SQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of Assessment

SQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of AssessmentSQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of Assessment

Matthew McCullaghQuality Manager

Welcome

欢迎

Why are we here?Why are we here?

To introduce you to SQA’s New Approach to Quality Assurance

To help you understand the key changes to Quality Assurance process

To help you become familiar with:– The new Quality Assurance Criteria– The new Confidence Statements– How visits are planned, conducted and

reported

Thursday 6th September 2012Thursday 6th September 20129.00 Coffee and Registration

9.30 Introduction, New Approach to QA Overview, Aims and Objectives of Training Days

10.10 Preparation for Qualification Verification Activity, Attitudes and Behaviours, KPMs

11.00 Break

11.15 Preparation for Qualification Verification Activity,Attitudes and Behaviours

12.00 Planning for Qualification Verification Activity – the theory

12.30 Lunch

1.30 Conducting the Qualification Verification Visit – the theory

2.45 Break

3.00 Introducing the Quality Assurance Criteria

3.20 Quality Assurance Criteria Workshop

4.30 Close

Friday 7th September 2012Friday 7th September 2012

9.00 Coffee and Registration

9.30 Feedback: The Quality Assurance Criteria

11.15 Break

11.30 Decision Making

12.30 Lunch

1.30 Communicating Decisions

2.00 Theory of Completing Excel Reports/Action Plans

2.30 Break

2.45 Writing effective Verifier Reports

3.45 Case Study Assignment

4.00 Summary and Q & A

4.30 Close

SQA’s Approach to QASQA’s Approach to QA

SQA is moving to introducing a new approach to Quality Assurance of qualifications delivered in China

It is based on SQA’s

Principles of Quality Assurance:Open, fair and transparent Aimed at risk reductionProportionate Intelligence ledA shared responsibility Constantly reviewed and improved

What is the new approach to Quality Assurance

What is the new approach to Quality Assurance

SQA now operates a transparent, intelligence-led, risk based model for quality assurance of approved centres and potential centres delivering our HND qualifications in China.

Timeline of Implementation of New Approach in China

Timeline of Implementation of New Approach in China

September 2011

May 2012

September 2012

September 2012-2013

March 2012

New Quality CriteriaNew Quality Criteria

Five Categories: – Management of a centre– Resources– Candidate Support– Assessment & Verification– Records/Data Management

All signposted to four QA processes All pre-rated as High/Medium/Low impact All supported by possible sources of evidence

The New Approach to Quality Assurance: The Four Processes

The New Approach to Quality Assurance: The Four Processes

Systems Approval

Qualification Approval

Systems Verification

Qualification Verification

High/Medium/Low Impact CriteriaHigh/Medium/Low Impact Criteria

All criteria are important However, some are more important than others Those that are most important are rated as High

Impact criteria Those that are less important are rated as Low

Impact criteria In between these two are medium impact

criteria. Failure to meet a High Impact criteria will have a

greater impact on the outcome of the visit

Sufficiency of evidenceSufficiency of evidence

No Systems Verifier or Qualification Verifier can change the impact rating of a criteria.

For each criterion you verify, you must decide whether the centre has presented you with:– Sufficient evidence to meet the criterion– Some, but insufficient evidence to meet the

criterion– No evidence to meet the criterion

Good Practice and GuidanceGood Practice and Guidance

As part of the verification visit, you should identify good practice that is evident in the centre.

You should also give advice and guidance to help centre staff improve the delivery of our qualifications

This is a mandatory part of your role as a Qualification Verifier

Sufficiency of evidence Sufficiency of evidence

We will support you and help you to understand what sort of evidence centres can provide to meet each criterion

Once you have made your decision regarding the sufficiency of evidence, SQA staff will then calculate our level of confidence

This will depend on the impact level of the criteria and the sufficiency of the evidence presented

Introduction of Confidence StatementsIntroduction of Confidence StatementsIn relation to Qualification

VerificationConfidence Statement

In relation to Systems Verification

High level of confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group

High Level of Confidence

High level of confidence in the systems that support the maintenance of SQA standards within this centre

