any input you would like to give to this process and would invite you to review some
of the documentation I generate. It is important that I respect your candidate’s right to
confidentiality, so we would need to confirm with your candidate that they are comfortable with
information being shared with other parties.
Should you wish to discuss anything in more detail, please contact me on:
__________________________________ (Cell)
Yours sincerely
________________________ Signature: __________________________

Candidate-Moderator
__________________________________________
Assessor 2
Page 34
Pre-Moderation Meeting Agenda
Dear Assessor 1 and 2
I kindly request your presence at a pre-moderation meeting on ____________________, at

_____________.
The topics to be covered are as follows:

Explanation of the moderation process
The roles and responsibilities of Assessors and the Moderator
Feedback
Assessment plans
The Appeals and Disputes procedure
Accommodating special and particular needs
Completion of biographical information forms
Please bring the following along with you:

An updated CV
A list of learners that you have assessed since the last moderation
Assessment batches
Thanking you,
________________________
Candidate-Moderator
_____________________ ____________________
Assessor 1 (sign) Assessor 2 (sign)
Date of receipt: ______________________________
Please attach minutes of the pre-moderation meeting after this page. Ensure that it is a date and time
after this agenda has been sent out.
Also, that the Assessors sign the minutes.
Page 35
Pre-Moderation Activity
Please complete the following pre-assessment moderation activity:
Moderator Checklist
Evidence No evidence
Criteria Comments
Confirmed available
Is the Assessment Strategy
available for Assessors?
Do the assessors have the

necessary registration?
Available of assessment guides

for assessors?
Is the assessment plan

available for all the evidence?
Assessment plan agreed upon

by the learner and the
Assessor, indicating that the
leaner was ready for
assessment.
Comment on Appropriateness
of the tools
Comment on the Validity of

the tools used
Fairness of the tool
The tools allow for judgement

of competence in line with
SAQA’s (embrace
foundational, practical and
reflexive dimension of
competence)
All range statements /critical
cross field outcomes are
covered in the assessment
Tools.
The evidence required is
clearly defined in the
assessment tools
The assessment tools provide
for an opportunity for
additional questions and
comments from the learner
Page 36
The assessment tools have a
feedback section.
The assessment tools have a

declaration of acceptance from
the learner
There is a checklist of how the

principles of assessment were
adhered to
Copies of model evidence

against which learner presented
evidence is judged is available.
All instruments can be

authenticated with signatures
from the relevant parties.
All instruments are dated to

ensure currency
All fields must be completed.
Pag
e 37
Internal Moderator’s Reports for Assessors 1
and 2
Please submit two reports
Ensure that each Assessor’s batch of assessments are attached after their Moderator
reports
Ensure that your reports have the following headings:
Assessor Name
Assessor Signature
Candidate-Moderator Name
Candidate- Moderator Signature
Date of Moderation
Learning Outcomes
Assessment Criteria
Name of Training Provider
Provider Number
Name of Candidates for Assessor 1
1.
2.
3.
Date Batch Received from Assessor 1 (Attach assessment batch)
Overall Comments
Type of Evidence Moderated:
Feedback to Assessor
Comments Regarding Upholding of Assessment Principles
Comments Regarding Meeting Quality Assuring Bodies’ Requirements
Comments Regarding the Usage of Resources
Feedback to The Assessor Including Actions Required
Pag
e 38
Assessor Evaluation Report
Please insert reports for both Assessors after this page.
Candidate-Moderator Name: _________________________
Candidate-Moderator Signature: _________________________
Assessor Name: _________________________
Assessor Signature: _________________________
Date: _________________________
Please answer the following questions about your Moderator:
1. How did your Moderator encourage you and put you at ease during the assessment
process?
2. How was the moderation process explained to you?
3. How were you encouraged to participate in the moderation process?
4. Were you given clear and constructive feedback?
5. Were your Moderator’s questions clear and did you understand the language the
Moderator used?
6. How did your Moderator accommodate any special or particular needs you might have
had during this moderation process?
7. When your Moderator conducted the observation, were you disrupted by their presence?
(Observations)
8. Did your Moderator moderate all the evidence provided by you?
9. Do you believe that all the assessment criteria and knowledge requirements of the unit
standard you were being measured against were considered in this moderation?
10. Were you made aware of your Moderator’s final moderation decision?
11. Was all documentation completed, signed and dated and were you given a copy?
12. How do you believe you have benefited from this moderation process?
13. Where you aware of any discriminatory practice carried out by your Moderator towards
you? Explain.
14. How did your Moderator try to convey to you an understanding of how these moderator
activities related to other relevant issues in the work environment?
Pag
e 39
Moderation Review
Please complete the following documents and insert after this page:
1. SWOT analysis of the moderation process and system, including recommendations.
2. Moderation Strategy
3. Sampling Plan
Page 40
Knowledge Questionnaire
1. Name 3 principles of good and valid assessment
2. Explain the 3 principles above in detail.
3. How can/should you as Moderator uphold these principles?
4. Describe 3 different methods of assessment.
5. Which main polices affect your assessment centre? (Name 3)
6. Name 3 assessment procedures which
7. What ETQA requirements must be borne in mind when conducting assessment and moderation? (Name
3 from your specific ETQA)
8. Why is it important for you, as Moderator, to align to your ETQA requirements?
9. Describe 2 moderation techniques and provide one (1) strength and one (1) weakness of a) for each.
10. What are the roles/ functions of a Moderator?
11. What is an assessment agency?
12. How does moderation contribute to quality assurance?
13. Provide two (2) examples of how moderation can verify fairness and appropriateness of methods used
by Assessors? Mention two principles of RPL, and say how they affect development in South Africa
14. How can RPL be accommodated in the assessment process?
15. Mention three special or particular needs, and say how you will ensure that they do not negatively
influence the assessment process
16. What is a quality assurance procedure?
17. What parts of moderation presented you with a challenge and why
18. What will you change within your moderation system?
19. Who (which parties) should you confirm your moderation strategy & plan with?
20. What were some of the difficulties encountered by your assessment team?
21. What feedback could you give the SGB / NSB regarding unit standards that you have been moderating?
22. What moderation documentation needs to be completed? (Name 4)
23. What organisational contexts influenced your moderation practice? (I.e. Was there anything in the
environment that you were moderating in that made moderation difficult or unusual?)
24. Explain, in your own words, how the NQF works.
Please sign and date your answers and insert after this page.
Page 41

