SQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of Assessment Matthew McCullagh Quality Manager Welcome 欢迎

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 2012 9.00 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 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 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 reduction Proportionate Intelligence led A shared responsibility Constantly reviewed and improved

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 Overview to Centre staff in Beijing and Xiamen Launch of new approach Overview to EVs at central verification events Specialist training for Centre staff and EVs Implementation new approach to QA September 2011 March 2012 May 2012 September 2012 September 2012-2013

New 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 Systems Approval Qualification Approval Systems Verification Qualification Verification

High/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 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 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 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 Statements In relation to Qualification Verification Confidence 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) 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: Minimal confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group as significant risks exist within the following categories: 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: No confidence in the maintenance of SQA standards within this Verification Group as severe risks exist within the following categories: 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:

How 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? 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? 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 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.

Sanctions In relation to Qualification Verification Confidence Statement In relation to Systems Verification   High Level of Confidence Entry in Action Plan Broad Confidence Suspension of specific qualification certification: by verification group by qualification Suspension of approval application by verification group Suspension of direct certification claim status: 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: Minimal Confidence Withdrawal of all existing specific qualification approval Withdrawal of specific qualification approval: No Confidence Withdrawal of centre approval

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

Questions

SQA’s Approach to Quality Assurance of Assessment David Pirnie Lead Verifier Welcome 欢迎

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 The Qualification Verifier role activities Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete verification report

Being prepared “The best preparation for good work tomorrow is to do good work today”. Elbert Hubbard

Preparing for Qualification Verification 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.

Preparing for Qualification Verification Required knowledge – three key areas: Knowledge of your subject area Centre roles and centre responsibilities Qualification Verification

Preparing for 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

Preparing for Qualification Verification Knowledge of centres roles and responsibilities: Centre Co-ordinators Assessors Internal verifiers

Preparing for Qualification Verification Knowledge of the Qualification Verifier role: Role Profile Sources of support Verification policies and procedures Values

QIIPS: Quality, Integrity, Innovation, Partnership & Service Sounds like: “QUIPS” – a dictionary definition: “A clever remark often prompted by the occasion”.

SQA Values Quality Integrity Innovation Partnership Service

SQA Values Quality As custodians of the standards we verify, we continually strive to maintain consistent quality in their assessment.

SQA Values 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.

SQA Values 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.

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

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

Preparing for Qualification Verification 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 Values Exercise

Planning for Qualification Verification The Qualification Verifier role activities Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete verification report

“Failing to plan is planning to fail”. Alan Lakein

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 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 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) SQA (China Office) confirms to each QV, the centre(s) they should visit, the date of each visit, and the Units they should verify Qualification Verifier contacts centre to confirm visit date(s) and travel arrangements

New Approach to Quality Assurance Welcome Back 欢迎回来

Carry out Qualification Verification The Qualification Verifier role activities Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete verification report

Carry 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 Prepare yourself for the visit Agree agenda and running order of visit Conduct sampling activities Judge the sufficiency of evidence

Conduct 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 Criteria Introducing the New Approach to Quality Assurance Criteria Introducing the Qualification Verification Guidance

Introducing 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.

Questions

The New Approach to Quality Assurance Welcome Back 欢迎回来

The New Approach to Quality Assurance Introducing the the new approach to quality assurance criteria feedback

Criteria 4.2 4.2 Signed pre-delivery checklist. The 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

Criteria 2.3 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

Criteria 4.8 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

Criteria 3.2 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

Criteria 4.6 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

Criteria 2.7 2.7 Current Health & Safety certificates There must be evidence of initial and on-going reviews of accommodation, equipment and reference, learning and assessment materials. Current Health & Safety certificates itinerary checklists, procurement records, library contents, system for supporting e-assessment Records of review

Criteria 4.3 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

Criteria 4.1 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

Criteria 4.7 4.7 Candidate evidence, documented retention policy Candidate evidence must be retained in line with SQA requirements. Candidate evidence, documented retention policy

Criteria 4.5 4.5 The 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

Criteria 5.6 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

Preparing for Qualification Verification The Qualification Verifier role activities Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete verification report

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

One evidence source could be sufficient in some cases for this 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 evidence Initial/diagnostic/formative assessment, skills profiles, training needs analyses Personal development/action plans, competence reviews, learner agreement/contracts, assessment plans

More than one evidence source is likely to be considered 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

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.

Awareness of things that could influence on our decisions Attitude of centre staff Own standards Own experience Own mindset (closed) Our confide-ence Previous centre perform-ance

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 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 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 Assurance Welcome Back 欢迎回来

The stages of Qualification Verification Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete verification report

The stages of communicating verification decisions Plan to deliver balanced feedback Explain your verification decisions

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 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 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 Qualification Verification Prepare for verification Plan verification Carry out verification Communicate verification decision Complete 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 Criteria Pages

The Required Action Log

The Summary Worksheet

Recommendations and Good Practice Worksheet

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 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 asv@sqa.org.uk by Friday 12th October

Assignment: 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

Summary 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

Questions