Broad confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group

Broad Confidence

Broad confidence in the systems that support the maintenance of SQA standards within this centre

Reasonable confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group, although moderate risks exist within the following categories:(insert appropriate category)(insert appropriate category)

Reasonable Confidence

Reasonable confidence in the systems that support the maintenance of SQA standards within this centre, although moderate risks exist within the following categories:(insert appropriate category)(insert appropriate category)

Minimal confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group as significant risks exist within the following categories:(insert appropriate category)(insert appropriate category)

Minimal Confidence

Minimal confidence in the systems that support the maintenance of SQA standards within this centre as significant risks exist within the following categories:(insert appropriate category)(insert appropriate category)

No confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group as severe risks exist within the following categories:(insert appropriate category)(insert appropriate category)

No Confidence

No confidence in the systems that support the maintenance of SQA standards within this centre as severe risks exist within the following categories:(insert appropriate category)(insert appropriate category)

How Confidence Statements are calculatedHow Confidence Statements are calculated

Confidence statements are given for the outcome of each Systems Verification and Qualification Verification visit for each of the categories of criteria verified

These are based on the sufficiency of the evidence provided to the you

A summary statement of confidence is also given, based on the confidence statements for each category

What if non-compliances are identified?

What if non-compliances are identified?

Where there is No evidence or insufficient evidence to meet a criterion, you must agree with centre staff, during the visit: – the action the centre needs to take in order to

become compliant. – The evidence they need to produce – Where to send this evidence– The date by which the action must be taken

What happens then?What happens then?

SQA will ask you to consider the evidence the centre sends us and ask you to consider whether it is Sufficient or insufficient.

Depending on the sufficiency of the evidence, the Confidence Statement will be re-calculated.

Sanctions Sanctions

If the outcome of a verification visit results in a Confidence Statement of Reasonable, Minimal or No Confidence, SQA staff may decide to place a sanction on a centre until our confidence increases to Broad or High.

Our confidence may decrease if a centre fails to meet action points agreed during a verification visit.

Sanctions will only be used where necessary.

SanctionsSanctionsIn relation to Qualification

VerificationConfidence Statement

In relation to Systems Verification

High Level of Confidence

Entry in Action Plan Broad Confidence

Entry in Action Plan

Suspension of specific qualification certification:by verification group by qualification Suspension of approval application by verification group Suspension of direct certification claim status:by verification group by qualification

Reasonable Confidence

Suspension of all existing qualification approval Suspension of centre certification Suspension of certification for all qualifications with assessed components Suspension of qualification approval application - whole centre

Suspension of specific qualification approval:by verification groupby qualification

Minimal Confidence

Withdrawal of all existing specific qualification approval

Withdrawal of specific qualification approval:by verification groupby qualification

No Confidence Withdrawal of centre approval

Benefits of new approach for centres

Benefits of new approach for centres

Open and transparent to all Clear guidance available to verifiers Proportionate response where issues are

identified Focused on Good Practice and improvement as

well as compliance

QuestionsQuestions

SQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of AssessmentSQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of Assessment

David PirnieLead Verifier

Welcome

欢迎

Qualification Verification Qualification Verification

The Qualification Verifier role activities

Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete verification report

Preparing for Qualification Verification




Being prepared Being prepared

“The best preparation for good work

tomorrow is to do good work today”.

Elbert Hubbard

http://www.famous-quotes.com/author.php?aid=3611



Before carrying out any activities, verifiers are

required to have a full understanding of their role

and responsibilities. This involves acquiring

knowledge and keeping it up to date.



Required knowledge – three key areas:

Knowledge of your subject area

Centre roles and centre responsibilities

Qualification Verification



Knowledge of your subject area:

Have a common interpretation of the Unit Standards including the Evidence Requirements for each unit you have been assigned to verify

Know how to access Arrangements Documents,

Instruments of Assessment and Marking Schemes to gain a full understanding of content



Knowledge of centres roles and responsibilities:

Centre Co-ordinators Assessors Internal verifiers



Knowledge of the Qualification Verifier role:

Role Profile Sources of support Verification policies and procedures Values

QIIPS:Quality, Integrity, Innovation, Partnership

& Service

QIIPS:Quality, Integrity, Innovation, Partnership

& Service

Sounds like:

“QUIPS” – a dictionary definition:

“A clever remark often prompted by the occasion”.

