NATIONAL CERTIFICATE: MIXED FARMING
SYSTEMS
48971
LEVEL 1
120 CREDITS
Moderator Guide
Moderator Guide
Table of Contents
Using the Moderation Guide.................................................................................................................4
1. Introduction 4
2. Using the Moderation Guide....................................................................................................4
2.1 Point of Moderation Purpose............................................................................................4
2.2 Moderation Documents.....................................................................................................4
2.2.1 Pre-Moderation.........................................................................................................4
2.2.2 Concurrent / Post Moderation...................................................................................4
Provider Details 5
Moderation Plan 6
Pre-Moderation 7
1. Moderation Preparation...........................................................................................................7
1.1 Learner Sample..................................................................................................................7
1.2 ETD Staff Sample................................................................................................................7
1.3 Documents in Moderation Sample....................................................................................7
2. Validation of Assessors & Candidates.......................................................................................8
2.1 Assessor Validation............................................................................................................8
2.2 Candidate Validation..........................................................................................................9
3. Comparative Moderation Results...........................................................................................10
3.1 Assessors Validation........................................................................................................10
3.2 Candidates Validation......................................................................................................11
4. Cross Sample Moderation Report...........................................................................................12
Concurrent / Post Moderation............................................................................................................14
1. Moderation Preparation.........................................................................................................14
1.1 Learner Sample................................................................................................................14
1.2 ETD Staff Sample..............................................................................................................14
1.3 Documents in Moderation Sample..................................................................................14
1.4 Learner Status..................................................................................................................14
2. Portfolio Construct.................................................................................................................15
3. Comparative Moderation Results...........................................................................................16
4. Cross Sample Moderation Report...........................................................................................18
Moderator Guide
Using the Moderation Guide
1. Introduction
The purpose of this Moderation Guide is to provide the Moderator with basic tools to conduct
moderation before, during and after assessment has taken place.
The Moderation Guide incorporates a system of comparative moderation as a basis for obtaining
more objectivity in the moderation findings and allows for block moderations instead of a “per
portfolio” approach only.
2. Using the Moderation Guide
Depending on the moderation point, the Moderator will delete the sections not in use, and only
maintain the areas applicable to the point of moderation.
2.1 Point of Moderation Purpose
The Moderation Guide allows for a targeted scope of moderation:
No Moderation Point Purpose and Scope of Moderation
1 Pre-Moderation Assessor Validation
Candidate Validation
Instrument Validation
2 Concurrent / Post Moderation Learner Status
Assessment Practice
Assessor Performance
Portfolio Validation
2.2 Moderation Documents
2.2.1 Pre-Moderation
The pre-moderation should be conducted during and directly after learner registration. When
conducting the pre-moderation, delete the concurrent / post moderation section and only complete
the pre-moderation reports.
2.2.2 Concurrent / Post Moderation
The concurrent moderation should be conducted at the end of every Learning Unit and results
reported as part of the SETA moderation report. When conducting the concurrent moderation,
delete the pre-moderation section and only complete the pre-moderation reports.
