Validation process and guidelines

Both the Training Adviser and the learner must understand what the standard requires. In some validation processes the learner and Training Adviser meet before the validation to ensure the learner has the same understanding as the Training Adviser. In others, a Trainer briefs the learner and the Training Adviser remains at an objective distance. The choice of method will depend on the nature of the module and of the method of validation.

It should be very clear what evidence is acceptable and what evidence is unacceptable for validation purposes. If the standard requires the learner to demonstrate that they know or understand something, the evidence may be gathered by a test, exam or structured interview. If the module requires the learner to demonstrate an ability or to deliver to a measurable performance level, the evidence may be gathered by observation of a task or by examining the actual output of a task.

In ‘claim based’ validation processes, the onus is on the learner to collect the evidence, to format the evidence and to approach the Training Adviser to arrange a validation. In ‘check based’ validation processes, the Training Adviser collects random evidence, possibly without the learner knowing, and then arranges a validation meeting.

Here the Training Adviser has to base the decision on a comparison between the standard and the available evidence. The comparison process involves the Training Adviser looking at each piece of the standard, then searching the evidence to find some that satisfies that piece. The Training Adviser then moves on to the next piece of the standard. Normally these pieces of the standard are grouped together in sections so that validation decisions can be made for specific sections, according to the validation rules.

A key principle of validation is early feedback. In most validation processes the Training Adviser should indicate where the evidence is insufficient to meet the standard and what the learner should do to collect appropriate evidence in the future. The feedback process encourages transparent validation,
the accountability of Training Advisers and fair and objective validation.

The following examples illustrate this process:

1. Treat all learners equally, impartially and fairly.
2. Wherever possible, the same person should not train and assess a specific learner on the same standard.
3. Check that the evidence is the learner’s own work and not based on hearsay or on subjective or emotional responses.
4. Check that the evidence is valid (i.e., that it demonstrates the knowledge, ability or performance required by the standard).
5. Check that the evidence is reliable (i.e., that it is repeatable and based on the learner’s ability and performance rather than on guess work or chance).
6. Check that there is sufficient evidence to meet the standard.
7. Base the validation decision on the evidence presented, observable and available.
8. Base the decision on current evidence, not on old evidence.
9. Make a written, signed and dated record of the validation process and the reasons for the decision.
10. Accept that the onus is on the learner to present the evidence, not on the Training Adviser to find it.
11. Base feedback on a comparison of evidence against the standard, not on other evidence that was not presented or available at the time of validation.
12. When giving feedback, comment on the evidence rather than the learner’s personality or ability.
13. Give the learner a written, signed and dated copy of the validation decision and the reasons for that decision.
14. Inform the learner how they can appeal against the validation decision if they so wish.