This is one of a series of articles available at www.nvqweb.com that aim to develop understanding of NVQs and their assessment.
Effective internal verification is the foundation for successful NVQ provision. Carried out well it ensures the quality of certificates awarded and contributes to continuous development of centre practice and staff. This article aims to provide a personal reflection on some of the key aspects of effective verification practice.
Within the world of NVQ verification there has been a tendency for verifiers to issue assessment feedback and requirements without justification or reference to the source regulation and guidance.
The downside of this is that NVQ assessment becomes more about rules and myths rather than understanding of sound NVQ principles and process. In other words practice is based on rote rather than rationale. This makes it very hard for staff to develop their own understanding and confidence of NVQ assessment.
External and Internal Verifier feedback and guidance should be always be justified and if necessary accompanied by explanation and reference to source documentation. There should also be a clear distinction between personal preference and official guidance or regulatory requirements.
Following on from the necessity for verifiers to base feedback and guidance on source regulation and guidance perhaps it would be useful to highlight the key documents that all verifiers should be familiar with:
* 'NVQ Code of Practice'.
* 'Joint Awarding Body Guidance on Internal Verification' (often called JAB guidance).
* 'Awarding Body and Sector Skills Council guidance and updates
* 'Internal Verification of NVQ'
* 'External Verification of NVQ'
* The A and V units.
* The NVQ Standards and Assessment Strategies for all awards you are verifying.
Effective sampling can at times appear a mystery and many hours can be spent searching for the perfect solution, often without finding one. In reality sampling strategies have to take into account a wide range of different variables and factors, some of which are very hard to predict.
For this reason whist a formal strategy is important, it is not always possible to treat sampling as an exact science. There will be times where a more flexible approach, that relies on the verifiers own common sense, judgement and even intuition, is needed.
Sometimes verifiers see verification feedback as being a one-way process where feedback is provided to the assessor through written or oral feedback – end of story.
However a much more effective approach is to use verifier feedback as an opportunity to hold a discussion with the assessor. This can include:
* Clarification of assessment decisions.
* Correction of minor errors found in the assessment. (This can often avoid returning units).
* Opportunity for development and standardisation.
* More tactful discussion of areas of development.
Using this approach sampling can be a key tool in assessor development.
Sufficient information must be available to ensure that the verifier is aware of progress and issues for each candidate, assessor and workplace. This must be regularly reviewed and followed up and allows progression to be monitored and any issues to be addressed quickly.
A verifier that is aware of performance is able to proactively manage their provision. If problems do arise these can be identified and dealt with quickly.
Traditionally verification focused on verification of completed units and portfolios. This form of outcome based quality assurance led to an over reliance on paperwork and often only identified problems after they had occurred.
Nowadays a more holistic approach is expected. Continuous professional development of centre staff, observation of assessment practice, sampling of units in progress and meeting candidates. This approach allows quality assurance to look at process as well as outcome.
NVQ can be very flexible, in fact this is one of the strengths of the system. However this can lead to differences across a centre between verifiers. This can be very confusing for assessors and this can affect their practice and development. It can also impact on the confidence that assessors and candidate have in the centre.
It is essential to have a uniform assessment and verification strategy across a centre and common expectations and requirements from different verifiers.
To achieve this there needs to be strong leadership, often from a coordinator or lead verifier. Also sampling and standardisation across verifiers is just as important as between assessors. Where there are differences these need to be sorted out between the verification team and agreement reached even if there are differences in opinion.
Verifiers have a key role in contributing to the management of NVQ. Part of this is to ensure that those factors that contribute to successful NVQ are in place.
Some examples include: Do verifiers, candidates and assessors have access to sufficient time and resources, does the provision meet the individual needs of candidates, does the candidate have access to effective support and assessment?
Where this is not the case then it is important for verifiers to identify and take responsibility for addressing any areas for development. Even better aim to plan and implement NVQ provision in a way that will ensure success.
Copyright TMS NVQ Support Services 2008. All materials published within www.nvqweb.com, unless stated otherwise, are protected by international trademark and copyright laws and must only be used for personal, non-commercial purposes only. NVQweb PLUS Coordinator and Corporate members have permission to use and edit NVQweb materials for use within their own organisation.