SAQA All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.
SOUTH AFRICAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY 
REGISTERED UNIT STANDARD THAT HAS PASSED THE END DATE: 

Evaluate education, training and development providers 
SAQA US ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
15191  Evaluate education, training and development providers 
ORIGINATOR
SGB Assessor Standards 
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY
ETDP SETA - Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority 
FIELD SUBFIELD
Field 05 - Education, Training and Development Adult Learning 
ABET BAND UNIT STANDARD TYPE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL CREDITS
Undefined  Regular  Level 7  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L7  15 
REGISTRATION STATUS REGISTRATION START DATE REGISTRATION END DATE SAQA DECISION NUMBER
Passed the End Date -
Status was "Reregistered" 		 2018-07-01  2023-06-30  SAQA 06120/18 
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2026-06-30   2029-06-30  

In all of the tables in this document, both the pre-2009 NQF Level and the NQF Level is shown. In the text (purpose statements, qualification rules, etc), any references to NQF Levels are to the pre-2009 levels unless specifically stated otherwise.  

This unit standard replaces: 
US ID Unit Standard Title Pre-2009 NQF Level NQF Level Credits Replacement Status
9939  Evaluate learning systems  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  18   

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD 
This Unit Standard will be useful to those who intend to conduct internal or external evaluations of the quality of education, training and development providers. The evaluations could serve a variety of purposes, including accreditation, improvement of provision or benchmarking.

People credited with this Unit Standard are able to:
  • Plan and prepare for evaluations.
  • Conduct an evaluation of a provider's quality assurance system.
  • Evaluate the implementation of a quality assurance system for learning provision and assessment.
  • Report findings and make recommendations. 
    		•

    LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING 
    It is assumed that learners starting to learn towards this Unit Standard have practical experience of Education, Training and Development and have knowledge and understanding of:
  • The contexts of evaluations.
  • The principles, concepts and structures of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF).
  • Quality management systems (QMS), with particular reference to learning interventions, assessment, moderation and verification.

    It is further assumed that candidates have working experience of general research processes, including the ability to gather data, commission inputs to the research, analyse, verify and interpret data, and present findings and recommendations. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD RANGE 
  • This document sets the standard for those who wish to prove competence as evaluators of education and training providers, and does not set the requirements for the accreditation of providers. The requirements for accreditation of providers are set by SAQA and ETQAs. Likewise, this document does not specify the requirements for registration of evaluators.

    Given the range of different kinds of providers in terms of capacity, sophistication and type of provision, ETQAs will generally apply a range of different processes and models for accreditation. Candidates who wish to achieve this Unit Standard must demonstrate the ability to evaluate providers using any given accreditation model set by ETQAs, or in cases where the evaluation is not for accreditation purposes, agreed quality criteria.

    In practice, some providers or ETQA's may use a team of people to conduct evaluations, in which case specific roles would be defined in that context. However, for recognition of competence in this Unit Standard, candidates must demonstrate their ability to carry out all the aspects of the evaluation as defined in this Unit Standard. It is therefore recommended that the scale of the evaluation be considered to ensure it is manageable for an individual when being assessed against this Unit Standard.
  • The focus of this Unit Standard is on the evaluation of the provider, including the quality of learning, teaching and assessment resources, personnel, quality assurance systems, financial systems, review mechanisms and learner entry and support mechanisms.

    Although the evaluation of learning programmes (e.g. learning design, methodology and materials) forms a critical part of the evaluation of providers, it is expected that candidates who achieve this Unit Standard will use given reports or other artefacts on learning programmes as part of their evaluation i.e. the candidates are not expected to evaluate the learning programmes themselves, as this is a specialist function. They are however required to analyse, verify and interpret reports on the programmes as part of their overall evaluation of the provider.

    Learners who wish to receive recognition for their ability to evaluate learning programmes should be assessed against the Unit Standard: Evaluate learning programmes using given evaluation instruments.