SQA Values SQA Values

Quality

Integrity

Innovation

Partnership

Service


Quality

As custodians of the standards we verify, we

continually strive to maintain consistent quality in

their assessment.


Integrity

We use open and honest communication with internal and external customers (centres), promoting transparency, and building trust with others.

We take a standardised approach to verification as laid down by SQA and agreed by consensus within our Qualification Verification team, even if our personal opinions may at times conflict.


Innovation

We view unfamiliar approaches to assessment and verification with an open mind, whilst ensuring quality is maintained.

We believe that creativity should be seen not as a threat to quality assurance but as an opportunity for improving upon existing practice.


Partnership

We understand that by working in partnership with SQA centres, we will achieve common goals of excellence and consistency in assessment.


Service

We maintain a professional approach with SQA centres at all times, regardless of the challenges we might face in carrying out our work.



More information on the preparation phase of

Qualification Verification can be found in the first

section of SQA’s New Approach to Quality

Assurance: Guidance on Visiting Verification For

HN Qualifications in China

Workshop

Workshop

Values Exercise

Planning for Qualification Verification

Planning for Qualification Verification



Planning Planning

“Failing to plan is planning to fail”.

Alan Lakein

http://www.famous-quotes.com/author.php?aid=4193

Visit Planning: Sampling Visit Planning: Sampling

SQA cannot always verify all HN Units, for all candidates, on every visit to a centre, therefore a sampling strategy has to be adopted. Purpose of sampling:

To establish that there is a common interpretation of the standards within each centre and that the assessment and verification systems allow valid, reliable and fair assessment decisions to be made.

Visit Planning: Applying a sampling frame

Visit Planning: Applying a sampling frame

SQA is responsible for systematically sampling on a percentre basis:

Selected Units Assessment decisions and practice Methods/Instruments of assessment Problematic/revised units Locations where assessment takes place Evidence of candidates across Units Documented evidence of policies/procedures

(implementation)

Visit Planning Visit Planning

SQA (China Office) agrees optimum date (s) for visiting verification. This is an agreement between SQA, each centre and each QV

SQA selects Units to be verified and communicates this to each centre (copying to SQA China Office)

Qualification Verifier contacts centre to confirm visit date(s) and travel arrangements

SQA (China Office) confirms to each QV, the centre(s) they should visit, the date of each visit, and the Units they should verify

New Approach to Quality AssuranceNew Approach to Quality Assurance

Welcome Back

欢迎回来

Carry out Qualification Verification Carry out Qualification Verification



Carry out Qualification VerificationCarry out Qualification Verification

Discussion point

Consider the verification activities you perform

from the time of arrival until the end of the visit.

Contribute to the discussion by letting us know

what kind of techniques/approaches you have

used that you have found particularly beneficial.

Carry out the visit Carry out the visit

Prepare yourself for the visit

Agree agenda and running order of visit

Conduct sampling activities

Judge the sufficiency of evidence

Conduct sampling activitiesConduct sampling activities

Complete Units (all Outcomes complete) Incomplete Units (some Outcomes complete) Evidence not yet internally verified Assessment/verification decisions Assessment and verification practice Interviews with assessors/verifiers/candidates Referencing of evidence to standards

Introducing the Quality CriteriaIntroducing the Quality Criteria

Introducing the New Approach to Quality

Assurance Criteria

Introducing the Qualification Verification Guidance

Introducing the Quality CriteriaIntroducing the Quality Criteria

In your groups, discuss and familiarise yourselves with the criteria you have been allocated.

Formulate a list of summary points on flip chart paper to help you explain the purpose of each criterion to your colleague verifiers. The summary should also include possible sources of evidence.

In formulating your points, you are asked to use SQA’s New Approach to Quality Assurance: Guidance on Visiting Verification for HND Qualifications in China as your information source.

