fbpx

AlGhad Training Institute Quality Management System

Assessment and Moderation Policy

Policy Reference:

T/P/005

Version:

2

Person Responsible:

General Manager

1. Policy Statement

  • The purpose of this policy is to ensure that GTI provides fair, effective, transparent, and consistent assessment of trainees, supporting learning progression and facilitating their career development.
  • GTI moderates assessments to confirm that training outcomes and standards are measured appropriately and consistently.
  • GTI recognises that assessment is an integral part of the training experience and central to the provision of quality of teaching and learning.
  • GTI recognises that planning and organising, particularly the ability to manage oneself, are important aspects of employability skill development and these attributes are reflected by regular attendance and punctuality, as well as demonstrated through active participation in classroom activities.

2. Application and Delegations

  • This policy applies to all course coordinators, trainers, trainees, and others involved in assessment and moderation activities at GTI.
  • It is the responsibility of all managers (Heads of Sections and coordinators) at GTI to make sure that guidelines and associated procedures stated in this policy are followed in the assessment and moderation activities in the programmes/courses under their authority.

3. External Requirements

  • This policy and associated procedures and forms provide assurance to industry partners and other stakeholders that GTI will adopt appropriate assessment and moderation methodologies to measure trainee achievement and decide whether the stated learning outcomes have been met.
  • This policy and associated procedures help GTI meet the requirements of government quality assurance agencies, such as the Education and Training Quality Authority (BQA), and the Bahrain Directorate of Institutes Affairs, Bahrain Ministry of Labour.
  • Its explicit focus on ensuring valid, reliable, and authentic assessment that is consistent in its application, helps GTI meet the requirements of funding bodies such as the MLSD, as well as those of professional accreditation agencies, such as City and Guilds and other awarding bodies.

4. What is Expected

4.1       The following six principles underpin GTI’s Assessment and Moderation policy:

4.1.1    Validity

Assessment tasks should be appropriate for the level, content and learning outcomes of the module/unit and the graduate profile of the programme or short-course. A valid task is one that measures the competencies and skills that it means to assess.

4.1.2    Reliability

Assessment should provide an accurate and consistent measure of trainee performance. The reliability of an assessment is its consistency in giving the same results regardless of the assessor, assessment venue, or assessment timing.

4.1.3    Fairness and inclusivity

Assessment tasks should be achievable and manageable as well as relevant and appropriate to the level stated. Tasks should provide every trainee with a fair opportunity to demonstrate their learning and should not discriminate against trainees based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, political affiliation, or disability, in accordance with GTI’s Special Needs and Differentiated Instruction Policy T/P/002.

4.1.4    Developmental

Assessment should be recognised as a learning activity. Assessment tasks should contribute to the development of skills and knowledge that can be applied within the programme/course as well as at work and in other real-life contexts.

4.1.5    Manageability

Assessment tasks should be reasonable and practical in terms of time and resources for both trainees and staff.

4.1.6    Transparency

The intention and practice of assessment in a particular unit/module should be clearly described to trainees and to other trainers involved in the programme/course so that its benefits, purposes, and procedures are well-understood and supported.

4.2 Based on these principles, GTI’s Minimum Threshold Requirements are to ensure that:

  • All assessment conducted by GTI shall be fair, valid, reliable and consistent.
  • All assessments are appropriately aligned to the stated learning outcomes.
  • All assessments are to be criterion-referenced, wherever possible.
  • Trainees are provided with the necessary assessment documentation at the beginning of each unit/module, and with timely feedback on their performance following each assessment.
  • The method of calculating the final grades needs to be communicated to trainees at the beginning of each programme/course.
  • All assessments need to be pre-moderated prior to being used.
  • All assessments need to be post-moderated after being conducted.
  • The course coordinator is responsible for making sure that results and decisions are reported, recorded, and maintained appropriately.
  • External moderation and validation should be conducted regularly.
  • External moderation and validation shall be carried out by impartial parties.
  • Attendance requirements are outlined to programme participants prior to the commencement of the programme, as these can affect the awarding of participation certificates. For trainees who have extenuating circumstances and cannot attend some sessions, there is facility to make up the time by attending another programme or completing requirements online or by attending a complementary session, depending on the circumstances. The trainees’ induction on Day 1 of the programme, and the learner’s manual, cover information about what to do if a trainee cannot attend an assessment event due to ill health.

