One of the biggest mistakes that students and some trainers/assessors can make is to think that the learner guide and presentations are the only sources of answers for summative assessments. This is not the case! The assessor should be looking for evidence that the student has actually understood the content and can apply it in a real-world context. Copying and pasting from the learner guide or presentations do not demonstrate this understanding and should likely lead to a not-yet-competent grade. So what should students do instead?

The best way to prepare for summative assessments is to make sure that the students have a thorough understanding of the content. This means going beyond just reading or listening to the material – students need to be able to explain it in their own words and apply it to real-world situations. A great way to test their understanding is to try and teach the content to someone else. If they can explain it clearly and answer any questions they have, then the trainers/assessors know they’re on the right track!

Another useful strategy is to create a mind map or summary of the key points for each topic. This will help students to remember the main points and will also give them something to refer back to if they get stuck during an assessment.

Finally, don’t forget that as an assessor you should be available to help – if they’re not sure about something, they should ask! You must be able to give them guidance and feedback that will help them improve their understanding.

If your students are only relying on the learner guide and presentations for their answers, they may also be at risk of plagiarism. Plagiarism is when someone copy-and-pastes text from another source without giving credit to the original author. This is considered cheating and can lead to serious consequences, like getting expelled from school.

To avoid plagiarism, make sure your students understand that they need to answer questions in their own words. They can use the learner guide and presentations as a resource, but they should not copy verbatim from these sources. Instead, they should paraphrase the information and cite any direct quotes.

If you’re not sure how to teach your students about plagiarism, there are many resources available online, such as this article from the Purdue Online Writing Lab https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/avoiding_plagiarism/index.html

So, don’t rely on the learner guide and presentations as the only source of answers for summative assessments. Make sure your learners understand the content thoroughly and can apply it in a real-world context. If they do this, they’ll be well on their way to success!

Simulation can provide a realistic environment in which to observe and assess student performance. A variety of assessment tools are available to support observation using simulation, including checklists, global rating scales, observation guides and structured debriefing. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of tool should be based on the specific learning objectives for the simulation session.

Checklists are often used to assess basic technical skills, such as handwashing or equipment setup. They are easy to use and can be completed quickly, making them ideal for high-volume simulated experiences such as mass casualty drills. However, checklists may not capture more complex aspects of student performance, such as decision-making or team communication.

Global rating scales are another common assessment tool for simulation. These scales allow observers to rate a learner’s overall performance on a specific task or scenario. They are often used in conjunction with checklists to provide a more comprehensive assessment of student performance. However, global rating scales can be subject to observer bias, and it can be difficult to compare ratings across different learners.

Observation guides should be used as a way to focus observations and should not be used as a means of recording every single detail of the simulation.

Structured debriefing is a process in which the learner and observer(s) reflect on the simulation experience together. This type of debriefing can be beneficial in helping the learner to identify areas of improvement and develop a plan for addressing them. However, structured debriefing can be time-consuming, and it may not be feasible to use this approach for large-scale simulations.

The information collected through an effective assessment tool can then be used to help inform instructional decision-making. Additionally, using simulation for assessment can help reduce bias in evaluations, as it allows all students to be assessed on an equal footing. Therefore, simulation should be considered as a possible assessment tool to support observation in order to improve student learning outcomes.

It is also important to note that assessment tools should not be used in isolation, but rather should be used in conjunction with other methods of assessment such as debriefing and post-simulation discussion. By using a variety of assessment methods, educators can more accurately identify areas of strengths and weaknesses for individual students.

The choice of assessment tool should be based on the specific learning objectives for the simulation session. Checklists, global rating scales, and structured debriefing are all valid options for assessing student performance in simulation. The most appropriate tool for a given simulation will depend on the nature of the task or scenario being simulated, the number of learners participating, and the time available for debriefing.

Assessment evidence in the VET sector refers to the process and methods used by assessors to gather, generate and judge the quality of evidence for the purpose of making informed judgements about vocational competence.