Timings:

30 minutes discussion and research

20 minutes flip-charting your points

Please appoint a spokesperson(s) to present the flip-charted points which will be presented in the first session tomorrow morning.

Each group will be assigned a facilitator to answer any questions/queries you may have.

QuestionsQuestions

The New Approach to Quality Assurance


Welcome Back

欢迎回来



Introducing the the new approach to quality assurance criteria

feedback

Criteria 4.2Criteria 4.2

4.2The centre must provide documented evidence to ensure that assessments are valid, reliable, equitable and fair.

Signed pre-delivery checklist.Standardisation meeting minutes, internal audit, review records


2.3

Records must be maintained to provide evidence that the centre has sufficient competent staff who have the necessary qualifications, occupational experience and understanding to support the assessment and internal verification of qualifications being offered in the centre.

CVs/staff info sheets, CPD records, copies of relevant certificates, list of current assessors and internal verifiers, changes to the deployment of assessors/internal verifiers


4.8

Outcomes of External quality assurance must be disseminated to appropriate staff and any action points must be monitored against agreed timescales.

Signed distribution list, corrective action log/report, minutes of meetings


3.2

Candidates' development needs and prior achievements (where appropriate) must be matched against the requirements of the award. These must then be related to agreed personal action/training plans.

APL evidence, skills profile, training needs analysis, assessment plans, reviews


4.6

The centre must comply with requests for access to premises, records, information, candidates and staff for the purpose of external quality assurance.

Documented procedure for handling QA visits, roles and responsibilities, site selection checklists, permission for SQA QA representatives to obtain access


2.7

There must be evidence of initial and on-going reviews of accommodation, equipment and reference, learning and assessment materials.

Current Health & Safety certificatesitinerary checklists, procurement records, library contents, system for supporting e-assessmentRecords of review


4.3

Evidence of candidates' work must be accurately and consistently judged by assessors against SQA's requirements.

Assessor reports, records of achievement, standardisation meeting minutes, IV reports, Qualification Verification reports


4.1

The centre's documented assessment and verification procedures must be implemented and the subsequent assessment/verification practices reviewed, the results of which must be recorded and actioned.

Minutes of assessor/internal verifier meetings, internal audit, review records


4.7Candidate evidence must be retained in line with SQA requirements.

Candidate evidence, documented retention policy


4.5The centre must take steps to ensure that assessment evidence is the candidate's own work.

Candidate disclaimer, Candidate and staff induction materials: assessor/IV roles and responsibilities


5.6

Comments/queries about the qualification specification, assessment guidance, qualification verification or related SQA matters must be resolved and recorded.

Correspondence file, emails, standardisation meeting minutes, notes of action points and resolution





Making verification decisions Making verification decisions

Deciding on the sufficiency of evidence can be likened to making an assessment decision

Making an assessment decision takes account of the overall strength of the evidence provided

One source of evidence will be sufficient at times. At other times, a number of sources will have to be considered, dependent on each centre’s approach to meeting quality assurance requirements and to some extent the structure of each criterion

Candidate’s development needs and prior achievements (where appropriate) must be matched against the requirements of the award. These must then be related to an agreed personal action/training plans.

The following are examples only, and do not constitute a

complete list of all possible types of evidence to support the

above criterion. APL/RPL/APA evidenceInitial/diagnostic/formative assessment, skills profiles, training needs

analysesPersonal development/action plans, competence reviews, learner

agreement/contracts, assessment plans

One evidence source could be sufficient in some cases for this criterion:

One evidence source could be sufficient in some cases for this criterion:

The documented assessment and verification procedures must be implemented and the subsequent assessment/verification practices reviewed, the results of which must be recorded and actioned.

The following are examples only, and do not constitute a complete list

of all possible types of evidence to support the above criterion.

