Guide to Validation for Validation Panel Members and Qualification Design Teams:

Using the design principles for Higher National Certificates and Diplomas

Publication code: CA2972 Published by the Scottish Qualifications Authority The Optima Building, 58 Robertson Street, Glasgow G2 8DQ Ironmills Road, Dalkeith, Midlothian EH22 1LE www.sqa.org.uk
H

The information in this publication may be reproduced in support of SQA qualifications. If it is reproduced, SQA should be clearly acknowledged as the source. If it is to be used for any other purpose, then written permission must be obtained from the Publishing Team at SQA. It must not be reproduced for trade or commercial purposes. Scottish Qualifications Authority 2007

For an up-to-date list of prices visit the Publication Sales and Downloads section of SQAs website. This document can, on request, be produced in alternative formats, including large type, Braille and community languages. For further details telephone SQAs Customer Contact Centre on 0845 279 1000. SQA is committed to using plain English. We will try to make our publications as easy and straightforward to understand as we can, and will try to avoid all unnecessary jargon. If there is any language in this document that you feel is hard to understand, or could be improved, please write to Editor, Publishing Team, at the Glasgow address above or e-mail: editor@sqa.org.uk.
H

Contents
Introduction 1 1 The design principles for HNCs and HNDs 3 3 1.1 The design principles 1.2 Further considerations 4 1.3 Transition programme 5 6 2 Validation an overview 2.1 The purpose of validation 6 2.2 What happens before validation 6 6 2.3 The Validation Proposal Document 2.4 Validation of HN Units 7 7 2.5 Validation of Graded Units 2.6 Validation of Group Awards 7 2.7 Validation outcomes 8 2.8 Validation spans 8 2.9 After validation 8 2.10Producing the Validated Document and an Arrangements Document 9 3 Validation panels members and their roles 10 3.1 Organisation of the panel 10 3.2 Size of panels 10 3.3 Role of the convener 11 3.4 Role of the educationist 13 3.5 Role of the industrialist or Sector Skills Council representative 13 3.6 Role of the SQA representative 14 3.7 Role of the centre representative 14 3.8 What to do if panel members do not arrive 15 3.9 Training of validation panel members 15 4 Validation meetings 17 17 4.1 Validation meeting for HN Units 4.2 Validation meeting for Group Awards 17 4.3 Validation outcomes 20 4.4 Validation conditions 21 22 4.5 The Validation Report 4.7 Appeals against validation outcomes 23 4.8 After validation 23 5 Validation Proposal Document for an HNC or HND 25 5.1 Content and format 25 26 5.2 Title 27 5.3 Rationale 5.4 Aims 27 5.5 Recommended access 28
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

5.6 Structure of the qualification 5.7 Approaches to delivery and assessment 5.8 HN Unit and Graded Unit specifications 5.9 Supporting evidence 6 Validation of Graded Units 6.1 Introduction 6.2 The role of the validator 6.3 The Graded Unit specification 6.4 General information for centres 6.5 Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates 7 Validating HN Units 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Revised format 7.3 General information for centres 7.4 Statement of standards 7.5 Support Notes 7.6 General information for candidates 8 Validation checklists 8.1 Checklist for use in the validation of HNCs and HNDs 8.2 Checklist for validation of a Graded Unit specification 8.3 Checklist for validation of an HN Unit Appendix 1: Summary of the design principles for developing HNCs and HNDs Appendix 2: SQA qualifications and the SCQF Appendix 3: SCQF level descriptors Appendix 4: Validation quality elements Appendix 5: Specimen programme for a Higher National Group Award validation meeting Appendix 6: Form Validation Reports Appendix 7: Higher National Graded Unit Specification: Project Appendix 8: Higher National Graded Unit Specification: Examination Appendix 9: Higher National Unit Specification Feedback Form
H H H H

29 39 41 41 43 43 45 45 47
H H H H H H H H H

49 53 53 53 55 58 61 62 63 63 69 73
H H H H H H H H H H H H

79 82 83 88
H H H H

89 90 108 117 125 134

H H

Introduction
B

These guidelines apply to the validation of HN Units, Graded Units and HNCs and HNDs that have been developed or revised using the design principles that were approved by SQAs Qualification Committee in March 2003 (see Appendix 1). The guidelines should be used when SQA manages the validation process, including where the centre involved does not have devolved responsibility for the validation of SQA qualifications. Centres with devolved responsibility for validating HN Group Awards may also use these guidelines, or they may choose to use guidelines of their own when validating HNCs and HNDs. While only SQA can now validate HN Units, we are working in partnership with centres which require new or revised HN Units for specialist single centre or specialist collaborative devised HNCs or HNDs. The qualifications this guide covers are: Higher National Certificates (HNCs) Higher National Diplomas (HNDs) Higher National Units (HN Units) using the revised HN Unit specification Graded Units Terminology used in this guide SCQF: This stands for the Scottish Credit and Qualification Framework, which is a new way of speaking about qualifications and how they interrelate. We use SCQF terminology throughout this guide to refer to credits and levels. For further information on the SCQF see Appendix 2 or visit the SCQF website at www.scqf.org.uk. SCQF credits: One HN credit is equivalent to 8 SCQF credit points. This applies to all HN Units, irrespective of their level. SCQF levels: The SCQF covers 12 levels of learning. HN Units will normally be at levels 69. Graded Units will be at level 7 and 8 (see Section 6 for further information on this). Subject Unit: Subject Units contain vocational/subject content and are designed to test a specific set of knowledge and skills. Graded Unit: Graded Units assess candidates ability to integrate what they have learned while working towards the Units of the Group Award. Their purpose is to add value to the Group Award, making it more than the sum of its parts, and to encourage candidates to retain and adapt their skills and knowledge. 1

