The following set of generic assessment criteria are applied in an integrated way to assess the Exit Level Outcomes: Current research and multiple sources of scholarly or professional literature are reviewed, critiqued and evaluated in an intellectually independent manner and sound theoretical judgements are made by using well-reasoned, theory-driven and evidence-based arguments. Assessment of risks in an organisational context and other complex problems related to the areas of specialisation are accurately identified, critically reviewed and evaluated and interpreted by taking into consideration the economic, socio-political and legal contexts, including governance and ethics. Standard procedures, processes or techniques to theoretically deal with or empirically investigate unfamiliar complex, abstract or real-life world problems in a particular area of specialisation are appropriately applied. The analyses and interpretation of theoretical, quantitative and qualitative data and information are independently conducted and demonstrate coherent and critical insight by means of well-rounded, theory-driven and evidence-based arguments and critical self-reflection. Judgements and conclusions are based on information and data and are clearly communicated using the resources of an academic/professional discourse appropriately, reliably and accurately. Critical self-assessment reflects an awareness of taking responsibility for the student’s own activities, ethical behaviour and continued personal development in the fields of risk management and governance. Reasoning, viewpoints, insights and ideas reflect an acceptable social sensitivity in the student’s relationship and interaction with others and work in the scholarly, risk management and other managerial work environments. Ethical decisions which affect knowledge production or complex organisational or professional issues are made with social sensitivity and awareness of consequences in an autonomous manner.Integrated Assessment:For the qualification to be awarded, a learner must have successfully achieved the outcomes of each of the compulsory modules that constitute the qualification.Evidence of learning competency (knowledge, skills, attitudes and expertise) and of the candidate’s ability to achieve the purpose of the qualification as a whole at the time that the qualification is awarded is required by means of comprehensive and integrated assessment (constituting a range of formative and summative assessments). Continuous formative and summative assessment methods are used in the form of written assignments and exams.Formative and summative assessment will be conducted within the guidelines of the Unisa Assessment Policy. The student’s summative assessment mark will comprise a year mark (10%) that will be gained from the specified number of compulsory assignments and a written examination in each module which comprises 90% of the total summative assessment mark. The pass mark shall be a minimum of 50% acquired from both continuous and summative assessment in a proportionate ratio; 75% shall constitute a pass with distinction.Assessors should assess and give credit for evidence of learning that has already been acquired through formal, informal and non-formal learning and experience.Lecturers responsible for the module and external markers (assessors) will act as assessor practitioners in accordance with the Unisa Assessment Policy. Formative and summative assessment will be conducted within the guidelines of the Unisa Assessment Policy. Student support will be provided in accordance with Unisa ODL and Learner Support policies and guidelines.Notes for assessors:Assessors should keep the following general principles in mind when designing and conducting assessments: Focus the initial assessment activities on gathering evidence in terms of the main and specific outcomes, or groups of specific outcomes expressed in each of the modules to ensure that assessment is integrated rather than fragmented. The aim is to declare the person competent in terms of the qualification purpose. Make sure evidence is gathered across the entire range, wherever it applies. Assessment activities should be as close to the real performance as possible and where simulations or role plays are used there should be supporting evidence to show that the candidate is able to perform in the real situation. All assessments should be conducted in line with the following well-documented principles of assessment as defined below and in the Unisa Assessment Policy.Principles of assessment: Appropriate: The method of assessment is suited to the performance being assessed. Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievements which are not related to the evidence. In particular, the method of assessment is sensitive to language diversity. Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost-effective assessments that do not unduly interfere with learning. Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and feasible. Valid: The assessment focuses on the requirements laid down in the standard, ie the assessment is fit for purpose. Direct: The activities in the assessment mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible. Authentic: The assessor is satisfied that the work being assessed is attributable to the person being assessed. Sufficient: The evidence collected establishes that all criteria have been met and that performance to the required standard can be repeated consistently. Systematic: Planning and recording are sufficiently rigorous to ensure that assessment is fair. Open: Students can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence. Assessment candidates understand the assessment process and the criteria that apply. Consistent: The same assessor would make the same judgement again in similar circumstances. The judgement made is similar to the judgement that would be made by other assessors.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.