    Further to the above, it is expected that learners will analyse, verify and interpret expert reports about the provider's systems. These could include but are not limited to reports in the following areas: financial, administration and human resources.
  • This Unit Standard applies to both internal and external evaluations. While the scope and purpose of internal and external evaluations might differ, the processes used will be essentially the same. Consequently, learners can achieve credit for this Unit Standard in the context of either internal and/or external evaluations.
  • Evaluation is generally seen as a process, rather than an event. It is therefore expected that learners who wish to achieve this Unit Standard will demonstrate the ability to engage in a process typically including:

    > Gathering data directly or through commissioned reports.
    > Evaluating providers through verification and interpretation of data in relation to agreed criteria.
    > Giving feedback and advice.
    > Evaluating corrective actions taken by providers.
    > Submitting a report based on findings.

    The process will generally include formative and summative evaluations, although the distinctions need not necessarily be clear.
  • The term "assessment" is used in this Unit Standard, not as a synonym for evaluation, but in reference to the process used to establish the competence of individuals. 
    		•

    Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria: 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1 
    Plan and prepare for evaluations. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Critical reflections of quality assurance systems reveal insight into their purpose, general principles, foundational assumptions, key features and impact on affected parties. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The objectives, policies, guidelines and criteria for the evaluation are confirmed to be relevant to the situation at hand. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    A variety of data gathering techniques are explained in terms of their impact and applicability for given situations. Techniques selected are justified in terms of their appropriateness to the nature of the evaluation and specific provider context. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Data gathering techniques could include any of the following: questioning, observation, recording, sampling, tracing, listening, reading, trend analysis.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    Criteria and evidence requirements are communicated to providers in a manner that facilitates understanding of the evaluation process and offers clear direction for provider preparation. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    This includes sharing successful models of quality assurance. Negotiations concerning the criteria for and process of the evaluation satisfy parties concerned.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Development plans and self-evaluations carried out by the provider, where available, are reviewed to establish possible impacts on the current evaluation. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    Evaluation plans define the details of the evaluation and enable the objectives of the evaluation to be met within available resources. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Details include: type of provider, proposed evaluation model, timing of the evaluation, expected duration, resources and information required, roles and responsibilities of support personnel, recording and reporting mechanisms.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    Data gathering instruments and documentation are ready and available and ensure the efficient collection and evaluation of the required evidence. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Instruments and documentation could include checklists, accreditation criteria, quality standards, organisation charts, previous evaluation reports and quality system documentation.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 8 
    Plans and preparations take into account ethical considerations such as potential conflicts of interest. Negotiations between the evaluator and provider create the context for a fair evaluation and make provision for the protection of confidentiality of information. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2 
    Conduct an evaluation of a provider's quality assurance system. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
    The quality assurance system refers to:
  • Quality management policies that define the provider's aims.
  • Quality management procedures that enable the provider to practise defined quality management policies.
  • Monitoring and review mechanisms which ensure that the quality management policies and procedures defined are applied and remain effective.

    The quality assurance system includes documented policies and practices for:
  • The management of the provision of learning, assessment and moderation.
  • Staff selection, appraisal and development.
  • Learner entry, guidance and support systems.
  • Irregularities and appeals policy.
  • The management of off-site practical / work-site components where applicable. 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The evaluation is conducted in a manner that facilitates provider co-operation, the resolution of conflict and the communication of all information required to meet the evaluation objectives. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    Evidence gathered against criteria during the evaluation is valid and sufficient to meet the requirements of the evaluation scope and plan. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    Evaluative decisions are made in terms of pre-determined and agreed upon evaluation criteria and on the basis of sufficient and verifiable evidence. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The evaluation establishes the extent of internal consistency between the quality system and its purpose, the extent of compliance of the system with agreed criteria and opportunities for improvement. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    All evaluation activities comply with existing regulations, evaluation principles, ethics and various other requirements. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
  • "Evaluation principles" include accuracy, fairness, objectivity, completeness, validity, reliability and openness.
  • "Ethics" includes confidentiality, avoiding misrepresentation and conflicts of interest and protection of copyrights and intellectual property.
  • "Other requirements" include any policies, procedures and requirements of the organisation/s involved, any relevant legislative and/or regulatory requirements and any other special industry conditions.
     