Dedicated Core Skill Unit: This is a Unit that is written to cover one or more particular Core Skills, eg HN Units in Information Technology or Communication. Embedded Core Skills: This is where the development of a Core Skill is incorporated into the Unit and where the Unit assessment also covers the requirements of Core Skill assessment at a particular level. Signposted Core Skills: This refers to the opportunities to develop a particular Core Skill at a specified level that lie outwith automatic certification. Qualification Design Team: The QDT works in conjunction with a Qualification Manager/Development Manager to steer the development of the HNC/D from its inception/revision through to validation. The group is made up of key stakeholders representing the interests of centres, employers, universities and other relevant organisations. Consortium-devised HNCs and HNDs are those developments or revisions undertaken by a group of centres in partnership with SQA. Specialist single centre and specialist collaborative devised HNCs and HNDs are those developed or revised by a single centre or small group of centres who provide knowledge and skills in a specialist area. Like consortium-devised HNCs and HNDs, these developments or revisions will also be supported by SQA.

1
B

The design principles for HNCs and HNDs

The design principles
To continue to uphold the tradition of Higher National Certificates and Diplomas as the leading qualifications for technician, technologist and first line management occupations, Qualification Design Teams should adhere to the design principles and develop or revise qualifications which ensure the continuing fitness for purpose of those qualifications. It should be noted, however, that these are principles rather than rules and are designed to ensure that all HNC/Ds are developed and validated to a consistently high standard. Therefore, where market research, particularly among candidates and employers, clearly indicates that any design principle needs to be re-interpreted or modified, SQA will work with the Qualification Design Team to develop alternatives, which are coherent with the other principles. In particular, this applies to those marked with an asterisk. Any re-interpretation or modification of design principles needs to be indicated and negotiated at the outset of development. Design principles cannot be challenged at the point of validation. The validity of the market research and the fitness for purpose of the proposed alternatives will be confirmed at validation. The design principles are summarised in Appendix 1. The main changes are: SCQF level and SCQF credit points Without exception, HNCs will be designed to be at SCQF level 7 and will have 96 SCQF credit points. HNDs will be designed to be at SCQF level 8 and will have 240 SCQF credit points. This means that in future all HNCs will be the same size, as will all HNDs. All HN Units will be allocated to a level appropriate to their position in the SCQF to confirm and strengthen the position of HNCs and HNDs as higher education qualifications, and to maintain and improve progression to appropriate employment, professional body qualifications and degree programmes. HN Units, and Graded Units, will be allocated to a level during the development or review process, and this will be subject to validation. HNCs should incorporate at least 48 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 and HNDs should incorporate at least 64 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8.

1.1
B

There is more about the SCQF and level descriptors in Appendices 2 and 3. Graded Units *HNCs should normally include one Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7. *HNDs should normally include one Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 plus 16 SCQF credit points of Graded Unit(s) at SCQF level 8. The Graded Units will be included in the 96 and 240 SCQF credit points required for HNCs and HNDs respectively. The purposes of Graded Units are to assess the candidates ability to integrate and apply the knowledge and skills gained in the HN Units to demonstrate that they have achieved the principal aims of the Group Award, and to grade candidates achievement. Mandatory section All HNCs and HNDs will have a mandatory section that every candidate will take. *For HNCs, this will be a minimum of 48 SCQF credit points, including the Graded Unit. *For HNDs, it will be a minimum of 96 SCQF credit points, including the Graded Units. Core Skills To meet employment and progression needs, all HNC and/or HND programmes will incorporate opportunities for candidates to develop Core Skills. *HNCs and HNDs should clearly include opportunities for candidates to develop Core Skills to the levels required by the occupations or progression pathways the HNCs and HNDs support. This would normally mean all five Core Skills should be developed in every HNC and HND.

1.2
B

Further considerations
Revised HN Unit specification and Graded Unit specifications SQA produces guidance on how to write HN Unit and Graded Unit specifications. These include templates and examples of how the specifications should be laid out. This guidance should always be used in developing new or revised HN Unit or Graded Unit specifications (see www.sqa.org.uk). The minimum change to current HN Unit specifications would be to remove the merit statements and to add an SCQF level and SCQF credit rating.

