SAS WFD QMS

RESTRICTED A-13

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
 Currency.

Comments:
 Sufficiency.

Comments:
 Fairness.

Comments:
 Consistency.

Comments:

20. Does the following evidence provided
substantiate the assessment judgments made by the
assessor?

Assignments in relation to the specific outcomes of
Unit Standard?

Comments:

Assignments in relation to the assessment criteria
of the unit standard?

Comments:

The essential embedded knowledge is included in
the assessment strategy?

Comments:

The critical cross-field outcomes?

Comments:

21. Did the assessor make sound judgments based
on the learner evidence?

Comments:
22. Did the assessor record his/her judgments
sufficiently for providing meaningful feedback,
moderation opportunity and possible appeals?

Comments:

Moderarion Plan Subject: ___________________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S No: ____________________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED A-14

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
23. Does the feedback to the learner focus on the
quality and sufficiency of the candidate’s performance in
relation to the agreed outcomes and criteria?

Comments:
24. Is the type and manner of giving feedback
constructive?

Comments:

25. Is the assessment decision valid in relation to
the assessment criteria?

Comments:

26. Is the assessment decision fair towards the
learner and the DoD?

Comments:

DECLARATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF PLAN
We hereby declare that I agree/disagree with the moderation plan.

Assessor Signature Assessor No Date

Moderator Signature Moderator No Date

Moderarion Plan Subject: ___________________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S No: ____________________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED B-1

APPENDIX B
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
PRE-MODERATION BRIEFING AGENDA

PURPOSE OF PRE-MODERATION BRIEFING

The purpose of the pre-moderation meeting is to ensure that all the documentation for
moderation has been received and to prepare the assessor for the moderation.

LEARNING PROGRAMME DETAIL Venue:
Programme Name:
Unit Standard Title:
Unit Standard Number:
NQF Level:
Credits:
Date of Training:
Name of Training Commander:
Contact Detail of Training Commander:

PRE-MODERATION DETAIL
Date and Time:
Venue:
Attendees:

MODERATOR’S PARTICULARS
Name in Full:
Moderator Number:
Contact Number(s):
E-mail Address:
Postal Address: SAS WINGFIELD, Private Bag X1, Goodwood, 7490

Pre-Moderation Briefing Agenda ) Subject: ________________________
U/S: _________
Programme: _________________________
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED B-2

ASSESSOR’S PARTICULARS
Name of Assessor:
Assessor Number:
Contact Detail of Assessor:
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

PRE-MODERATION BRIEFING AGENDA

Date:
Time:
Venue:

POINT AGENDA POINTS COMMENTS
Discussion about the RESPONSIBILITY To ensure that the
training programme Assessor/ Moderator formative and summative
assessments is
Documentation needed for Assessor/Moderator scheduled in the training
moderation (Aspects) programme and the
training program is
Preparation of learner Assessor/Moderator adequately
evidence batches for Assessor/Moderator to
moderation discuss if all documents
needed is in place.
Special learner needs that Assessor/Moderator When POE must be
need to be addressed submitted it must discuss
the percentage that must
Constraints that need to Assessor/Moderator be submitted for
be addressed moderation.
The assessor must
Feedback dates Assessor/Moderator determine if any of the
assessor, moderation learner will require
forum special needs to be pre-
active and ensure
fairness
To ensure that the time
provided for the module
is sufficient and that
facilities and resources is
available
Assessor/Moderator to
discuss what dates
feedback be provided
and assessor/moderation
forum will take place

Pre-Moderation Briefing Agenda ) Subject: ________________________
U/S: _________
Programme: _________________________
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED B-3
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA Date

Assessor Signature Assessor No

Moderator Signature Moderator No Date

Pre-Moderation Briefing Agenda ) Subject: ________________________
U/S: _________
Programme: _________________________
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED C-1

APPENDIX C
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
PRE-MODERATION BRIEFING MINUTES

LEARNING PROGRAMME DETAIL Venue:
Programme Name:
Unit Standard Title:
Unit Standard Number:
NQF Level:
Credits:
Date of Training:
Name of Training Commander:
Contact Detail of Training Commander:

PRE-MODERATION DETAIL
Date and Time:
Venue:
Attendees:

MODERATOR’S PARTICULARS
Name in Full:
Moderator Number:
Contact Number(s):
E-mail Address:
Postal Address: SAS WINGFIELD, Private Bag X1, Goodwood, 7459

Pre-Moderation Briefing Minutes Subject: ___________
Programme: ____________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED C-2

ASSESSOR’S PARTICULARS
Name of Assessor:
Assessor Number:
Contact Detail of Assessor:
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

PRE-MODERATION BRIEFING MINUTES

Date:
Time:
Venue:

