SVQ in Food & Drink Operations External Verification Report

Verification  External Verification period 1 st August 2013 to 31 st July 2014  Eleven centre visits were undertaken. All centres were externally verified under the Quality Assurance Management System (QAMS)  Level 2 8 awards Old Pathways 11 awards New Pathways

Verification  Level 3 3 Old Pathways 5 New Pathways  All awards were sampled at various stages of completion  Five centres did not fully comply with parts of the QAMS criteria with weaknesses evident

Approval and Development  Six Centre Approval Visits for 4 Awards at Level 2 and 4 Awards at Level 3  One Centre Approval for a Customised Award  Four Development visits

QAV – Quality Approval Verification  All centres held the current sector Assessment Strategy  Centres are aware of the Assessment Strategy  The majority of Centres are aware of QAMS  There has been a significant increase in the uptake of Level 3 awards and Units, which is very encouraging

QAV  Centres reported that some of the pathways did not offer sufficient Units and candidate-specific job roles had to be changed to suit their chosen pathway  Centres should ensure that the candidates selected for Level 3 awards are working at this level and have full support from workplace management/team leaders

QAV  Units at Level 3 – assessment only by observation practices is insufficient at this level  Centres must ensure that assessors are fully competent in the food production area they are assessing. Competency should be fully detailed in CPD records. Centres must ensure assessors are fully competent to assess at Level 3

Good Practice  Centres continue to use innovative training and learning resources: Video, PowerPoint  Centres have developed high quality induction and learning resources, support material, and guidance on plagiarism to support candidate induction  Post-assessment feedback at some centres is very effective. This enables candidates to improve their performance

Good Practice  Centres are using a diverse range of assessment methods as a result of the new pathways to support assessment and record performance: photographic, video and voice recording  One centre calculated the assessor / candidate ratios: this ensures assessors have sufficient time and resources to undertake candidate assessment and planning

Good Practice  An increased use of e-portfolios and the benefits of electronic storage and remote access  An awareness of the qualification requirements and the National Occupational Standards

QAMS  All centres were externally verified using QAMS. Some centre staff were not aware of the changes and criteria to be met for QAMS. Where non-compliance was identified, this was resolved by the centre within the agreed timescale. All centres gave positive feedback on QAMS

Visit Plan  Part of Quality Audit Trail, copied to SQA  Majority of centres met all requests on Visit Plan  Queries regarding the visit plan eg - non availability of assessor, verifiers, candidates, portfolios requested; please inform your External Verifier prior to the visit

QAMS  Green - Significant Strengths  Amber - Insufficient Evidence  Red - No Evidence  If Amber or Red, sanctions are applied by QAV team at SQA.

QAMS  Insufficient or no Evidence in Criteria  2.3 Documented evidence of CPD Amber Red  2.4 Sufficient competent staff, occupational experience, to support A and IV at centre Amber

QAMS  2.8 On going reviews of assessment procedures, equipment, learning, and environment Amber  4.1 Assessment and verification procedures documented to meet SQA requirements Red

QAMS  4.2 Assessment reliable, valid and fair Amber  4.6 Comply with access to premises, records, information, staff and candidates for external verification purposes Amber  4.7 Candidate evidence retained in line with SQA requirements Amber

QAMS  4.8 Outcomes or external quality assurance disseminated to staff, actions points monitored against time scales Red  6.6 Comments/Queries about qualification, assessment guidance, verification or SQA must be resolved and recorded Amber

Areas for Improvement  CPD - CPD records should be detailed, accurate and available for external verification visits and relevant external quality audits  Centres should hold standardisation meetings for the awards, preferably mid- and post- completion of Units. All assessors, internal verifiers and SQA Co-ordinators should attend these meetings

Areas for Improvement  The QAMS system and criteria should be discussed at the standardisation meetings  Level 3 candidates would benefit from better explanation of the awards  Assessors should provide learners with robust, constructive comments and feedback with suggestions and pointers on how to enhance their performance

Areas for Improvement  Internal verifiers should provide feedback to assessors on assessment decisions and provide support and guidance to assessors  Centres should ensure that the candidates selected for Level 3 awards are working at this level and have full support from workplace management/team leaders  Assessment through observation practices is insufficient at Level 3