Validation of HN Unit specifications A key part of validation is to confirm the proposed allocation of the Unit to an SCQF level and to confirm the proposed allocation of SCQF credit points to the Unit. This needs to be done consistently. Until the process of devolving this to centres is fully worked out, SQA will validate all new or revised HN Unit specifications. Centres may continue to develop HN Units specifications for validation by SQA, though only distinctive HN Units from specialist centres will normally be considered. Validation of HNCs and HNDs and Graded Units Group Award validation may continue to be done by those centres with devolved authority. As Graded Units relate to the principal aims of a Group Award, these too may be validated by devolved centres. An important part of HNC and HND validation will be to confirm the levels of all five Core Skills needed for progression and the availability of opportunities for candidates to develop the appropriate Core Skills in the proposed HNC or HND. Validation periods HN Units, Graded Units and Group Awards will be kept under review by Qualification Support Teams to ensure their continuing fitness for purpose. Normally, these will be reviewed every five years or more frequently, if recommended by validation panels. However, specific time periods of validation will not be specified.

1.3
B

Transition programme
SQA is committed to having all HN qualifications allocated to an SCQF level and given an SCQF credit rating by 2008. All consortium-devised HNCs and HNDs should be incorporated in the SCQF by 2006. Specialist single centre and specialist collaborative devised HNCs and HNDs should be incorporated in the SCQF by 2008. In order to achieve these dates, no existing HNC and/or HND should be revised or extended according to the 1988 design rules with a validation date that takes it beyond July 2008.

2
B

Validation an overview
The purpose of validation
Although the design principles for HNCs and HNDs have been changed, the validation system and criteria have not. Validation is the quality assurance process by which SQA ensures that all new, revised, or amended qualifications are valid, credible, and fit for purpose. It is a process of peer-group review that focuses on the justification for, and coherence of, a proposed qualification, and its technical specification. It confirms that any new qualification fully satisfies SQAs quality criteria for Units and Group Awards.
The validation criteria for SQA qualifications are detailed in Appendix 4.

2.1
B

Validation is required when any new Unit (including a Graded Unit) or Group Award, or modification of an existing Unit or Group Award, is proposed.

2.2
B

What happens before validation

SQA or centres identify the need to develop a new qualification or revise an existing qualification through consultation with a range of stakeholders centres, students, employers, higher education, professional bodies, and/or Sector Skills Councils and Standard Setting bodies. This work is normally undertaken by a Qualification Design Team, who will then develop or revise the qualification, taking account of the feedback from consultation. Once developed, the proposed qualification is subject to validation by a panel of subject experts.
Section 3 has details on the composition and role of validation panels.

2.3
B

The Validation Proposal Document

Once the Qualification Design Team has completed the development of the qualification, they will prepare a validation proposal in the form of a document giving details of the proposed qualification and the support there is for it. The Validation Proposal Document should contain all the information the validation panel needs to be able to judge whether the proposed HNC and/or HND and HN Units meet SQAs validation criteria.

See section 5 for more on the Validation Proposal Document.

2.4
B

Validation of HN Units
Authority for validating HN Units has reverted to SQA. This is so that we can be consistent in allocating HN Units to SCQF levels and assigning SCQF credit points. We are also using this as an opportunity to rationalise the HN Unit Catalogue. Centres with the necessary devolved authority will still be able to validate HNCs and HNDs made up of HN Units from our catalogue. The validation of HN Units will be carried out prior to the validation of the Group Award. Units should be validated at least three months before Group Award validation.

2.5
B

Validation of Graded Units

Validation of Graded Units takes place at the time of validation of HN Group Awards.

2.6
B

Validation of Group Awards

Validation happens at a meeting of subject experts. The meeting can be hosted either by SQA or by a centre which has devolved authority for validating Group Awards. After each validation meeting, a Validation Report is produced. After the validation meeting, we will send a copy of the Validation Report to the convener for signature and return.
See section 4 for details on the validation meeting and Validation Report.

Note: Centres can validate Group Awards made up of validated SQA Units if they have devolved authority for validating SQA qualifications (ie if they have been successfully audited against our validation criteria 6.16.6 see Appendix 4). These centres are responsible for organising and hosting validation meetings.

2.7
B

Validation outcomes
At the validation meeting, the panel will reach one of three possible decisions about the proposed qualification: validated not validated until conditions have been met not validated
There is more about validation outcomes in section 4.

2.8
B

Validation spans
Under the design principles, the validation period for both Units (including Graded Units) and Group Awards is open-ended, ie HNCs and HNDs will no longer have a specified lifespan (it is currently up to five years). This will bring HNCs and HNDs into line with National Qualifications. However, HNCs and HNDs should be reviewed regularly, with the frequency of the review reflecting the pace of change in the subject area and occupational sector.

2.9
B

After validation
Once the qualification has been validated, it will be entered onto SQAs system and will be available to candidates through approved centres. The qualification will be reviewed periodically to determine whether it should be revised, and if so, how. The review could result in one of the following conclusions: Take no further action and allow the qualification to lapse without replacement this is rare and is usually the result of a change in industrial practice, eg there is no longer an employment market in Scotland for graduates of HNCs and HNDs in Mining and Metallurgy. Take no further action because the qualification as it stands still satisfies the current market needs. Re-validate the qualification with minor revisions. Undertake a major revision of the existing structure and/or Units, update and re-validate.