5. Procedures for establishing effective assessment

  • Prior to start of the programme

Task

Person responsible

Process

Notes

  • Identify, and map the proposed modules/units  with approved assignments

General Manager

Relevant Head of Programme Sector

Trainers

Carefully map the learning outcomes to the assessment criteria

Local course assessments are planned and approved by programme committee (the trainers and Head of programme section, plus relevant course co-ordinator), prior to the start of the pilot programme/course. Thereafter, an external moderator will be appointed to provide feedback on the quality of assessments before they are included in the assessment plan for any module (unit).

Mapping is done during the analysis, and design phases (see Course Design, Approval and Revision Policy          T/P/004, which includes a template for module descriptors).

Assessment design may involve the external consultant who authored the programme, if this is pilot or substantively revised offering.

Internal moderation is provided through peer review processes.

  • Map out the assignment briefings/ training support

Relevant Head of Programme Sector

Trainers

Set dates for assignments, considering trainee workload. Establish training support systems as required depending on TNA results.

These dates are then shared with GTI team, trainees, and the client.

TNA done at induction. Briefing of trainees on assignment dates, expectations, done at induction.

  • Tracking

Programme coordinator and Trainers

A Tracking Sheet is setup.

The purpose of the Tracking Sheet is to keep track of the status of assignments, and a log for contacting trainees.

  • During the programme

Task

Person responsible

Process

Notes

  • Initial briefing

Programme Coordinator

The briefing covers the awarding body requirements, submission of assignments/ deadlines/word count/ plagiarism

On first day of course

  • Assignment briefing

Trainer

Trainees are presented with the assignment task. The trainer briefs the trainees, and answers any questions

On the day an assignment is presented

  • Awarding body registration online

Programme Coordinator

Trainees who have submitted an acceptable level of assignments before the registration deadline are registered.

On or before the final registration deadline

  • Assessment of assignments

Trainers and any other qualified assessors contracted by GTI (collectively known as the assessors)

Approved rubrics that outline ‘sufficiency descriptor’ are used for assessing/marking assignments.

The Appendix to this policy provides a checklist for the assessment of a rubric, developed by Dr. Bonnie B.

Mullinix, Monmouth University, New Jersey, USA.  

Common assessment rubrics developed collaboratively ensure consistency across cohorts and trainers. Internal and external moderation guidelines are covered in a separate procedure.

  • Feedback

Assessor

The assessor will send feedback to the trainee with details of the assessment outcome.

The assessor also outlines actions for improvement

Feedback may be online, face-to-face, individual, or to the whole class.

Trainer may reteach various sections to whole class, or may provide individual support as required (see Trainees’ Support Policy T/P/012)

  • Log and track

Assessor

The Tracking Sheet is updated with the status of the corresponding assignment

  • Collate

Programme Coordinator

The Programme coordinator extracts records from trainers at the end of each module or unit.

Programme coordinator maintains secure records in accordance with Record Management Policy O/A/001

6. Procedures for moderation

  • These procedures must be followed to ensure the maintenance of academic standards in the assessment process.
  • Moderation is the process of confirming that the learning outcomes and any standards associated with the awarding of qualifications are measured appropriately in accordance with the Assessment and Moderation Policy (T/P/005).
  • The following steps will be taken to implement pre moderation, utilizing F2/T/P/005

Step

Responsible

Process

Notes

  • All new or revised summative assessment tasks need to be sent to a peer for review

Trainer

Moderation plan requires all assessments associated with a module to be reviewed in line with the schedule as well.

In the pilot phase of a new programme, this may be the author of the programme, where they are not on staff.

  • Peer checks to ensure that the assessment is aligned to the stated learning outcomes for the course or programme, that it is appropriate with respect to content, level, numbers of questions and the time it requires to be administrated, types of questions, grammar, punctuation, typographical errors and format.

Peer

Complete template form for pre-moderation (F2/T/P/005)

For higher level programmes leading to Diploma and above qualifications, an external moderator may be appointed to ensure consistency with international standards.

  • Changes made after considering feedback from peer review.

Trainer

Assessment revised prior to administering it.

Completed Form F2/T/P/005) and revised assessment lodged with QAT.

  • The following steps will be taken to validate assessment, that is to implement post moderation, utilizing F3/T/P/005.

Step

Responsible

Process

Notes

  • Establishes a moderation plan

Trainer

Trainer lists the trainees and assessments in a matrix before the module is assessed. This is passed onto the moderator.