POINT DISCUSSION POINTS
Discussion about DISCUSSION
the training
programme Assessors ensure that all assessment dates has been captured in
the training programme and that the time scheduled for the
Documentation module will be sufficient. The LO will start on ___________ and
needed for finish on ______________.
moderation Documents submitted for review as indicated as in the
(Aspects) agenda plus assessments, assessment feedback,
assessment review, assessment report and completed
Preparation of POE’s to be submitted 3 days after assessment to the
learner evidence moderator. The moderator will do then the sampling as per
batches for SAS WINGFIELD Moderators’ policy.
moderation Assessor to submit POE once all learning assignments and
Special learner assessment was captured in the POE and accordingly to
needs that need to SAS WINGFIELD Moderators’ policy 10% or a minimum of 4.
be addressed
Constraints that Assessor to determine if there was any the learners with special
need to be needs before the start of the LO to be pro-active to ensure the
addressed assessment is fair. Feedback must be provided

Feedback dates It was confirmed that the time scheduled for the LO is sufficient
assessor, and that all the assessment will take place as scheduled. No
moderation forum parades will take place that will have an effect on the training
program. All the financial resources, facilities and equipment is in
place.
Feedback dates from assessor and moderation forum was
establish and will take place 1 week (_________________) after
the module completed.

Pre-Moderation Briefing Minutes Subject: ___________
Programme: ____________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED C-3
ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING

Assessor Signature Assessor No Date

Moderator Signature Moderator No Date

Pre-Moderation Briefing Minutes Subject: ___________
Programme: ____________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED D-1

APPENDIX D
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
MODERATION CONTROL SHEET

LEARNING PROGRAMME DETAIL Venue:
Programme Name:
Unit Standard Title:
Unit Standard Number:
NQF Level:
Credits:
Date of Training:
Name of Training Commander:
Contact Detail of Training Commander:

MODERATION DETAIL
Number of Learners:
Number of Assignments/Learner Evidence to be Moderated:
Date of Moderation:
Venue for Moderation:

MODERATOR’S PARTICULARS

Name in Full:
Moderator Number:
Contact Number(s):
E-mail Address:
Postal Address: SAS WINGFIELD, Private Bag X1, Goodwood, 7459

Moderation Control Sheet Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED D-2

ASSESSOR’S PARTICULARS Rank Name Result
Name of Assessor: Comp/NYC
Assessor Number:
Contact Detail of Assessor:

E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

BATCH

Learner’s Evidence included in the batch:

Ser No Civilian ID No Force No

Samples of Batch No: Force No Rank Name Result
Ser No Civilian ID No Comp/NYC

Moderator’s findings wrt the assessments: Learners knowledge was tested theoretical by
means of formative and a summative assessment. All the outcomes of the unit standard was
covered and achieved by the learners. The assessor must ensure that the learners comply
with the assessment instruction (formative) and the learners must describe and explain and
not refer to the learner guide. This eliminates the assessment principle of sufficiency where
the rule of “the more the best”, must be applied. I uphold the judgement of the assessor.

Moderation Control Sheet Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED D-3
Date
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Date

Assessor Signature Assessor No

Moderator Signature Moderator No

Moderation Control Sheet Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED E-1

APPENDIX E
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
MODERATION ASPECTS

ASPECTS TO DOCUMENTS TO BE RECEIVED EVIDENCE
BE
PROVIDED FOR YES NO
MODERATED
MODERATION
Assessment
Design ASSESSMENT DESIGN

Assessment Guide Y Kept by the assessor. Was review during the
pre-moderation meeting. On review it was
found that the learners will be guided to prepare
themselves to be assessed and what outcomes
they must achieve.

Learner Manual .

Y Kept by the assessor. The learner manual was
provided by the assessor on request. On
review it was found that the learner manual
covers the unit standard and that all the
outcomes are covered in the learner manual.

Unit Standard Y POE (page nr 13). Unit standard in date until 26
Feb 2010. All outcomes correlate with the

assessment instrument

Assessment Instruments Y POE (Summative assessment page 36 &
Formative workbook page 52). Learner’s
knowledge and understanding was theoretical
tested and all outcomes were covered by the
assessments. Learners should be able to reflect
their knowledge as per unit standard.

Planning for Assessment Policy ASSESSMENT PROCESS
Assessment Assessment Plan
Y Kept by the assessor. Document was reviewed
during the pre-moderation meeting and was
found sufficient. The assessment policy
addresses all aspect of the assessment process.

Y POE (page 26). Assessment plan indicate to the
learner what he will be assessed on, how he will
be assessed, and when he will be assessed on.
Assessment plan is completed and signed by
responsible parties. The assessment plan was
signed on the day of the assessment therefore
the process would not be fair to the learner.