2.10
B

Producing the Validated Document and an Arrangements Document

Once the qualification has been validated, the Validation Proposal Document will be converted to a Validated Document. A Group Award Arrangements Document will also be produced. The Arrangements Document will be based on key parts of the Validated Document, and will serve as a guide to the implementation of the Group Award to delivering centres.

3
B

Validation panels members and their roles

Organisation of the panel
A proposal for a new qualification, or for extensive revisions to an existing qualification, will be validated by a panel of subject experts at a validation meeting. SQA will organise and host the validation meeting: for consortium-devised qualifications when asked to do so by a centre which is putting forward an HNC and/or HND proposal for validation the centre will have the opportunity to comment on the panel which SQA has composed to avoid the possibility of potential conflicts of interest Alternatively, the nominated centre of a collaborative development, or a single centre putting forward an HNC and/or HND proposal, may wish to organise and host the validation meeting. Where a centre decides on this course of action, SQA will have been consulted on the composition of the validation panel and will normally make at least one nomination to it. All the panel members attending a validation meeting are acting on behalf of SQA in assessing the proposed qualification against SQAs quality elements (this is the name we give to our criteria for quality assurance these can be found in Appendix 4).

3.1
B

3.2
B

Size of panels
There are two basic models for validation meetings though these can be altered to meet the validation needs of a particular qualification proposal. Regardless of which model is chosen, all members of the panel are equal partners at the validation meeting. Their role is to act as independent judges of the proposed qualification, and to make a validation decision at the end of the meeting. Model 1 appropriate when significant changes to an existing Group Award framework are proposed, including the introduction of new Units to the mandatory section. The panel should include as a minimum: an educationist an industrialist or Sector Skills Council representative an SQA representative a centre representative (if the proposal has been submitted by a centre or small group of centres)

10

Either the educationist or the industrialist should chair the meeting. Model 2 appropriate for a new or completely revised Group Award proposal. The panel should include as a minimum: a chairperson (convener) from education or industry three educationists/industrialists or Sector Skills Council representative (both categories to be represented) an SQA representative a centre representative (if the proposal has been submitted by a centre or small group of centres) Panels may be larger if a greater range of expertise is required, but they should not be smaller. Note: As the development or revision of HNCs and HNDs using the design principles would normally involve major change, we recommend that Model 2 be used the first time an HNC and/or HND is to be validated. Note: The panel should not include any members of the Qualification Design Team or Steering Groups.

3.3
B

Role of the convener

Panels are convened by individuals who are independent of the Qualification Design Team and of the centre or centres proposing the qualification. The convener has a pivotal role in ensuring the success of the validation meeting, and should display: knowledge of the validation process impartiality objectivity experience of chairing meetings experience of participating in the validation of higher education qualifications expertise in a field related to the qualification thoroughness of approach good communication and interpersonal skills diplomacy and tact

Members should be encouraged to work as a team, bringing their own expertise and experience to it. The conveners role is to ensure all members are allowed an equal opportunity to participate so that the meeting is not dominated by any individual or small group.

11

It is the conveners responsibility to ensure that the proposed qualification is assessed comprehensively and objectively against the validation criteria. At the first private meeting (see section 4 and Appendix 5) the convener will co-ordinate the drawing up of: i ii any changes to the draft programme for the day an agenda of issues for discussion with the Qualification Design Team

It is important to make full use of the expertise of all the members of the panel. Each member will have identified issues that require clarification and discussion, and these should be pooled to form an agenda for the meeting. The convener may wish to identify individual panel members who will take the lead on specific topics, but this should not prevent others from joining in with related points. The convener should ensure that all members of the panel are comfortable with educational terminology, and should be ready to provide explanations whenever necessary. The SQA representative will be able to help provide clear definitions of terminology and policy. Validation panels will be presented with a Validation Proposal Document which has been developed in partnership with or supported by an SQA officer. It will already have passed through rigorous internal scrutiny. The Validation Proposal Document will normally have been the result of extensive work and wide comment before it is presented for a fresh and impartial scrutiny by the validation panel. The convener should ensure that the work and the professionalism of the Qualification Design Team are acknowledged both formally and implicitly in the conduct of the meeting. If validation panel members are not convinced that the proposals address all of SQAs validation criteria (see Appendix 4), or if they think that the evidence supporting the proposal is unclear or insufficient, the convener will agree the broad conditions that he/she wishes to see addressed before final validation. The convener should ensure that reasonable timescales for meeting the conditions, and the mechanism for meeting these conditions, are agreed with the Qualification Design Team. It is very important that he/she ensures that the validation panel members do not attempt to re-write any aspect of the proposal. While helpful suggestions for improvements will always be welcome, the purpose of the validation is to confirm (or otherwise) that the SQA validation criteria have been broadly met. Detailed suggestions for re-writing should not form part of any formal conditions for validation.