    		•

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3 
    Evaluate the implementation of a quality assurance system for learning provision and assessment. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
    The evaluator is expected to make use of expert reports or inputs on the quality of the learning programmes, as well as any other expert reports or inputs that may be needed for the evaluation. Although it is not expected that evaluators should generate such reports, it is expected that evaluators will be able to call for, verify and interpret such reports or inputs.

    The evaluation is to cover the implementation of the quality assurance system, the quality of the resources and general provision.

    "Resources and general provision" refers to:
  • The development, delivery and evaluation of learning.
  • The capacity and ability to ensure the achievement of desired outcomes, using available resources and procedures.
  • Financial, administrative and physical resources.
  • Practices for staff selection, appraisal and development.
  • Practices for student entry, guidance and support systems.
  • Practices for the management of off-site practical/work-site components where applicable.
  • Practices for the management and conducting of assessment and moderation.
  • The capacity and ability to produce appropriate reports.
  • Compliance with relevant Acts. 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The evaluation is conducted in a manner that facilitates the co-operation of the provider, the resolution of conflict, and the communication of all information required to meet the evaluation objectives. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The evaluation identifies variances between the provider's planned and actual quality of provision. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The evaluation identifies shortcomings in the provider's planned provision in relation to pre-determined criteria and general fitness-for-purpose. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The evaluation identifies strengths and weaknesses of the implementation of the quality assurance system, resources and provision, and identifies opportunities for improvement in relation to pre-determined and agreed criteria. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Findings are made in terms of pre-determined evaluation criteria and on the basis of sufficient and verifiable evidence. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    The progress of the evaluation, including any circumstances that could alter planned arrangements, is communicated to relevant parties in a timely and confidential manner. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    Management of contingencies during the evaluation ensures that the integrity of the evaluation is not compromised. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Examples of contingencies are - dangerous and critical situations, significant failure of organisation's systems and/or equipment.
     

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 
    Report findings and make recommendations. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
    The report to include findings based on corrective actions taken by the provider following formative evaluations and advice given during the evaluation process, where applicable. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Reports identify the extent of compliance with quality standards, areas requiring corrective action and recommendations for improvement. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The nature and quality of recommendations facilitate a common understanding of principles of quality assurance in general, the accreditation requirements in particular, and ways of addressing shortcomings. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Emphasis is placed on the need for fit-for-purpose policies, procedures and review mechanisms as part of a continuous cycle of improving provision.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The report covers the full scope of the evaluation and reflects all findings in a manner appropriate to the provider. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    Reports are distributed according to the evaluation plan with particular attention to confidentiality issues. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Opportunities for improving the evaluation process are identified and documented in a form that facilitates planning for future evaluations. Provision is made for the provider to contribute to this review. 


    UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS 
  • An individual wishing to be assessed, (including through RPL) against this Unit Standard may apply to an assessment agency, assessor or provider institution accredited by the relevant ETQA.
  • Anyone assessing a candidate against this Unit Standard must be registered as an assessor for this Unit Standard with the relevant ETQA.
  • Any institution offering learning towards this Unit Standard must be accredited as a provider of learning towards this Unit Standard with the relevant ETQA.
  • External moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at its discretion. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE 
    The following knowledge is embedded within the Unit Standard, and will be assessed directly or implicitly through assessment of the specific outcomes in terms of the assessment criteria:
  • Potential evaluation problems - "Evaluation plans define the details of the evaluation and enable the objectives of the evaluation to be met within available resources."
  • Principles of quality assurance systems - "Critical reflections of quality assurance systems reveal insight into their purpose, general principles, foundational assumptions, key features and impact on affected parties."
  • Concepts and philosophies of quality evaluations - "Critical reflections of quality assurance systems reveal insight into their purpose, general principles, foundational assumptions, key features and impact on affected parties."
  • Evaluation models and techniques - "A variety of data gathering techniques are explained in terms of their impact and applicability for given situations. Techniques selected are justified in terms of their appropriateness to the nature of the evaluation and specific provider context."
  • Evaluation purposes, principles and ethics - "All evaluation activities comply with existing regulations, evaluation principles, ethics and various other requirements."
  • Features of quality learning provision - embedded throughout.
  • Aims and objectives of the NQF - embedded throughout.
  • Consequences of evaluations and the effect on the quality and viability of provision. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOME 
    N/A 