Moderation Aspects Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED E-2

ASPECTS TO DOCUMENTS TO BE RECEIVED EVIDENCE
BE PROVIDED FOR YES NO
MODERATION POE (page 20) Learner was explain the whole
MODERATED Pre-assessment Y assessment procedure, appeals procedure, how
Learner Interview to appeal, if he has special needs, what
Preparation for Y instruments will be used the moderators findings
the Assessment Y is that the whole pre-assessment meeting is
transparent and open. Document was signed by
Minutes of Pre- Y both parties, but it will not be fair as it was signed
assessment Meeting on the same day of assessment.
Y Assessors File (Section 1). Pre-assessment
Assessor-Learner Y meeting is not properly recorded and incomplete
Agreement therefore it would not be sufficient. The assessor
must address the short comings and submit it
Letter of Understanding within 2 days to be re-moderated.
of Assignment POE (page 31) All the questions pertaining the
assessor-learner agreement was discuss with the
Review of the Review of Assessment leaner and was signed by all parties concerned,
Assessment Plan Review Template however the assessor-learner agreement was
Plan not found sufficient as the comments column is
Conduct of the Assessment not completed and it was signed on the day of
Assessment Instruments assessment. Assessor must pay attention to
detail to ensure the whole process is transparent
and authentic.
POE (page 34). Letter of understanding is signed
by the learner where he undertakes to submit his
POE against a date determined by the assessor
and that the work will be his own. Short comings
to be addressed by the assessor is that
mentioned document should be signed in
advanced and nit of the day that the learner must
submit his POE
Assessments file (Appendix C-1). The template
was moderated and covers all aspect to make it
fair and transparent.
Assessments file (Section 6) Assessment
instruments were moderated during the pre-
assessment meeting. The assessment
instruments covered all outcomes of the unit
standard and are a self assessment and a
theoretical summative assessment.

Moderation Aspects Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED E-3

ASPECTS TO DOCUMENTS TO BE RECEIVED EVIDENCE
BE
PROVIDED FOR YES NO
MODERATED
MODERATION

Evidence Collected in the Learner Portfolio

Validity Y Assessment File (Section 6 & 10)

Comment: Outcomes to Y POE (page 51 & 53 to 88)
be achieved was clearly
stated in the assessment
guide. Appropriate
method and assessment
instrument was used and
selected.
Authenticity

Comment: The Y POE (page 13 to 18)
authenticity can be
established in the answer
sheet and
workbook(formative and
summative assessments)
where member completes
the documents in his own
handwriting.

Currency

Comment: The currency N POE (53 to 88)
can be determined by the
Unit standard that is in
date (registration end
date 2011-02-06).
Sufficiency

Comment: When learner
completed the workbook
(formative assessment),
he did completes all the
answers as instructed by
the workbook. Learner
was suppose to explain in
his own words, but
referred to the learner
manual. This leaves the
question if enough
evidence of the right
quality was produced.
The rule of “the more the
better’ was not applied.

Moderation Aspects Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED E-4

ASPECTS TO DOCUMENTS TO BE RECEIVED EVIDENCE
BE PROVIDED FOR YES NO
MODERATION
MODERATED Assessment feedback Y POE (page 2 to6)
Feedback to form –completed
Learner template

Comment: Assessment Y POE (page 2 to6)
feedback (product
evaluation mark sheet)
was completed and was
signed by the assessor.
Comment were not
provided by the
assessor.

Assessment Feedback
Minutes

Assessment Comment: Learner did Y Assessors file (Section 7)
Decision not sign the document
and therefore the
Assessment assumption that it was
Management not discuss with the
learner. Comments were
not provided by the
assessor.

Results records

Comment: All the N
learners’ results were
recorded. Document was
signed by both parties
and is neatly recorded.
Assessment Review

Comment: No evidence
wrt assessment review
could be find in the
assessment file or POE

Moderation Aspects Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED E-5

ASPECTS TO DOCUMENTS TO BE RECEIVED EVIDENCE
BE
PROVIDED FOR YES NO
MODERATED
MODERATION
Quality
QUALITY OF ASSESSMENT

Fair Y POE (13 to 18,37 to 50 and 53 to 88)

Comment: The Y POE (13 to 18,37 to 50 and 53 to 88)
assessment process
and was fair and clear to
all the learners. All
questions in the
assessment tools relates
to the unit standard
which is an essential
requirement for an
officer to be deployed
international.

Valid

Comment: Appropriate Y POE (13 to 18, 37 to 50 and 53 to 88)
method (theory) was
used to assess learners
as this test the learner’s
knowledge of the unit
standard which is
applicable to officers in
the SANDF.

Reliable

Comment: The Y POE (13 to 18, 37 to 50 and 53 to 88)
assessment method is
reliable and consistent,
Method used is to
determine is to cover all
the outcomes of the unit
standard.

Practicability

Comment: It is
practicable as the junior
officer will be held
responsible for the
conduct of their
subordinates during
armed conflict.

Moderation Aspects Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED F-1

APPENDIX F
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
MODERATION CHECKLIST

ASSESSMENT PLANNING

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
Assessment
1. Did the assessor plan according to the SAS Y File
(Section12)
WINGFIELD policy on assessment?
POE (page
Comments: Document was reviewed during the pre- Y 26).
moderation meeting and was found sufficient. The
assessment policy addresses all aspect of the assessment
process.
2. Did the assessor utilise an assessment plan/guide
for conducting the assessment?