12

3.4
B

Role of the educationist

Educationists are selected for their expertise in validation and their specialist subject, and for their experience in the management and delivery of similar qualifications. Familiarity with higher education qualifications in general, and SQAs HNCs and HNDs in particular, is essential as the educationist may be called upon to explain issues to other members of the validation panel. Educationists will play a major role in determining whether: the qualification represents a unique achievement worthy of separate certification there is any overlap with existing provision and, if so, whether this is acceptable the demands made on candidates are reasonable and justify the SCQF level and credit value of the qualification the Group Award is at the appropriate SCQF level each Unit and Graded Unit specification is at an appropriate SCQF level and conforms to SQAs criteria In making these determinations, educationists should consider only SQAs validation criteria. Issues such as candidate demand and intercentre competition for viable numbers are not relevant to the validation process. Though broad suggestions for improvements to the Validation Proposal Document will be welcome, detailed proposals for re-writing any aspect of it should not form part of the decisions of the validation panel members. The Qualification Design Team will be expected to take account of any discussion of all aspects of the proposal. Educationists should also comment on the opportunities for Core Skills development in the HNC and/or HND to ensure that they exist and meet the needs of the end-users of the qualification. This includes the way in which the award has taken account of the market research carried out. If there is no Core Skill specialist on the panel, a report by a credible Core Skills specialist that supports the Core Skills claims should be incorporated into, or should accompany, the Validation Proposal Document.

3.5
B

Role of the industrialist or Sector Skills Council representative

Industry-based panel members are selected because of their subject expertise and knowledge of related employment sectors. Although they may have been consulted during the market research for the qualification, they should view the proposal objectively on its merits and without any sense of personal ownership.

13

Industrialists are on the panel to represent the views of prospective employers. It is their role to determine whether: the proposed qualification meets the short, medium, and longer term education and training needs of employers in the targeted sectors by taking into account relevant elements from the National Occupational Standards or professional body requirements of the sector successful candidates are likely to obtain employment in those sectors at an appropriate level If industry-based panel members are unfamiliar with educational terms, (for example, in regard to the SCQF or Core Skills) they should not hesitate to look to the convener for clarification. Though industry-based panel members may have no personal experience of validation, this should not debar them from participation. Hosting centres should, if requested, provide validation training for those who feel it is necessary.

3.6
B

Role of the SQA representative

The SQA representative will be appointed based on his or her experience of validation and knowledge of SQA policy. He or she will be someone who has not been directly involved in development of the qualification and who therefore does not have a vested interest in its validation. The representative will clarify any points of SQA policy that arise at the meeting, and should be able to make a full contribution to discussions, especially those concerning whether or not validation criteria have been met. Where the meeting is arranged and hosted by SQA, it is the responsibility of the SQA representative to complete and submit the Validation Report form. Where the centre hosts the validation meeting, the SQA representative will complete a summary report using the checklist supplied by SQA.

3.7
B

Role of the centre representative

Where the proposal has been submitted by a centre or by a group of centres, the validation panel should include a centre representative normally someone with a management position in the centre. This person should not be or have been a member of the Qualification Design Team, and should never be regarded (or regard him or herself) as a spokesperson for the submission. The centre representative should be a fully participating member of the validation panel.

14

When the meeting is arranged and hosted by a centre, it will be the responsibility of the centre representative to complete and submit the Validation Report form. The centre may provide secretarial support for its representative throughout the meeting this has the great advantage of ensuring that an accurate note of the proceedings is kept whilst allowing the representative to participate fully. Note: Where a proposal has been developed by a group of centres, the Qualification Design Team will be asked to agree on a single representative from one of the participating centres. This representative should not have been a participating member of the Qualification Design Team.

3.8
B

What to do if panel members do not arrive

If, on the day of the meeting, one or more members of the panel fail to arrive, it may be necessary to postpone the validation meeting. It should proceed only if the range of expertise available is sufficient to allow a comprehensive assessment of the proposed qualification. The decision on whether or not to postpone the meeting should be taken by the convener in consultation with the SQA representative. If additional guidance is required, the SQA representative will immediately contact SQA to discuss the matter with the appropriate Qualification Team Business Manager or Qualifications Manager/Officer. If the convener fails to arrive, the meeting may proceed only if another panel member with experience of chairing meetings is prepared to take on this role. SQA must be consulted on the change of convener before the meeting starts. Any changes to the panel membership must also be explained in the Validation Report.

3.9
B

Training of validation panel members

Members of the validation panel should be trained to validate SQA HNCs and HNDs, Graded Units and/or HN Units before participating in a validation meeting. Anyone participating in a validation meeting should read the relevant sections of the Guide to Validation for Validation Panel Members and Qualification Design Teams: using the design principles for HNCs and HNDs thoroughly and clarify any matters with the relevant Qualifications Manager. SQA can provide briefing sessions for prospective validation panel members for proposals from consortiumled developments.

15

For validations hosted by centres, SQA is willing to participate in the training of validation panel members who have had no direct experience of validating SQA HNCs and HNDs, or for experienced members validating a qualification using the 2003 design principles for the first time.