Moderator Guide
Provider Details
Provider Name Type of Moderation
Provider Address Date of Moderation
Report
Provider Contact Moderator
Person Responsible
Provider Contact Moderator Contact
Details Details
Qualification / Learning programme
Moderator Guide
Moderation Plan
1 Type of Moderation
2 Purpose of Moderation
3 Date of Moderation
4 Location of Moderation
5 Method of Moderation
6 Role Players
7 Scope of Moderation
8 Moderation Sample
9 Moderation Tools
10 Preparation Required
Additional Briefing Notes
Moderator Signature Date of Moderation Plan
Moderator Guide
Pre-Moderation
1. Moderation Preparation
1.1 Learner Sample
Surname Name Learner ID Numbers Unit Standards
Completed
1.2 ETD Staff Sample
Surname Name Assessor ID Numbers Unit Standards
Assessed
1.3 Documents in Moderation Sample
No Documents requested Received Comments
Yes No
1 Alignment Strategy & Facilitation Schedule
2 Master Assessment Guide and Assessment
Toolkit
3 Learner recruitment, selection & entry
documents as per selection
4 Assessor registration and SME details
5 Workplace agreement / minutes
Moderator Guide
2. Validation of Assessors & Candidates
2.1 Assessor Validation
Programme / Qualification
Assessment period / Client / Project
Rating ranges from 1 – 4 for each main criterion
No Evidence – 0, Insufficient Evidence – 1, Sufficient Evidence – 2, Above Standard Evidence – 3, Excellent Evidence – 4
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
s
A. Assessor Name Assessor Validation to Programme
1 ID / CV / scholastic documents on
file
2 SETA Registration Report
3 Assessment Scope validated
4 Assessor SLA and code of conduct
5 Assessor /learner allocation
validated
B. Assessor Name Assessor Validation to Programme
1 ID / CV / scholastic documents on
file
2 SETA Registration Report
3 Assessment Scope validated
4 Assessor SLA and code of conduct
5 Assessor /learner allocation
validated
C. Assessor Name Assessor validation to programme
1 ID / CV / scholastic documents on
file
2 SETA Registration Report
3 Assessment Scope validated
4 Assessor SLA and code of conduct
5 Assessor /learner allocation
validated
Overall Findings Average of 3 ratings, and moderator decision
in terms of candidate suitability and entry
process
11 Assessors’ registration and scope in
line with programme requirements
12 Assessor contracts and
administration in line with SETA
requirements
13 Assessor learner allocations
reasonable and manageable
Moderator Guide
Moderator Comments
Moderation Decision
Assessors meet the programme and SETA requirements in terms of registration and Yes No
Subject Matter Expertise
Assessors have been duly contracted / briefed on programme / assessment requirements Yes No
Assessor – candidate ratio is suitable and in line with SETA requirements Yes No
2.2 Candidate Validation
Candidate Name
Candidate ID
Qualification / Unit Standards
Rating ranges from 1 – 4 for each main criterion
No Evidence – 0, Insufficient Evidence – 1, Sufficient Evidence – 2, Above Standard Evidence – 3, Excellent Evidence – 4
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
A. Candidate Administration Candidate screening and administration
1 ID / CV / scholastic documents
2 Registration Form & database entry
3 Contract
4 Learner administration file
B. Candidate RSE Recruitment, Selection & Entry
5 Recruitment & Selection Validation
6 Entry Orientation / Induction
7 Assessment Preparation
8 Candidate meets entry requirements /
special needs identified
C. Learner Support Candidate support from provider and
workplace
9 Candidate received training material &
facilitation schedule
10 Candidate coach / mentor / workplace
identified
D. Overall Findings Average of 3 ratings, and moderator
decision in terms of candidate suitability
Moderator Guide
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
s
and entry process
11 Candidate Administration in order
12 Candidate RSE fair, valid, appropriate
13 Learner support evident
Moderator Comments
Moderation Decision
Candidate meets the programme entry requirements and due process has been followed Yes No
in recruitment, selection and entry
Candidate administration has been completed relevant resources provided Yes No
Candidate has been oriented on programme and assessment requirements Yes No
3. Comparative Moderation Results
3.1 Assessors Validation
Candidate Name / Surname Candidate ID Number
3. SLA / Code
4. Assessor /
Registration
of Conduct
Scholastics
Rating per
candidate
1. ID, CV,
Assessor
2. SSETA
Scope &
ratio
Rating per area of moderation
Moderator Guide
3.2 Candidates Validation
Candidate Name / Surname Candidate ID Number
Administratio
A. Candidate
B. Candidate
Rating per
C. Learner
D. Overall
candidate
Findings
Support
RSE
n
Rating per area of moderation