Comments: Assessment plan indicate to the learner what Y POE (page
he will be assessed on, how he will be assessed, and when 35)
he will be assessed on. Assessment plan is completed and
signed by responsible parties.
3. Reference to the Pre-briefing for the learning
programme:

Comments: Letter of understanding is signed by the learner
where he undertakes to submit his POE against a date
determined by the assessor and that the work will be his
own and that he did receive a copy of the training program.

LEARNER PREPARATION FOR THE ASSESSMENT

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
4. Was the learner briefed before the assessment? Y POE (page 20
& 32)
Comments: Learner was explain the whole assessment Y
procedure, appeals procedure, how to appeal, if he has POE (page
special needs, what instruments will be used the 26).
moderators findings is that the whole pre-assessment
meeting is transparent and open.
5. Did the learner receive an assessment plan?

Comments: Assessment plan indicate to the learner what
he will be assessed on, how he will be assessed, and when
he will be assessed on. Assessment plan is completed and
signed by responsible parties.

Moderation Criteria Subject: LOAC________
Programme: _____________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED F-2

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
6. Did the learner receive an assessment guide that Y POE (page
included the policies and procedures for the assessment 32)
before the assessment?

Comments: No assessment guide is on the assessors file, Y POE (page 20
but it was reviewed during the pre-moderation meeting. On and 32)
review it was found that the learners will be guided to
prepare themselves to be assessed and what outcomes
they must achieve. Learner indicates on learner-assessor
agreement that he did receive an assessor’s guide, but is
not included in the POE

7. Did the learner receive a briefing on the appeals
process before the assessment?

Comments: Learner was explained the whole assessment POE (page 21
procedure, appeals procedure, and how to appeal. During and 32)
the learner-assessor agreement and pre-assessment
meeting
8. Were the learner’s special needs identified and
addressed before the assessment?

Comments: Learner was explained the whole assessment POE (page 22
procedure as well as if the learner will require special and 32)
needs. During the learner-assessor agreement and pre-
assessment meeting
9. Was opportunity given to the learner to voice
opinions that would contribute to a valid assessment?

Comments: After pre-assessment meeting learner had an POE (page
opportunity to raise his opinion and it was recorded that he 33)
was “happy” with the proceedings. During the learner-
assessor agreement and pre-assessment meeting
10. Did the learner sign the Assessor-Learner
Agreement?

Comments: The assessor-learner agreement was signed
on 19 May 10 by the learner

CONDUCT THE ASSESSMENT

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
11. Did the assessor ensure that the required physical
and human resources were available and ready for use
during the assessment?

Comments:

Moderation Criteria Subject: LOAC________
Programme: _____________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED F-3

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
POE (page 27
12. Did the assessor conduct the assessment according Y to 30)

to the assessment guide/plan?

Comments: In the assessment plan the learner was Y POE (page
informed against what outcomes he will be assessed, what 51)
assessment instruments will be used and when he will be
assessed.
13. Was the assessor flexible according to the situation
without compromising the validity, authenticity and fairness
of the assessment?

Comments: The method used did not allow the assessor to
be flexible as 3 possible answers was given on the
assessment instrument and the learner had to choose
which one was the correct answer.

FEEDBACK TO LEARNER

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
POE (pages 2
14. Was feedback given to the learner in accordance Y to 6)

with the policies, SOP and confidentiality requirements?

Comments: Feedback was given on the product evaluation Y POE (pages 2
mark sheet. It was indicated to each learner and all to 6)
outcomes were covered ito the unit standard. LS O Block Assessment
did not sign his feedback form. Template should be marked file (Section 7)
“confidential when completed”.
15. Was feedback given within the agreed timeframes?

Comments: Feedback was given on the product evaluation
mark sheet. Feedback was provided to the learners on the
same day when they have done the assessment. Formative
assessment was also assessed by the assessor.

ASSESSMENT DECISION

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
16. Does the assessment review provide sufficient Y POE (pages 2
information for the moderator to accept the assessment to 6)
decision made by the assessor?

Comments: Learners achieved the pass mark and achieved
all outcomes but there is a lack of comment on the mark
sheet and there is no collective feedback given by the
learners,

Moderation Criteria Subject: LOAC________
Programme: _____________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED F-4

ASSESSMENT MANAGEMENT

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE

17. Are the assessment results recorded on the Y POE (pages 2
appropriate forms as detailed in the Assessment Policy? to 6)
Assessment
Comments: Recorded on the product evaluation mark sheet file (Section 7)
as well as SP02 was completed to be submitted to
SASETA..
18. Are all the relevant assessment forms clearly
identifiable and fully completed?