16

4
B

Validation meetings
Validation meeting for HN Units
Under the design principles, the responsibility for validating HN Units has reverted back to SQA. Validation can be carried out in different ways. It must always include a formal scrutiny of the Units by independent (ie not involved in the development process) specialist stakeholders (employers, universities) deliverers (lecturers, trainers), SQA Qualifications Managers or Officers, and/or SQA specialist External Verifiers. This can be done by: a formal validation meeting involving a group of stakeholders appropriate to the qualification being proposed officer decision supported by consultation among specialist stakeholders or by a combination of these methods. Validation of HN Units must be carried out by the SQA Qualifications Manager (QM) in whose subject portfolio the Unit resides. The QM will be supported by experts from education and/or industry, whether meeting formally or not. However, the final decision on the validation of a Unit lies with the Qualifications Manager. Units will be validated before the Group Award validation.
There is more information on the validation of HN Units in section 7.

4.1
B

4.2
B

Validation meeting for Group Awards

Documentation for the meeting
At least two weeks before the validation meeting, validation panel members will normally be provided with: the time and date of the meeting a location map of the venue a list of panel members a provisional programme for the meeting guidance on validating HNCs and HNDs including: validation checklists SCQF level descriptors validation criteria

4.2.1
B

17

 an expense claim form, for those eligible to have their expenses reimbursed These will be accompanied by the Validation Proposal Document. This will give panel members an opportunity to familiarise themselves thoroughly with the details of the proposed qualification. If panel members feel that they have not been given sufficient time to assess the proposal, they can contact either SQA or the centre to ask for the meeting to be postponed. We recommend that panel members complete the appropriate validation checklists, and bring them along to the meeting. They will be used as a means of forming and communicating collective views based on individual comments. The validation checklists include lists of questions which might be raised under the various section headings in the Validation Proposal Document, though these lists of questions are by no means exhaustive. Panel members are encouraged to add questions of their own.
There are validation checklists in section 8.

Panel members should prepare for the meeting by reading the Validation Proposal Document thoroughly, evaluating it against the validation criteria, and annotating any issues and/or comments they wish to raise with the Qualification Design Team on the validation checklists.

4.2.2
B

Format of the meeting

Before the formal meeting with the Qualification Design Team, the validation panel will have an opportunity to hold a private meeting during which introductions will be made and issues addressed. At this stage, panel members should confine themselves to identifying areas of concern which they wish to discuss more fully with the Qualification Design Team, rather than trying to reach any conclusions about changes they may wish to make. The Qualification Design Team should always be given the opportunity to explain the proposal and expand on any information contained in the Validation Proposal Document. The convener will collate comments under the section headings in the validation checklist, and allocate issues to individual panel members who will lead the discussion with the Qualification Design Team. It is essential that all members of the validation panel contribute to a full discussion of the points to be addressed. During the private meeting, the panel can re-arrange the draft programme for the day if they feel this is necessary. In this case, any changes should be communicated to the leader of the Qualification Design Team. The convener will endeavour to ensure that the programme is kept on

18

schedule, but this should not be allowed to interfere with a full discussion of the proposal. At the start of the formal meeting with the Qualification Design Team, the convener will introduce all the panel members and inform the Qualification Design Team of the programme for the day and of the principal items for discussion. Further amendments to the programme may, of course, be made in the light of issues raised during the discussion with the Qualification Design Team.
A typical programme for a full validation meeting is given in Appendix 5.

All questions directed to the Qualification Design Team should be openended to encourage wide-ranging but focused discussion. The focus of the discussion will be the evaluation of the proposed qualification against the validation criteria. It must be remembered that validation is about ensuring that the proposed Group Award, Unit and Graded Unit specifications broadly meet SQAs criteria, and not about the centres ability to offer the qualification that is dealt with through a separate process called approval. It should be noted, however, that the Units will have been validated prior to the Group Award validation and therefore validation panel members will only be expected to comment on their suitability for inclusion in the Group Award framework. After the formal meeting with the Qualification Design Team, there will be an opportunity for the validation panel to hold a second private meeting. At this stage, panel members should decide whether or not all of the issues have been satisfactorily addressed during the discussion with the Qualification Design Team. During this second private meeting, the validation panel will discuss and finalise its recommendations. The panel should then reconvene with the Qualification Design Team. The outcome of the panels discussion will be communicated to the Qualification Design Team by the convener. If the panel decides that conditions have to be met before validation is confirmed, the clarity of these conditions and the reasonableness of the timescales proposed should be discussed with the Qualification Design Team before finalisation. Validation of Core Skill proposals Like all other design principles, the one relating to Core Skills must always be addressed at the validation of an HNC or HND. Stakeholders, such as industrialists and university representatives, who understand the progression pathways claimed for the proposed HNC or HND should confirm: the level of each of the five Core Skills required for progression in employment or higher education

19

 the level recommended for each of the five Core Skills is concordant with the findings from market research and reflects the needs of employers and higher education that the opportunities for developing the Core Skills to these levels, either through embedding or signposting, have been explained in the Validation Proposal Document Normally, the signposting of Core Skills will be in new or revised Unit specifications (or Graded Unit specifications). Details of the development opportunities will be laid out in the Core Skills and Approaches to Learning and Teaching sections. However, where unrevised Unit specifications (with no reference to Core Skills) are used, a separate report by an independent Core Skills specialist will accompany the proposals where appropriate. In all cases, information on the opportunities to develop Core Skills within the Group Award should be explained clearly in the Validation Proposal Document, and the panel must be satisfied that the Core Skills claims in the proposals are appropriate and achievable, and have been given due importance.
There is more information on validating Core Skills in section 5 paragraph 5.6.4. See also Guidance on Core Skills: using the design principles for Higher National Certificates and Diplomas. This is available on our website (www.sqa.org.uk).