Records of assessment Records of internal verification/audits, monitoring of assessor/verifier

practice Reviews of assessment and verification practices

More than one evidence source is likely to be considered for this criterion:

More than one evidence source is likely to be considered for this criterion:

The main guiding principles for making verification decisions The main guiding principles for making verification decisions

Decisions should be based:

on the sufficiency of evidence relating to each criterion

only on the criteria provided

The evidence examples given in the guidance document are just that. They are not a shopping list of evidence sources that all centres must have.

Own standard

s

Own standard

s

Attitude of centre staff

Attitude of centre staff

Own

mindset (closed)

Own

mindset (closed)

Our confide

-ence

Our confide

-ence

Own

experience

Own

experience

Previous centre perform-ance

Previous centre perform-ance

Awareness of things that could influence on our decisions Awareness of things that could influence on our decisions

Insufficient/no evidence = action points

Insufficient/no evidence = action points

Sufficient evidence - this means that the centre has provided evidence that fully meets the criterion (no action points required)

No evidence – this means that the centre has not provided any evidence in support of the criterion (action points required)

Insufficient evidence – this means the centre can provide some evidence in support of the criterion (action points required)

Agreeing action points Agreeing action points

Is there anything wrong with this action point?

“You should submit evidence of having

disseminated the results of Qualification

verification visits to relevant staff”

Action points should be SMART Action points should be SMART

Specific: Centres should be clear in terms of the action they need to take to close-off the action point.

Measurable: How will SQA or the centre know that the action point has been met, what will be the measure of success?

Achievable: The centre must have sufficient time in which to achieve the agreed action. Please factor in time it takes for SQA to receive, process and edit the report and send it to the centre.

Relevant: The action must directly relate to the criterion Time bound: Agree a specific and realistic.

date for the action to be completed by.

Questions

New Approach to Quality AssuranceNew Approach to Quality Assurance

Welcome Back

欢迎回来

The stages of Qualification Verification



The stages of communicating verification decisions

The stages of communicating verification decisions

Plan to deliver balanced feedback

Explain your verification decisions

Plan to deliver balanced feedback Plan to deliver balanced feedback

Plan to include: Good practice Recommendations Action points (where appropriate)

Consider: Location Order of feedback and emphasis Words and tone

Explaining your verification decisions

Explaining your verification decisions

Where action points are given, ensure you:

have explored all possible evidence sources gather all information to support your decisions can justify your decisions - clearly relating them

to criteria requirements Give the centre an opportunity to ask questions and

clarify points

Communicating Decisions Communicating Decisions

Role play exercise:

David as a Qualification Verifier feeding back at the end of a Qualification Verification visit to Matthew who is the SQA Co-ordinator.

Please note your observations of the following on your observation sheet:

The content of the Feedback Attitudes and behaviours of the Qualification Verifier and the SQA Co-ordinator Any possible improvements




The stages of completing the Qualification Verification Report

The stages of completing the Qualification Verification Report

Ensure report content matches your feedback

Justify your verification decisions

Write clear action points

Check report prior to submitting to SQA

The Qualification Verification Visit Report

The Qualification Verification Visit Report

The Criteria PagesThe Criteria Pages

The Required Action LogThe Required Action Log

The Summary Worksheet The Summary Worksheet

Recommendations and Good Practice Worksheet

Recommendations and Good Practice Worksheet

Writing Effective Verifier Reports Writing Effective Verifier Reports

SMART action points

Report writing guidance available – www.sqa.org.uk/files ccc/Writing for SQA part

A.pdf

Write report as soon after visit as possible

Checking content thoroughly

Assignment: Report WritingAssignment: Report Writing

Assignment will be emailed to you by Thursday 20th September.

You will be asked to: Review a Case Study Complete a Qualification Verification Visit Report Return to [email protected] by Friday 12th October

Assignment: Report WritingAssignment: Report Writing

SQA will provide you with:

Guidance document on how to complete a qualification verification visit report

Feedback on each report to provide support

byFriday 26th October 2012

SummarySummary

To introduce you to SQA’s New Approach to Quality Assurance

To help you understand the key changes to Quality Assurance process

To help you become familiar with:– The new Quality Assurance Criteria– The new Confidence Statements– How visits are planned, conducted and

reported

QuestionsQuestions