Comments:

QUALITY OF ASSESSMENT

Name of candidate: ______________________________________

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE

19. Did the assessor apply the principles of

assessment and evidence namely:

 Validity. Y POE (page 41 of
summative
Comments: Outcomes to be assessed are clearly assessment and
stated and appropriate assessment method was 67 of formative
used. Example of this is specific outcome 3, assessment and
assessment criteria 1 unit standard
page 15)
 Authenticity. Y POE (page 46 of
summative
Comments: Principles of assessment are realistic assessment and
and learners learned what weapons are allowed to 70 of formative
be used in arm conflict. assessment and
unit standard
 Currency. Y page 15)
POE (pages 2 to
Comments: Assessment instrument used cover all Y 6, 53 to 88 and
the outcomes of the unit standard unit standard is in unit standard
date and end date of registration is 2011-02-06. pages 13 to 18))
That can also verified by the above two principles of
validity and authenticity. POE (pages 46 to
47 of summative
 Sufficiency. assessment and
63 to 65 of
Comments: Referring to pages in the evidence formative
column it can clearly be stated that the enough assessment and
evidence of the right quality has been collected to unit standard
determine whether the learner was found competent page 15 specific
against is specific outcome. The evidence provided outcome 2)
was the trend through the whole assessment
instruments used.

Moderation Criteria Subject: LOAC________
Programme: _____________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED F-5

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
 Fairness. Y POE

Comments: No feedback of unfairness was Y POE (page 37 to
recorded by any of the learners POE that was 88)
moderated.

 Consistency.

Comments: The method that the assessor/designer
designed the assessor instruments, did nt allow the
assessor to be inconsistent, therefore it can be
stated that consistency can be declared by the
moderator.

20. Does the following evidence provided Y POE (pages 2 to
substantiate the assessment judgments made by the 6 and 53 to 88)
assessor?

Assignments in relation to the specific outcomes of
Unit Standard?

Comments: The assignment completed by the
learner was coupled to all the outcomes, however
the assessor must informed the learners to put it in
their own words as per assignment instructions and
not referring to the answer in the learning manual.

Assignments in relation to the assessment criteria Y POE (pages 53 to
of the unit standard? 88)

Comments: Assignments in relation to the
assessment criteria of the unit standard has been
achieved, however the assessor must informed the
learner to put it in their own words as per
assignment instructions and not referring to the
answers in the learning manual

The essential embedded knowledge is included in
the assessment strategy?

Comments:

The critical cross-field outcomes?

Comments:

Moderation Criteria Subject: LOAC________
Programme: _____________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED F-6

CHECKPOINTS YES NO EVIDENCE
POE (pages 2 to
21. Did the assessor make sound judgments based Y 6 and 53 to 88)

on the learner evidence?

Comments: Assessor did make sound judgement as the N POE (pages 2 to
learner has achieved all the outcomes as reflected, 6)
however the assessor must informed the learners to put
it in their own words as per assignment instructions and
not referring to the answers in the learning manual.

22. Did the assessor record his/her judgments
sufficiently for providing meaningful feedback,
moderation opportunity and possible appeals?

Comments: Learner has been given feedback on the N POE (pages 2 to
outcome but nothing has been recorded to ensure good 6) Assessment
ETD practices. File (Section 7)
23. Does the feedback to the learner focus on the
quality and sufficiency of the candidate’s performance in
relation to the agreed outcomes and criteria?

Comments: Learner has been given feedback on the N POE (pages 2 to
outcome but nothing has been recorded to ensure good 7) Assessment
ETD practices. File (Section 7)
24. Is the type and manner of giving feedback
constructive?

Comments: Learner has been given feedback on the
outcome but nothing has been recorded to ensure good
ETD practices.

25. Is the assessment decision valid in relation to Y POE (pages 2 to
the assessment criteria? 6)

Comments: All the assessment criteria’s were achieved,
therefore the assessment decision is valid

26. Is the assessment decision fair towards the Y POE (pages 2 to
learner and the DoD? 7) Assessment
File (Section 7)
Comments: It is a fair decision as the learner has
achieved all the outcomes as reflected in the unit
standard, and it will also be fair towards the DOD as it is
stated in the unit standard that once a learners is found
competent against the unit standard he/she will be able
to assume responsibilities successfully and contribute to
the conduct of operations at a tactical level in a manner
consistent with the requirements of international
humanitarian law.

Moderation Criteria Subject: LOAC________
Programme: _____________________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED G-1

APPENDIX G
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
MODERATOR/ASSESSOR COMMUNICATION CONTROL SHEET

LEARNING PROGRAMME DETAIL

Programme Name:

Unit Standard Title:

Unit Standard Number:

NQF Level:

Credits:

Date of Training: Venue:

Name of Training Commander:

Contact Detail of Training Commander:

MODERATION DETAIL
Number of Learners:
Number of Assignments/Learner Evidence to be Moderated:
Date of Moderation:
Venue for Moderation:

MODERATOR’S PARTICULARS
Name in Full:
Moderator Number:
Contact Number(s):
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

ASSESSOR’S PARTICULARS
Name of Assessor:
Assessor Number:
Contact Detail of Assessor:
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

Communication Control Sheet Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRIC

Ser Date & Communication Aspect Communica
Moderator and Ass
No Time Topic

Communication Control Sheet
Programme: ___________________

RESTR

CTED G-2

ated by Outcome of Follow Signature Signature
sessor Communication up Moderator Assessor

Needed

Subject: ___________
U/S: __________

RICTED

RESTRICTED H-1

APPENDIX H
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
MODERATION REPORT