Validation of Graded Units As Graded Units relate to the principal aims of the Group Award, they should be addressed as part of the Group Award validation. Section 6 of this guide gives more information on the validation of Graded Units.
See also Guidance on Graded Units: using the design principles for Higher National Certificates and Diplomas. This is available on SQAs website (www.sqa.org.uk).

4.3
B

Validation outcomes
Having considered all the evidence provided in the Validation Proposal Document and the subsequent discussion with the Qualification Design Team, the panel will reach a decision on the outcome of the validation meeting. The proposed qualification must always be judged solely against SQAs validation criteria (see Appendix 4).

20

You can make one of the following three decisions: Qualification validated (with recommendations if appropriate) the validation span for HNCs and HNDs, Graded Units and Units is open-ended, although the qualification will be subject to periodic review to ensure that it continues to meet the needs of candidates and employers. The HNC and HND would normally be reviewed formally five years after validation. However, you may wish to recommend a shorter review period, especially in subjects where technology rapidly changes. Qualification not validated until conditions have been met where the decision is not to validate until conditions have been met, all the conditions must be satisfied before the qualification will be validated, ie before any centre can be given approval to offer it. Qualification not validated where the panel cannot recommend validation, the Qualification Design Team can, after further development work, submit new proposals, though any new proposal will have to be validated in the usual way.

4.4
B

Validation conditions
If the validation panel wishes to set conditions on the validation of a qualification, it is important to recognise that these will need to be fully satisfied before the qualification can be considered validated. The conditions should therefore be achievable in the time span set by agreement between the Qualification Design Team and the panel. Meeting the conditions is the responsibility of the Qualification Design Team. The validation panel should not attempt to re-write the proposal, but should specify the changes that have to be made or the further development that must be undertaken before the qualification can be validated. Any conditions imposed by the validation panel should concern rectifying significant failures to satisfy the validation criteria. More minor issues should be dealt with by recommendations, and should be explained in the Validation Report under the appropriate section heading (see end of Section 4.5 below). Recommendations are points that are not essential to the integrity of the Group Award but are suggestions for clarification or further information that might be incorporated into the final Validated Document or subsequent Arrangements Document. They might include information on integration of assessment, flexibility of delivery or other aspects of learning, teaching and assessment.

21

The panel should also agree with the Qualification Design Team on the mechanism and estimated timescale for lifting the conditions (see the Validation Report Form, Appendix 6). This might mean a revised Validation Proposal Document being considered by: the SQA representative only the SQA representative and convener all panel members providing comments to the convener (without meeting) a meeting of the re-convened full validation panel or some other method Whatever the mechanism selected, it is important that the entire panel is in agreement with it and that it is specified in the Validation Report form. Where the conditions are to be lifted by a mechanism which does not include the SQA representative and this should only be in exceptional circumstances, and with the agreement of the SQA representative the centre must ensure that SQA is kept fully informed of developments. Any delay may slow the validation process.

4.5
B

The Validation Report

After the meeting, a Validation Report must be completed and sent to SQAs HN/SVQ Product Team, normally within one week. If the meeting is arranged and hosted by a centre, it will be the responsibility of the centre representative to complete and return the Validation Report in this case, the SQA representative will submit a summary report immediately after the meeting. If the meeting is arranged and hosted by SQA, it will be the responsibility of the SQA representative to complete and return the Validation Report. In both cases, the Validation Report must be signed by the convener to indicate agreement with its contents. Once the appropriate SQA Qualification Team Business Manager has countersigned the Validation Report, copies will be sent to all panel members. All matters pertaining to the meeting and its outcome should be treated in confidence. If, on receipt of the Validation Report, a panel member has questions concerning any part of it, he/she should contact SQA without delay. A Qualifications Manager/Officer will then follow up the matter. A copy of the Validation Report form is attached as Appendix 6.

22

Recommendations The validation panel may wish to make recommendations for the future development of the qualification such as integration of assessment or a recommended review date. Unlike conditions, these do not have to be met before the qualification can be validated.

