1 / 10

Review of the SCQF Level Descriptors

April 2011 to June 2012. Review of the SCQF Level Descriptors. Aims. Planning the Review of the Level Descriptors Stage 1 Stage 2 Plans for the Revised Descriptors. Planning the Review. Began 2010 Scope Rationale Appointment of consultants. Stage 1. Literature Review

winka
Download Presentation

Review of the SCQF Level Descriptors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. April 2011 to June 2012 Review of the SCQF Level Descriptors

  2. Aims • Planning the Review of the Level Descriptors • Stage 1 • Stage 2 • Plans for the Revised Descriptors

  3. Planning the Review • Began 2010 • Scope • Rationale • Appointment of consultants

  4. Stage 1 • Literature Review • Individual Interviews • Focus Groups • Survey Monkey Survey • 35 documents • 25+ interviews with Board, QC, CRBs and Experts • 5 Groups • 97 responses

  5. Findings - general • SCQF Embedded, well used and respected • Primary users are practitioners, but being used more by employers • Don’t change for the sake of it! • Must retain relationships with other frameworks • Clearer distinction between levels wanted

  6. Findings - descriptors • 66% said no aspects of the descriptors caused issues • Language is technical but also accessible • Could be a better academic/vocational balance • Level 1 descriptor • Clarity re progression 6/7, 7/8, 8/9

  7. Early findings - guidance • Mixed views about need for further guidance, suggestions included: • A glossary of key terms and their usage • Summary level descriptors or criteria • Additional/better contextual material • Stronger guidance about both the holistic and cumulative nature of the descriptors • Need to ensure guidance is consistent

  8. End of Stage 1 • Proposals from the Consultants • Quality Committee Away Day • Plans for Consultation and Live Testing Stage Two

  9. Stage 2 • Consultation Document agreed On website Return Date 16 March 2012 • Live Testing All levels Adam Smith College UWS SQA SPC Employers Minerva Momentum

  10. Next Steps • Amendment to proposals in light of the consultation • Recommendation of Quality Committee • Agreement of Board • Dissemination of Revised Level Descriptors • A 5 Booklet • Ultimately a revised handbook

More Related