LEARNING PROGRAMME DETAIL

Programme Name:

Unit Standard Title:

Unit Standard Number:

NQF Level:

Credits:

Date of Training: Venue:

Name of Training Commander:

Contact Detail of Training Commander:

MODERATION DETAIL
Number of Learners:
Number of assignments/learner evidence to be moderated:
Date of Moderation:
Venue for Moderation:

MODERATOR’S PARTICULARS
Name in Full:
Moderator Number:
Contact Number(s):
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

Moderation Report Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED H-2

ASSESSOR’S PARTICULARS
Name of Assessor:
Assessor Number:
Contact Detail of Assessor:
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

ASSESSMENT DESIGN

1. Has the assessment design been moderated by the Design Team?

YES NO

2. If yes, provide the following:

Evaluation File Designer(s): Evaluation
Date: Reference: Team/ Moderator:

3. Additional notes from the moderator, where applicable, regarding:

a. Appropriateness of Assessment Instruments
Moderators Comments:

b. Relevance of Assessment Instrument(s)
Moderators Comments:

c. Sufficiency of Time Allocated to Learner for Gathering and
Presenting Evidence
Moderators Comments:

d. The relationship between Learning Programme Delivery, Unit
Standard, Programme Content and Assessment
Moderators Comments:

Moderation Report Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED H-3

e. Concurrence between Grading Design and Instrument Design
Moderators Comments:

f. Applicability of the Learner Assessment Guide
Moderators Comments:

g. Provisioning for Special Needs
Moderators Comments:

h. Implementation/Feasibility of Assessment
Moderators Comments:

MODERATION CRITERIA

COPY AND PASTE THE ENTIRE CONTENT OF THE MODERATION TOOL (APP G)
THAT YOU COMPLETED IN THIS SPACE.
Notes on the Assessment Process:

INTEGRATION OF MODERATION FOR THE BATCH:

27. In comparing the results from the batch, did the assessor perform consistently
according the principles of assessment?
Moderators Comments:
28. Feedback to the assessor in terms of strengths in his/her assessment:
Moderators Comments:
29. Feedback to assessor in terms of areas for improvement:
Moderators Comments:
30. Moderation’s Decision
Comments by Moderator:
Concluding Note:

Moderation Report Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED H-4
ACCEPTANCE OF THE MODERATION REPORT

Assessor Signature Assessor No Date

Moderator Signature Moderator No Date

Moderation Report Subject: ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED I-1

APPENDIX I
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
MODERATION REVIEW REPORT

LEARNING PROGRAMME DETAIL

Programme Name:

Unit Standard Title:

Unit Standard Number:

NQF Level:

Credits:

Date of Training: Venue:

Name of Training Commander:

Contact Detail of Training Commander :

MODERATION DETAIL
Number of Learners:
Number of assignments/learner evidence to be moderated:
Date of Moderation:
Venue for Moderation:

MODERATOR’S PARTICULARS

Name in Full:
Moderator Number:
Contact Number(s):
E-mail Address:
Postal Address:

Moderation Review Report Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED I-2

SWOT ANALYSIS (THIS SWOT IS AN EXAMPLE OR GUIDELINE. DELETE
THE INFORMATION AND REPLACE WITH YOUR OWN ANALYSIS UNDER
EACH HEADING OR POINT)

1. The following strong and weak points and opportunities and threats were
identified wrt the moderation system and process:

Strong Points:

 The stringent process of moderation coupled to specific moderation criteria
assisted in ensuring that the moderator was not side-tracked by emotional and
unrelated issues.

 All elements, aspects and criteria in the process of moderation could be utilised.
 The moderation process ensures a consistent approach to assessments which

are competent and not yet competent.
 The SAS WINGFIELD moderation system is being constantly tested on

moderator programmes. This ensures that constant feedback regarding
applicability is being considered.

Weak Points:
 Template information requirements not same information requested.
 The system conforms to the relevant DODI and SAQA guidelines on moderation
practises, however only one moderation method exists in the policy, n.l. Sample
Moderation of Assessment Documentation.

Opportunities
 A very good opportunity to test the SAS WINGFIELD moderation policy and
templates.
 Identify system gaps and assist with design and review of the programme and
assessment instruments.
 Continuous training of ETD practitioners as assessors is assured.
 A good chance to check the SAS WINGFIELD QMS.

Threats
 The magnitude of paperwork required for a moderation of this nature could thwart
implementation. ETDP’s will take time to motivate them to institute the system.

Moderation Review Report Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED I-3

2. The following recommendations are made in terms of the alignment of the
moderation system to ETQA requirements:

 The moderation system conforms to ETQA requirements.

3. The following judgement is made in terms of the credibility and validity of the
moderation system and process:

 The moderation system is applicable and can be implemented without much
adaptation. However, the moderator requires sufficient ETDP background,
subject knowledge and especially, a sound understanding of the moderation
process, to make the necessary recommendations. This is complicated when
considering a combination of moderation methodologies, ie Programme Review
(quality assurance).