The moderator typically views the marked work of randomly selected trainees, over a range of assessments (usually 30%).

  • Select sample of trainer’s marking to check they are making accurate and consistent decisions.

Moderator may be an internal or external verifier, depending on requirements in programme regulations.

Address questions after analysing samples, following the post-moderation template form F3/T/P/005.

It is not necessary to look at all of the assessments unless a light sampling indicates that there are inconsistencies.

In cases where an awarding body other than GTI is involved, that organisation may act as an external verifier.

  • Complete Moderation report F3/T/P/005 and provide feedback to trainer(s)

Moderator

Completed Post-moderation template F3/T/P/005 is lodged with QAT

If inconsistencies warrant a remark, then the procedure for amending trainees’ assessment or unit/module grades will be invoked (see Procedure section 7 below)

7. Procedures to amend a final grade

  • The following steps, including completion of Form F1/T/P/005will be taken to amend a final grade as a result of moderation, an appeal (see Academic Appeals Policy T/P/007), or other process that results in the need for amendment of Academic records.

Step

Responsible

Outcome

Notes

  • Submit request for change of grade
Trainer moderator QAT member Appeal investigator

The initiator (trainer, moderator, QAT member, or person who has investigated an appeal) completes a result amendment request form (Result Amendment Form F1/T/P/005) and submits it to the GM for approval.

If the GM has handled the appeal, then the Quality Assurance Advisor will take the authorising role.

  • Consideration and approval to amend

General Manager (GM)

The completed request to amend a result form (Result Amendment Form F1/T/P/005) and any accompanying evidence are reviewed by GM and if supported, the result amendment form is signed off as approved.

If the GM is not satisfied that due process has been followed, or if the evidence is not attached, the matter will be referred to the initiator to complete the necessary documentation or process, as required by the relevant policy.

Once approved, the GM advises the Course Coordinator to amend the grade in the official course records.

Both soft and hard copy records need amendment

  • Notification of amendment

Course Coordinator

Course Coordinator makes the amendment, which is checked by the GM.

Course Coordinator advises the trainee, trainer, and the initiator of the requested amendment (moderator, QAT member, etc) that the amendment has been made.

8. Related Documents ((Rules, Guidelines, Flowcharts, Forms)

9. Key Dates

First Approved:                    26 January 2016

This Version Approved:       26 December 2023

Next Review Date:               December 2024 or earlier if any changes to legislation or the external environment require it.

Version Effective Date     Description of Changes    
01 26/01/2016  First approval of the policy
02 23/09/2022 Revision for consistency with QAM, allocation of codes, 3 forms, integration of procedures.

Approved by the General Manager, effective immediately:

Signed by General Manager: Abbas Ali Date: 26/12/2023

10. Appendix

Criteria

1 Below Standard

2 Approaches Standard

3 Meets Standard

DESIGN

Selection & Clarity of Criteria

Criteria being assessed are unclear, have significant overlap, or are not derived from appropriate standards for product/task and subject area

Criteria being assessed can be identified, but not all are clearly differentiated or derived from appropriate standards for product/task and subject area

All criteria are clear, distinct, and derived from appropriate standards for product/task and subject area

Distinction between Levels

Little or no distinction made between levels of achievement

Some distinction between levels is clear, but some gaps are narrow, others are large, so progression is not uniform.

Each level is distinct, and progression is clear and logical.

Quality of Writing

Writing is not understandable to all users of rubric, including trainees; language is vague and unclear, so it is difficult for users to agree on a score

Writing is mostly understandable to all users of rubric, including trainees; some language may cause confusion among different users

Writing is understandable to all users of rubric, including trainees; Clear, specific language helps all users reliably agree on a score

USE

Involvement of Trainees in Rubric Development *

Trainees are not involved in development of rubric

Trainees discuss the wording and design of the rubric and offer feedback/input

Trainers and trainees jointly construct rubric, using exemplars of the product or task

Use of Rubric to Communicate Expectations & Guide Trainees

Rubric is not shared with trainees

Rubric is shared with trainees when the product/task is completed, and used only for evaluation of trainee work

Rubric serves as a primary reference point from the beginning of work on the product/task, for discussion and guidance as well as evaluation of trainee work

 GTI’s current policies are available on the website. If you are using a hard copy of this policy, please check that it is the current version before proceeding.