Moderator Portfolio of Evidence 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Moderator Portfolio of Evidence 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Portfolio of Evidence

Compliance (in orange): _____________________

Date of Compliance Check: _______________

Signature of Compliance: _________________

Assessor: _______________________ Khanyisela College (Pty) Ltd

Company name: ____________________________

Due Date: ____________________________

First Submission Date:

Assessor Signature: ___________________

Second Submission Date:

Assessor Signature: ___________________

Third Submission Date

Date of Assessment: ___________________

Assessor Signature: ____________________

Date of Assessment: ____________________

Welcome to the Assessment Process for Moderator (115759)

Enjoy compiling your portfolio of evidence.

Learner signature: __________________________

SECTION 1 Learner Information.........................................................................................6

SECTION 2 Khanyisela College Documents.......................................................................9

SECTION 3 Unit Standards................................................................................................13

SECTION 4 Learner Evidence............................................................................................26

Enjoy compiling your portfolio of evidence.

Learner signature: __________________________

Please ensure that all your learner documentation has been

Learning Assumed to be in Place for module

I _________________________declare that the evidence provided in this portfolio of

Learner’s Signature: ____________________________

Witnesses (including Facilitator, Assessor and/or Moderator)

Relationship to Signature of Date of

Khanyisela College Documents

Learner’s Name: _____________________________________

Learner’s Signature: ___________________________________

Learner’s Signature: ________________________________

Course name: Moderator (115759)

CCFO’s Attend Moderator training

CCFO’s Attend Moderator compliance workshop

CCFO’s Have pre-assessment meeting

115759 Complete Skills Practise Exercises

115759 Complete Knowledge Questionnaire

115759 Complete Assignment 1

115759 Complete Assignment 2

CCFO’s Ensure pages are all numbered

CCFO’s Insert page numbers in Contents Page

CCFO’s Insert page numbers in Evidence Summary

CCFO’s Sign all office documents

CCFO’s Review portfolio

CCFO’s Submit portfolio

Learner Assessor Moderator

Skills Practise 115759 (SO1 )

Skills Practise 115759 (SO 3.1, 3.2, 3.3,

Summative 115759 (SO 2 – 6)

3. General comment by Assessor:

4. General comment by Moderator:

US No. US Title C NYC

DEMONSTRATIN Demonstrate the world as a set of

2 Did you understand the

3 Were your special needs

4 Did you have enough time

5 Was your Assessor

6 If you received support

7 Was the feedback you

Signature: __

Signature: __