    UNIT STANDARD LINKAGES 
    N/A 


    Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO): 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO IDENTIFYING 
    Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking:
  • Planning for and dealing with problems that arise during evaluation, suggesting changes to the evaluation processes for the future. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO WORKING 
    Work effectively in a team using critical and creative thinking:
  • Working with personnel from providers and accrediting bodies during and after evaluation. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANISING 
    Organise and manage oneself and ones activities:
  • Planning, preparing, conducting and recording the evaluation. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING 
    Collect, analyse, organise and critically evaluate information:
  • Gather, evaluate and judge evidence and the evaluation process. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING 
    Communicate effectively:
  • Communicating during the evaluation and providing feedback. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING 
    Demonstrate the world as a set of related systems:
  • Understanding the impact of quality assurance systems and the related evaluation on individuals and organisations. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO CONTRIBUTING 
    Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts:
  • Plan, conduct and give feedback on evaluations in a culturally sensitive manner. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD ASSESSOR CRITERIA 
    N/A 

    REREGISTRATION HISTORY 
    As per the SAQA Board decision/s at that time, this unit standard was Reregistered in 2012; 2015. 

    UNIT STANDARD NOTES 
    This unit standard replaces unit standard 9939, "Evaluate learning systems", Level 6, 18 credits.

    Definitions
  • Quality is the totality of the characteristics of products and services that bear on their ability to satisfy stated and implied needs of customers and other stakeholders.
  • Quality assurance is a philosophy that encompasses quality management systems, customer focus, a consultation culture, and continuous improvement, for the purpose of improving the value of goods and services to internal and external customers, with the outcomes being improved business results and greater effectiveness and efficiency in day-to-day activities.
  • Quality assurance systems are organisational structures, procedures, processes, and resources needed to implement quality management.
  • Quality evaluation is a systematic and independent examination to determine whether quality activities and related results comply with planned arrangements and whether these arrangements are implemented effectively and are suitable to achieve objectives.
  • Providers refer to the education and training provider that is to be evaluated.
  • Quality standards are the criteria against which the organisation will be evaluated. These criteria are those stipulated in SAQA regulations and ETQA/SETA requirements.
  • ETQA - Education and Training Quality Assurance Body
  • SAQA - South African Qualification Authority
  • SETA - Sector Education and Training Authority 
    		•

    QUALIFICATIONS UTILISING THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
      ID QUALIFICATION TITLE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL STATUS END DATE PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QA FUNCTIONARY
    Elective  50330   Bachelor: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices  Level 6  NQF Level 07  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 
    Elective  50331   National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education, Training and Development Practices  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 


    PROVIDERS CURRENTLY ACCREDITED TO OFFER THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
    This information shows the current accreditations (i.e. those not past their accreditation end dates), and is the most complete record available to SAQA as of today. Some Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionaries have a lag in their recording systems for provider accreditation, in turn leading to a lag in notifying SAQA of all the providers that they have accredited to offer qualifications and unit standards, as well as any extensions to accreditation end dates. The relevant Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionary should be notified if a record appears to be missing from here.
     
    1. AFRICA COMPETENCY DEVELOPMENT (PTY) LTD 
    2. ASORIP NPC 
    3. ASSESSMENT COLLEGE OF SOUTH AFRICA PTY LTD 
    4. ATTE - The Training Edge 
    5. BORDERGATE EVENTS MANAGEMENT AND PROJECTS 
    6. Cale Developments 
    7. Colleen Osorio Skills Development Consultancy cc 
    8. Driving Instincts cc 
    9. EDUTEL SKILLS DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD 
    10. INKWENKWEZI PRIVATE COLLEGE - SKILLS DEVELOPMENT cc 
    11. M3i Skills Development 
    12. MENTORNET (PTY) LTD 
    13. Petra institute of Development (PTY) Ltd 
    14. Resonance Institute of Learning 
    15. South West Gauteng Tvet College 
    16. SPS Consulting (Pty) Ltd 
    17. SWAN SUPPORT SERVICES CC 
    18. The Institute of People Development 
    19. TMG Quality Services 
    20. VERYCOOLIDEAS 


    All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.