It includes how assessors:

• Design and select assessment instruments
• Plan and conduct assessments
• Interpret and use assessment results as evidence of a student’s claim of competence

There are different types of assessment evidence that can be used in the VET sector, including:

Direct evidence: This is generated when an assessor observes a candidate undertaking a task or activity, or when the candidate provides a first-hand account of their own performance.

Indirect evidence: This is generated from sources other than the candidate themselves, such as witness testimony, video or audio recordings, or documents produced by the candidate.

Anecdotal evidence: This is information that is not directly related to the candidate’s performance, but which may nonetheless be useful in making a judgement about their vocational competence. This could include information from references, employer feedback, or third-party observations

Direct Evidence

Training and assessment in the VET sector relies heavily on direct evidence.

This is because learners in the VET sector are typically engaged in practical, hands-on activities that allow assessors to directly observe their skills and knowledge in action.

Direct evidence can take many forms, but it typically includes:

• Observations of learners carrying out tasks
• Interviews with learners about their experiences and learning
• Products or artefacts produced by learners as part of their learning (e.g., essays, drawings, models)

Assessment tasks specifically designed to test specific skills or knowledge areas.

Direct evidence is usually collected by assessors during the normal course of teaching and assessment activities.

However, it can also be collected through specialised assessment tasks or activities that are specifically designed to assess particular skills or knowledge areas.

One of the advantages of using direct evidence is that it provides a clear link between the evidence and the relevant skill or knowledge area. This can make it easier for assessors to make judgements about whether a learner has demonstrated the required level of proficiency.

Another advantage of direct evidence is that it can be very specific. This means that it can provide detailed information about what a learner knows and can do, which can be very useful for diagnosis and planning purposes.

However, there are some disadvantages of using direct evidence. One of these is that it can be time-consuming and expensive to collect, especially if specialised assessment tasks are required.

Another disadvantage is that direct evidence is often open to interpretation without proper benchmarking in assessor’s copy of the training and assessment resources. This means that there can be scope for assessors to make different judgements about the same piece of evidence, which can lead to inconsistency in assessment decisions.

Indirect Evidence

Indirect evidence is often used to supplement direct evidence in order to get a more holistic picture of the learner’s achievement.

Indirect evidence has its advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages of indirect evidence:

• Can be used to assess a wide range of skills and knowledge
• Can be less time-consuming and expensive to collect than direct evidence
• Can be used to assess learners who are not able to physically perform a task

Disadvantages of indirect evidence:

• May be less reliable than direct evidence
• May be prone to bias
• May not provide as much detail as direct evidence

Indirect evidence can be collected in a number of ways, including through

• questionnaires,
• tests, and
• interviews.

Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Questionnaires:

Advantages:

• Can assess a wide range of skills and knowledge
• Can be administered to a large number of people at once
• Can be relatively quick and easy to administer

Disadvantages:

• May be subject to response bias
• May not provide as much detail as other methods such as interviews or observations

Interviews:

Advantages:

• Can assess a wide range of skills and knowledge
• Can provide more detail than other methods such as questionnaires or tests

Disadvantages:

• May be time-consuming and expensive to administer
• May be subject to bias
• May not be able to assess a large number of people at once

The type of evidence used will depend on the particular assessment context and the purpose of the assessment.

For example, direct evidence may be more appropriate where a candidate’s practical skills are being assessed, while indirect evidence may be more suitable for assessing theoretical knowledge.

Anecdotal evidence

Anecdotal evidence is also known as “Supplementary evidence”

As the VET sector continues to grow and evolve, so too does the need for high-quality training and assessment. A key part of ensuring that training and assessment are of a high standard is the use of evidence-based practices.

One type of evidence that can be used to inform training and assessment practices is anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence consists of stories or accounts of events that have been experienced by an individual or group. This type of evidence can be useful in providing insights into the effectiveness of different approaches to training and assessment.

However, it is important to note that anecdotal evidence should not be used as the sole basis for decision-making. Rather, it should be used in conjunction with other forms of evidence, such as research evidence, in order to make informed decisions about training and assessment practices.

It is important that assessors use a range of evidence sources to build up a comprehensive picture of the candidate’s competence.

This will help to ensure that the assessment is fair and accurate and that any judgement made about the candidate’s vocational competence is well-informed.