4. The following comments are made in terms of data capturing, record keeping,
support staff and personnel:

5. The following comments are made in terms of the Unit Standard content:

6. General comments:

ACCEPTANCE OF THE MODERATION REVIEW

Assessor Signature Assessor No Date

Moderator Signature Moderator No Date

Moderation Review Report Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: __________

RESTRICTED

J-1

APPENDIX J
TO SOP FOR
MODERATION
PROCESS

SAS WINGFIELD
INDEX TO MODERATION FILE

DESCRIPTION PAGE

SAS WINGFIELD SOP for Moderation Process and Appendixes 1
Registration as Moderator against Unit Standard 2
Moderation Plan (Appendix A) 3
Pre-Moderation Briefing Agenda (Appendix B) 4
Pre-Moderation Briefing Minutes (Appendix C) 5
Moderation Control Sheet (Appendix D) 7
Moderation Aspects (Appendix E) 8
Moderation Checklist (Appendix F) 9
Communication Control Sheet (Appendix G) 10
Moderation Report (Appendix H) 11
Moderation Review (Appendix I) 12

Moderation Portfolio Subject : ___________
Programme: ___________________ U/S: _____________

RESTRICTED

OFFICERS FORMING PROGRAMME
(FETC : MILITARY OPERATIONS)

MODERATION PORTFOLIO

MODULE : WELLBEING
SUBJECT : HIV/AIDS

RESTRICTED

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

RESTRICTED

NBS/WFD/R/103/2/3

SAS WINGFIELD TRAINING SOP: NO 24/18

Issued by

96719489MC CDR B. GOUSSARD
ACTING TRAINING COMMANDER SAS WINGFIELD

Telephone: 021 590 2665 SAS WINGFIELD
SSN: 820 2665 Private Bag X1
Facsimile: 021 590 2662 Goodwood
Enquiries: WO1 S. Tilley 7459

January 2018

PROGRESS BOARD ( 2 CHANCE RULE ) AT SAS WINGFIELD

INTRODUCTION

1. The aim of this order is to promulgate processes wrt the progress board at
SAS WINGFIELD.

EXECUTION

2. The process must be followed so as to ensure the effective and efficient
progress board’s take place at SAS WINGFIELD.

EXECUTION DATE

3. This SOP comes into with immediate effect, and will be reviewed one year
after the date of implementation.

PROGRESS (2 CHANCE RULE) BOARDS

Reference 1: NO Pers 1/2016
2: Administrative Order 2/1/98 par 31 dd 2 Jul 98
3: SANGP 1D Chapter 16
4: DODI 6/2003
5: SANFO/LOG/1/98 (Trade Test Assessment)

1. Progress Boards (2 Chance Rule) Boards will be conducted for all learners
who have failed an assessment on first or final attempt. Should a Learner be found
not yet competent (NYC) on his or her first or second attempt, a Progress Board is to
make recommendations regarding the future development of the Learner. SF to
indicate the requirement for a Progress Board immediately after the Learner/s have
been found not yet competent.

2. The aim of the board is to determine whether the assessment was fair and to
minute decisions and actions that must be taken wrt further attempts. In the event
that the assessment was unfair, the assessment must be corrected and the learner
will be allowed to re-write a different assessment.

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED 2

3. The following role players must be invited to attend, 14 days in advance:

a. FHRD (Chairperson) (Attn: SSO FETD).

b. FHRD (Applicable Career Manager).

c. SSO FCM.

d. SSO FHRS.

e. OC.

f. XO.

g. TC.

h. ATO.

i. TE.

j. RD(E)/RD(M) as applicable.

k. Facilitators (including outsourced training provider representatives) that
presented modules on a course.

l. All Learners that attended the course iro Assessment Board or
Learners deemed NYC iro Progress Boards.

4. Reference Policies. The following Policies must be available at the board and
must be conveyed to the learner prior to the commencement of the Learning
Opportunity:

a. NO PERS 1/2016.

b. Administrative Order 2/1/98 par 31 dd 2 Jul 98 (Two Chance Rule).

c. SANFO/LOG/1/98 (Trade Test Assessment).

d. SANGP 1D Chapter 16.

e. DODI 6/2003 (Management of Learner Assessments in the DOD).

5. Confidential Report. A Confidential Report must be submitted by the Course
Facilitator that includes the following:

a. Learning Opportunity content.

b. Progress of learner on the full apprenticeship.

c. Prognosis in the opinion of the Facilitator wrt potential of the learner to
pass the LO/Modules/Subject.

d. Indication of future utilisation taking effectiveness, efficiency and
economy into consideration.

e. Cost of training to that point.