Overall Moderation Area Overall Rating General Comments and Remediation Required
A. Assessor Validation
B. Candidate Validation
C. Overall Findings
KEY: MR – Met Requirements, RR – Remediation Required, NMR – Not met Requirements
Moderation Decision MR / RR/ NMR
The selected candidates meet the requirements of the programme recruitment, selection and
entry requirements
The assessors meet the requirements of the programme registration, scope and subject matter
expertise
Overall programme requirements have been met for candidates and assessors moderated
Moderator Details
Moderator Name Date
Moderator Signature
Moderator Guide
4. Cross Sample Moderation Report
Rating ranges from 1 – 4 for each main criterion
No Evidence – 0, Insufficient Evidence – 1, Sufficient Evidence – 2, Above Standard Evidence – 3, Excellent Evidence – 4
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
s
A. Candidates Candidate Validation
1 Candidates meet entry
requirements of programme,
special needs identified
2 Recruitment, selection and
entry process followed
3 Learner Administration and
support in place
B. Assessors Assessor Validation
4 Assessors meet registration
and subject matter expertise
requirements
5 Assessor contracts,
agreements and
administration in place
6 Assessor briefing / schedules
completed
7 Assessor – candidate ration is
reasonable and appropriate –
note total assessors and
candidates
C. Instrument Validation Instruments Reviewed
8 Assessment strategy and
related assessment toolkit
suitable for target group in
this project
9 Plan for special needs
identified
10 Workplace supports valid
assessment and evidence
gathering
D. Overall Findings Average of 3 ratings, and moderator decision in
terms of programme start up
11 Candidates suitable for
programme
12 Assessors suitable for
programme
13 Instruments suitable for
programme
14 Overall logistics, planning and
preparation for programme in
place
Moderator Guide
Moderator Comments
Moderation Review
Candidate and assessor sample is valid and representative of the total target group under Yes No
review in terms of demographics and programme suitability
Moderation methods allowed for a fair, valid reliable and credible review of candidate, Yes No
assessor, workplace and instrument suitability – a combination of desk-top and interactive
methods used
A remedial plan has been established that will allow current learners to exit, and future Yes No
practices to improve.
Moderator Guide
Concurrent / Post Moderation
1. Moderation Preparation
1.1 Learner Sample
Surname Name Learner ID Numbers Unit Standards
Completed
1.2 ETD Staff Sample
Surname Name Assessor ID Numbers Unit Standards Assessed
1.3 Documents in Moderation Sample
No Documents requested Received Comments
Yes No
1 Alignment Strategy & Facilitation Schedule
2 Master Assessment Guide and Assessment
Toolkit
3 Learner PoE sample as per selection
4 Assessment Toolkits as per selection
5 Learner uploads for programme in moderation
1.4 Learner Status
No Description Total No Description Total
1 Learners registered 4 Number of drop-outs
2 Learners remaining 5 Percentage drop out
3 Number of learners Competent 6 Number of learners in
to date remediation
7. Number of drop-outs per reason - please complete below
Reason Total
Moderator Guide
2. Portfolio Construct
Candidate Name
Candidate ID
Qualification / Unit Standards
Assessor Name
Assessor ID
Rating ranges from 1 – 4 for each main criterion
No Evidence – 0, Insufficient Evidence – 1, Sufficient Evidence – 2, Above Standard Evidence – 3, Excellent Evidence – 4
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
A. Assessment Details s Candidate details
1 Portfolio Index / checklist
2 Progress sheet completed and as per
strategy / roll out schedule
3 Learner Preparation
Learner Information Declaration of
Authenticity
B. Assessment Process Plan, prepare, conduct, judge, feedback,
review documents
4 Assessment Recording &
Administration - complete
5 Coaching Sheets & Re-assessment
evidence
6 Validity of assessment recording -
quality of comments
7 Learner feedback per instrument
completed in line with decision
8 Evidence Summary completed
9 Judgements completed
10 Overall learner feedback completed
C. Evidence Evidence documents, review in terms of
VACS
11 Valid - sample answers checked
against model answers, re-
assessments where necessary
recorded
12 Authenticity & Currency – signed and
dated
13 Sufficient – enough evidence
provided in line with strategy and
model answers
D. Assessment Judgement Feedback, re-assessment, coaching and
recorded judgement
14 Feedback and re-assessment /
coaching
15 Judgement
Moderator Guide
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
s
E. Overall Findings Average of 5 ratings, and moderator decision
in terms of assessment conducted.
