Understanding Knowledge in NVQ assessment

This is one of a series of articles available at www.nvqweb.com that aim to develop understanding of NVQs and their assessment.

Assessment of knowledge is an important aspect of an Assessor’s role. This article explores the theory of different types of knowledge found within National Occupational Standards (NOS) and how these relate to assessment practice.

Exploring knowledge

A person who is considered competent at their job is someone who has the ability to perform the tasks and roles required to the expected standard. As well as demonstrating skills and attitudes this also requires the person to apply and show understanding of the knowledge that is required to support their performance...

Understanding the type and nature of the knowledge being assessed can make assessing knowledge much easier to plan and judge. The following descriptions aim to provide a deeper understanding of the assessment of knowledge within workbased assessment. Whilst some of the following is based on research, there is also a high level of personal interpretation and terms used, which is based on personal experience.

• Propositional or declarative knowledge is about ‘knowing what’. This may include data, facts, and descriptive information. Often possession of this type of knowledge is hidden, it is difficult to assess or infer through performance alone. This may suggest that the use of assessment methods such as questioning, assignment or professional discussion, are more valid. Alternative forms include using mind mapping.
• Procedural knowledge is about ‘knowing how’. This may be related to possession of knowledge about technique and process of skills and tasks. This can often be inferred through someone performance using methods such as observation, produce of work and candidate accounts. However as the level of NVQ rises and tasks become more complex the knowledge supporting cognitive skills such as decision-making and problem solving becomes harder to infer. This is where professional discussion can be particularly useful. Flow charts are a useful alternative way of providing evidence of procedural knowledge.
• Schematic knowledge is about ‘knowing why’. The reasons why actions are taken in the workplace may include knowledge of procedures, systems, policies, theories, legislation, theories, research and guidelines. Assessing that someone knows why they have performed an action is also not always easy to infer directly through performance. Questioning and professional discussion can be used. Personal or reflective accounts that include a rationale can also be an effective way of covering this although care should be taken as this approach is not suitable for all candidates.

It is not considered sufficient to hold knowledge without understanding. Understanding is difficult to define, perhaps one explanation is that it is about being able to link the 'what, how and why' described in the previous paragraphs and relate them to practice. Assessment of understanding should be at the level required by the person to support their performance and should therefore be appropriate to their job role and responsibilities. For example a person who is working under supervision may require a different understanding of health and safety to someone carrying out a similar role independently.

The following example illustrates how the knowing what, how and why can come together to show understanding.

Understanding the need for reporting in the event of an accident

• Knowing what - Falls, trips, manual handling injuries etc.
• Knowing how - Accidents should be reported using the accident book.
• Knowing why - Company policy, allow investigation and risk assessment, provide auditable record in case of liability, duty of care, legal requirement under Health and Safety at Work Act and RIDDOR.

Application of knowledge: Possessing knowledge is worthless unless it is used in practice. Assessment practice that only looks at evidence of knowledge in isolation from performance poses a high threat to the validity of assessment of competence. This can be seen where all of the knowledge evidence is collected through written questions or workbooks. Wherever possible evidence of knowledge must come from, or be supported by, assessment of application of knowledge through performance.

Underpinning knowledge. This term is now dated but is still occasionally used. This was used to refer to knowledge that is required to support performance.

Core knowledge is knowledge that is generic or common to different settings and across different parts of the job and NOS units or competences, for example knowledge about record keeping. Often this type of knowledge will be contained within a specific unit, however it is useful to remember that NOS units or competences have to be written to stand-alone and such knowledge may be embedded into each unit. An holistic or whole award approach to core knowledge will reduce unnecessary duplication.

Situated knowledge is knowledge that is relevant to a specific context, task or setting. For example knowledge around manual handling may be very different between a care worker who works in a hospital to someone who works in mental health. This is one of the reasons why knowledge criteria, that are written generically to cover different situations, are sometimes difficult to write and interpret and why a job profile or description is needed in a candidate portfolio. Knowledge in NOS should be assessed in the context of the individual persons job role and setting.

Contextualisation is about using language and meaning that is familiar to the person’s role and the everyday language used in their workplace. The generic nature of NOS units and the fact they are designed as assessment tools mean that - however well written they are - they are not always contextualised. The same can be true for learning materials that have not been specifically written around a candidate's workplace. This lack of contextualisation can provide a barrier to many candidates especially where knowledge is of an abstract (theoretical) rather than concrete (practical) nature. This can have implications when candidates are expected to work directly with the NOS/NVQ units. Part of a successful assessor’s skill is the ability to communicate with and assess their candidates within the context of the candidate's language and workplace.

Inferred knowledge is where it is obvious and explicit through someone’s performance that they have specific knowledge. For example if a person is observed carrying out a technical task following a step-by-step order, this could not happen by accident. Where knowledge can be implied the use of observation and other performance methods can avoid duplication. This will save unnecessary writing and further assessment. This is also an effective method for ensuring knowledge is being applied. However do be wary of assessment strategies that assess knowledge using purely inferred knowledge. Valid assessment is most likely when this is supported using other assessment methods such as questioning. The evidence method used should reflect the nature of individual knowledge criteria and whether it is asking what, how or why.

Truths, beliefs and knowledge. Our common understanding of what is appropriate or correct knowledge, is not always clear-cut and there can be differences between assessor expectations and interpretation. It is worth considering that knowledge is considered to be the meeting point between truths and beliefs and this can vary between individuals and workplace. Keeping abreast of best practice, research and continuing development can reduce this effect. This is also one of the reasons why assessor standardisation is so important.

Tacit knowledge is knowledge that is difficult to explain or communicate but is nether less important to the job. It may even be intuitive. The common example used is how we recognise a friends face. Within the workplace this is often highly cultural or situated, for example in the values shared within a team.

Knowledge specification. Within National Occupational Standards, skills and attitudes are typically described under performance criteria and knowledge under the section entitled knowledge specification. Whilst listed under separate headings, when it comes to assessment performance and knowledge are closely related. For assessment to be fair and reliable it is important to assess strictly to the written knowledge specification and within the context of the persons job role.

Knowledge requirements. Within NVQ units there is a section headed evidence requirements. This section will explain the assessment methods required or recommended for each unit. Unlike the actual standards these are not written by the standard setting body (normally the relevant Sector Skills Council) or part of the actual NOS. Instead these are written by each individual awarding body. Sometimes awarding bodies will collaborate to produce the same evidence requirements, however this may not always be the case and it is therefore essential to only use the evidence requirements provide by your own awarding body. Awarding bodies will develop evidence requirement in line with the assessment strategy written by the standard setting body.

Plagerism. This is where evidence presented by a candidate is not their own work and therefore does not prove that person's knowledge or understanding. This can happen accidently, for example within group work but can also be deliberate. Assessor's need to ensure that candidates are aware of how to avoid this and also make sufficient checks to ensure that assessment is authentic. The following article provides more information on this topic:
http://nvqweb.com/node/1294

Accreditation of prior learning and achievement: Prior to starting their programme, candidates will often have weath of existing knowledge already in place. Accreditation of prior learning and achievement can be used to assess this without the need for producing new evidence. This is particularly significant with regard to evidence of knowledge and should be the starting point for assessment planning. Each assessment centre will have a policy on how evidence of prior learning can be used. For more on this topic go here:
http://nvqweb.com/avcare/apl

Conclusion

Reading this article may have been simply revision or may have introduced some new ideas for the assessment of knowledge. Registered users are welcome to discuss this topic further by posting a reply. You can also rate this article using the poll option.

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.