6. Guidelines for Progress Board Decisions. When a Learner is found NYC in
his/her LO, negotiation between the Learner and the Assessor about future action is
to take place before the Board takes place. A comprehensive development plan
must be decided on between the Assessor and the Learner. A copy of the
development plan is to be given to the Learner for reference so that the Learner can
comply with the development plan. All the above negotiation must be documented
and signed by both the Assessor and Learner and placed on file. All documentation

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED 3

signed by the Assessor and Learner must be available at the Board.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROGRESS BOARD MEMBERS

7. TSCO Responsibilities. TSCO is responsible for the following:

a. Ensure that the documentary process is quality assured ito ETQA QMS.

b. Duties of Secretary to be captured in the Delegation of Duties.

c. Sending of signals pertaining wrt the decisions that were taken at the
board eg removal from training, changes in mustering, updating of
personnel details.

8. QA Responsibilities. The QA section is responsible for the following:

a. Ensure that the Assessment Policy has been complied with ito ETQA
QMS.

b. Verification that the decisions taken at the board is in line with reference
policies.

c. Confirm that decisions taken will not create precedence for appeal
against the decision of the Progress Board.

9. TE Responsibilities. The TE is responsible for the following:

a. Receives the Progress Board Checklist from the Secretary.

b. Verifies that the Assessment and Moderation process was correct.

c. Verifies that the learner was informed of all relevant policies and orders.

d. The Learner, Facilitator and the Training Evaluator must sign this
documentary process.

10. SF Responsibilities. The SF is responsible for the following:

a. Informs the Progress Board on the progress of the learner in terms of
the Training Program, what the cost of the LO is and possible
recommendations ito Administration Order 2/1/98 dd 2 Jul 98 and DODI
6/2003.

b. Where applicable, informs the Progress Board whether the learner
registered for a second attempt at own expense, own time and to
provide proof of this to the Progress Board.

c. Confirms and provides proof of registration to the Chairperson that the
process was complied with iaw decisions made by the Progress Board
and recommendations forwarded to FHRD.

d. Ensures all actions and decisions made at the Progress Board have
been complied with and reported at the Training Committee Meeting.

e. Represents the learner as Divisional Officer and informs the Progress
Board of any matters that may have adversely affected the learner prior
to the assessment.

f. Where applicable, compiles a development plan for further training.

g. Where applicable, recommends a date when the learner can be re-
assessed.

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED 4

h. Ensure that members accepted (Evaluation Board) to continue with
apprenticeship training, be indentured with the applicable SETA.

Note 1: Due to the high cost of training it is important that the SF monitors the
progress of the learner and Assists and Support the learner from the first day
of the LO up to the final assessment. This is specifically important for N-
Subjects and Distance Education. As the gap between Grade 12 (Matric) and
starting with N-Studies varies, SFs should ensure that a Guardian Facilitator is
available after hours to assist, mentor and work tutorials.

11. Course Facilitator. The facilitator is responsible for the following:

a. Inform the Progress Board on the progress of the learner.

b. Indicates the learners prognosis wrt the potential of the learner to
complete the LO successfully.

c. Presents a supplementary program to the Secretary and Chairperson if
the learner requires further training.

d. Ensure learners complete the Progress Board Checklist and submits it
to the Secretary at least two days prior to the commencement of the
Progress Board.

12. Secretary. The secretary is responsible for the following:

a. Provides all relevant ETD regulations.

b. Agenda.

c. Compile and distribute of minutes of the board.

d. Confirms Board preparation Checklist completed 2 working days before
the Board. Any anomalies are to be immediately reported to TC/ATO.

WITHDRAWAL PROCESS

13. When a learner fails a trade subject or module that he requires to progress to
the next level of training, he/she is suspended from training.

14. The period of suspension allows for the learner to obtain the outstanding
subject(s), in his/her own cost and in own time and according to the time frame as
determined by the PB. The PB will interview the learner prior to withdrawal and
determine the date when the learner has to successfully complete the failed module.

15. Should the learner fail the same subject(s) or module for the second time,
he/she is withdrawn from training. In the event that a learner fails to complete a
module within the timeframe determined by the PB, the TC and OC is to be advised
wrt the learner’s non compliance to the PB recommendation.

16. The thoroughness, with which withdrawal reports are to be drawn up, cannot
be over emphasised. Complete records of each student withdrawn from training
must be kept by the TAO at WFD.

17. DFHR is responsible for determining the future utilisation of the learner who is
withdrawn from training. This requires that the learner(s) remain/s at WFD until the
drafting instruction is received.

Note 2: A learner that is withdrawn from training will impact on MILQUAL
scheduling. Learners who are removed from training are therefor also

RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED 5

removed from the SCYP and MILQUAL scheduling ito numbers and will affect
the APP.
18. Drawing 1 below displays the Withdrawal Process

Drawing 1: Withdrawal Process.

Start Merseta to be notified

Assessor Learner found
NYC

Did the Yes
Learner
Learner appeal? Learner to
complete
No relevant appeal

forms

2 Chance rule OC-WFD Chairman
board TC-WFD
ATO-WFD

Assessor-Facilitator
Internal Moderator-Senior Facilitator

Verifiers - QA WFD

Learner No Learner to be
at fault? re-assessed or
Board
Members Yes attempt first
chance

Possible Trg Member No
intervention and/or removed?

second
attempt/removal from

LO

Yes

END

RESTRICTED