16 Assessment practice – process,
recording, policy compliance
17 Evidence – VACS
18 Administration – recording, PoE
structure
19 Overall reliability, consistency and
credibility of assessment judgement
and feedback
Moderator Comments
Moderation Decision
The learner meets the requirements of the unit standards and evidence requirements, and is Yes No
therefore competent.
Assessment meets the requirements of process, principles and recording Yes No
Overall portfolio and assessment decision can be upheld Yes No
3. Comparative Moderation Results
Candidate Name / Surname Assessor Name / Surname
D. Assessment
A. Assessment
B. Assessment
C. Evidence
Judgement
Rating per
candidate
E. Overall
Findings
Process
Details
Rating per area of moderation
Overall Moderation Area Overall Rating General Comments and Remediation Required
A. Assessment Details
B. Assessment Process
C. Evidence
D. Assessment Judgement
E. Overall Findings
KEY: MR – Met Requirements, RR – Remediation Required, NMR – Not met Requirements
Moderator Guide
Moderation Decision MR / RR/ NMR
The learner meets the requirements of the unit standards and evidence requirements,
and is therefore competent.
Assessment meets the requirements of process, principles and recording across all
portfolios and assessors
Overall portfolio and assessment decisions for group of learners moderated can be
upheld
Moderator Details
Moderator Name Date
Moderator Signature
Assessors Feedback Provided
Assessor Name & Signature Date
Assessor Name & Signature Date
Assessor Name & Signature Date
Moderator Guide
4. Cross Sample Moderation Report
Rating ranges from 1 – 4 for each main criterion
No Evidence – 0, Insufficient Evidence – 1, Sufficient Evidence – 2, Above Standard Evidence – 3, Excellent Evidence – 4
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
s
A. Assessment Details Candidate details
1 General Portfolio administration:
portfolio checklists, structure, neatness
and consistent filing
2 Progress sheets / assessor reports,
candidate details, adherence to provider
policy and strategy / roll out schedule
3 Learner Preparation
Learner Information Declaration of
Authenticity
B. Assessment Process Plan, prepare, conduct, judge, feedback,
review documents
4 General Assessment Recording &
Administration – across portfolios and
per assessor
5 Coaching Sheets & Re-assessment
evidence - across portfolios and per
assessor / candidate
6 Validity of assessment recording - quality
of comments - across portfolios and per
assessor
7 Learner feedback per instrument
completed in line with decision - across
portfolios and per assessor
8 Evidence Summary completed - across
portfolios and per assessor
9 Judgements completed - across
portfolios and per assessor
10 Overall learner feedback completed -
across portfolios and per assessor
C. Evidence Evidence documents, review in terms of
VACS
11 Valid - sample answers checked against
model answers, re-assessments where
necessary recorded - across portfolios
and per assessor
12 Authenticity & Currency – signed and
dated - across portfolios and per
assessor
13 Sufficient – enough evidence provided in
line with strategy and model answers -
across portfolios and per assessor
D. Assessment Judgement Feedback, re-assessment, coaching and
recorded judgement
Moderator Guide
Doc Evidence Evaluation External Moderator Comments
Requirement
Requirement
Not met
Met
s
14 Feedback and re-assessment / coaching
- across portfolios and per assessor
15 Judgement - across portfolios and per
assessor
E. Overall Findings Average of 5 ratings, and moderator
decision in terms of assessment
conducted.
16 Assessment practice – process,
recording, policy compliance - across
portfolios and per assessor
17 Evidence – VACS - across portfolios and
per assessor
18 Administration – recording, PoE structure
- across portfolios and per assessor
19 Overall reliability, consistency and
credibility of assessment judgement and
feedback - across portfolios and per
assessor
Moderator Comments
Moderation Review
Portfolio sample is valid and representative of the assessment under review in terms of Yes No
learner demographics, assessors, regions / sites
Moderation methods allowed for a fair, valid reliable and credible review of assessment Yes No
practice – a combination of desk-top and interactive methods used
A remedial plan has been established that will allow current learners to exit, and future Yes No
practices to improve.