Annexure J 2

POST ASSESSMENT MODERATION TOOL

NAME OF SCHOOL CHIPA TABANE COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL

DISTRICT GAUTENG NORTH

SUBJECT AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES

GRADE 10

TASK MODERATED JUNE EXAMINATION

NAME OF MODERATOR MUDAU NC

TECHNICAL ASPECTS
Quality Indicators Comment in FULL sentence
1. The question paper is complete with Learners wrote a common question paper from outside, it was
the marking guideline and complete with the marking guideline but there was no grid analysis
assessment grid analysis.
2. The cover page has all the relevant The cover page has all the relevant and necessary details such as
details such as subject, grade, subject,grade,date,duration.mark allocation and number of pages
duration, date, marks allocation, and
number of pages.
3. Instructions to candidates are clearly Instructions are clear and unambiguous
specified and unambiguous
4. Mark allocation is clearly indicated Marks are clearly allocated per question
per question.
5. The mark allocation on the question The mark allocation on the question paper correlates with the
paper is the same as on the marking allocation on the marking guidelines
guideline.
6. The quality of illustration, pictures, All the structures are of quality and they are all clear
graphs, diagrams.
7. The marking guideline is efficient in The marking guidelines are efficient and allows consistent marking
terms of sufficient alternatives and
allows consistent marking.

STANDARD OF THE TASKS

1. The task assesses all specific core
content and skills that should be
covered in this term as per the ATP.
2. The distribution of different cognitive
levels as per policy. Indicate the
distribution.
3. Different types of questions used
(Multiple choice, matching type,
missing words, open-ended, etc.)
4. The correct terminology of the subject
was used to design the test
5. The language used is appropriate for
the level of learners.
The tasks cover content and skills as per ATP and
CAPS
Cognitive levels are well distributed as per policy
Different types of questions used Ii.e
Multiple choice questions,matching type,calculations
and investigative questions.
Correct terminology used
The language used is appropriate and for the level of
the learners

MARKING
1. Quality of marking by the teacher. Marking is fair and consistent. Evidence of effective
(Consistency, accountability of ticks, usage of marking guidelines
relevance of marking tool)

2. Marking of all sections of the task. All sections of the tasks are marked and learners’ tasks
Signature and dating of the tasks signed
during marking

3. Compliance to marking standards as There is compliance to marking standards

outlined in the marking guideline (e.g.,
writing of subtotals)
4. Evidence of extended opportunities to There is no evidence of extended opportunities
learners who did not submit tasks due
to valid reason.
5. Accuracy of calculation of marks on Marks are accurately calculated on learners’ scripts
each learner’s task.

6. Incidence of lenient marking, global There is no sign of lenient marking and global marking
marking or unmarked questions but
marks awarded to learners (be
specific)
7. Evidence of feedback (to teachers, There is no evidence of feedback after marking
learners, DH) and its possible impact
on the improvement of SBA.
8. Performance analysis of each task is There is evidence of diagnostic analysis
done by the teacher
9. Any other comment on Marking. Marking is of acceptable standard
RECORDING
1. The use of SA SAMS working Correct SASAMS marksheets used and the correct patch
marksheets and the patch used.
2. Accuracy of transference of marks Learners’ marks are correctly transferred to the SASAMS
from learner evidence of work to the marksheets.
SASAMS marksheet.
3. Evidence of learners who missed There is no evidence of learners who missed SBA task.
SBA task is provided in the teacher
file.

LEARNER PERFORMANCE
1. The quality and standard of learner Learners’ responses to questions are of moderate standard.
responses to each question type.
2. The influence of standard of the The standard of the tasks have no influence to the
test on the performance of the performance of the learners.
learners.
3. Correlationbetween mark allocation There is correlation between mark allocation by the teacher
by the teacher and learner and learner responses.
responses
4. Do you think the style of marking No, the style of marking did not have impact on the
and recording may have had performance of learners.
impact on the performance of
learners? Elaborate
5. The learner performance in the task The learners’ performance is comparable to other tasks.
is comparable to performance in
other formal tasks (consult the
SASAMS working marksheets)

Questions which were not attempted/poorly answered by learners and possible

causes. (FOR COMMON TASKS only)
Poorly Nature of the Possible reasons Recommendations
answered challenge/Type of
questions question
SCHOOL BASED MODERATION
1. Evidence of pre- and post-
assessment moderation of the test?
Elaborate
2. Quality of moderation at each level.

Use of different colour pens.

3. Feedback provided to the teacher by
the Departmental Head/Teacher
Moderator/Subject Advisor?
4. Implementation of recommendations
suggested by the moderator at each
level.
5. Evidence of HISTORY of the task
provided.
6. Moderator signed off the SASAMS
working marksheet

COMPUTER GENERATED MARKSHEETS (For last phase of moderation)

1. Transfer of marks from the SA SAMS
working mark sheet to the copy of
computerized marksheet
2. Correct code awarded for blanks and
“0” mark on the marksheet
3. Copy of computerized marksheet
signed off by DH and Principal.

OVERALL IMPRESSION BY THE MODERATOR

Areas of Good Practice Challenges Recommendations
Educator must continue us
Marking is of acceptable standard previous question papers so th
and the marking guideline is Learner performance learners can get used to t
effectively utilized. standard of the fi
examinations
 Name of learners whose files were moderated (For circuit, district and provincial
moderation)

NO. NAME AND SURNAME TEACHER MARK MODERATED MARK

1. Nongalo Noloyiso 87/150 87/150
2. Moloi Kamogelo 67/150 66/150
3. Machacha Koketso 22/150 30/150
4. Rasakanya Sarah 16/150 16/150
5. Bamu Neo 55/150 55/150
6. Mkhwebane Angel 84/150 85/150

MODERATORS NAME SIGNATURES DATE

Moderator Mudau Ntakuseni
Senior Moderator
Chief Moderator