4.7
B

Appeals against validation outcomes

A Qualification Design Team may lodge an appeal if it feels that the validation panel has failed to conduct the validation meeting in an objective way and in accordance with SQAs validation criteria. Appeals will only be considered if it can be shown that SQAs validation criteria have been misinterpreted or that the procedures followed were not consistent with those laid down in this guide. Appeals will be considered on the following grounds: lack of objectivity of the panel misinterpretation of validation criteria deviation from procedures (as laid down in this guide) A Qualification Design Team can appeal by writing to the SQA, within two weeks of the event, setting out the grounds for the appeal. Appeals will normally be considered by SQAs Appeals Sub-Committee within six weeks of receipt of a full submission. However, before making the appeal, all parties are encouraged to discuss the matter informally to seek a solution without recourse to a formal hearing. If there is to be a hearing, the convener of the validation panel will be invited to attend. This mechanism for making an appeal against validation outcomes is available to centres putting forward HNC and/or HND proposals (including HN Units) for validation, and to Qualification Design Teams led by SQA. Appeals must be submitted by the Head of the Centre (or his/her representative) or by the Qualifications Manager if SQA is making the appeal. For more information on appeals, see the current edition of SQAs The Appeals Process on the SQA website ( www.sqa.org.uk).
H

4.8
B

After validation
Once the qualification has been validated, the Validation Proposal Document will be converted to become the Validated Document. This is the Validation Proposal Document, which has been amended to: reflect the decisions made at validation meet any conditions set by the validation panel 23

 reflect the change from proposal to agreement, eg instead of The proposed title for this Group Award is HNC in Engineering the text would read The title of this Group Award is HNC Engineering The Validated Document will then be used as the basis for the Arrangements Document, which will be published for each Group Award to assist delivering centres with the implementation of the qualification.

24

5
B

Validation Proposal Document for an HNC or HND

Content and format
Proposals for the validation of Group Awards should be presented in the form of a Validation Proposal Document. There is no need to have separate documents for each Group Award if the proposal is for a suite of Group Awards in the same subject area. For example, the HNC Computing; HND Computing: Software Development; and HND Computing: Technical Support were all presented in the one Validation Proposal Document. The Validation Proposal Document should follow this format: Front cover stating the full title(s) of the Group Award(s) and the originating source, ie SQA/consortium or specialist single centre or specialist collaborating. Title page giving the type and name of the proposed Group Award(s) and the date on which the validation meeting will be held. Contents page giving page numbers for the relevant section in the document. Rationale for the development or revision of the Group Award(s) including information about those involved in the development/revision, and the processes of consultation and/or market research carried out. Aims of the Group Award or, where both an HNC and HND are proposed, the aims of each Group Award. Recommended access to the Group Award(s), ie recommended prior entry requirements including the recommended entry Core Skills level. Structure of the Group Award(s). Approaches to delivery and assessment of the Group Award(s), including credit transfer and Core Skills mapping. Units and Graded Unit specifications. Guidance on progression pathways. Supporting evidence in the form of an appendix (or appendices) containing evidence of support for the qualification (including market research analysis, letters of support from employers, higher education, professional bodies etc).

5.1
B

25

5.2
B

Title
The title of a Group Award should give clear information about the broad nature of the vocational competences required. It should be as concise as possible, but should have an unambiguous message for a wide range of different users, including candidates, lecturers, higher education, employers, and professional bodies. Where possible, the title should convey the occupational relevance of the qualification. For example, the title HND in Business Administration is preferable to HND in Business Studies. In many cases, the Group Award will encompass more than one occupational area. For instance, a Group Award in engineering might also enable candidates to develop managerial competences. The title of such a qualification should reflect the additional competences achieved. A title such as Engineering with Management indicates that the principal occupational competence achieved is in engineering, but that management competence is also developed. If the Group Award covers two occupational areas in equal measure, a title such as Engineering and Management can be used. The design principles say that: HNCs will have a mandatory section of a minimum of 48 SCQF credit points (including a Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7), and HNDs a minimum of 96 SCQF credit points (including a Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 and Graded Unit(s) of 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8) which all candidates for the Group Award must take. This means that a Group Award will be validated with a set of mandatory Units and Graded Units, and the title allocated will be reserved for those frameworks that have the same mandatory section. For example, if the HNC Horticulture has a specified mandatory section, no other Group Award with a different mandatory section can be validated using that title. An alternative title, eg HNC Horticulture with Plantmanship, would have to be used to reflect the differences in the mandatory section. You should ensure that the title reflects the content of the proposed HNC and or HND and does not duplicate a Group Award title already in existence. This can be checked by referring to the HN Modernisation Status Update section on the HN page of our website ( www.sqa.org.uk) or by contacting the relevant Qualifications Manager.
H

26

5.3
B

Rationale
All Qualification Design Teams are expected to outline their justification (rationale) for the new or revised qualification, and this will form a general introduction to the Validation Proposal Document. There are many reasons for going ahead with Group Award development they usually relate to meeting employers needs and/or enabling or improving progression to degree and other higher education programmes and professional body qualifications. The rationale should be supported by evidence from market research. For existing qualifications that are to be revised, this will be augmented by information on the success of the earlier version. Information will include details of numbers of candidates starting and completing the Group Award (data is available from SQA) and their subsequent progression history (data is available from individual centres). The rationale should establish: that there is a need for the qualification this should link to the evidence supported by market research and other evidence-gathering methods (which should form an appendix to the Validation Proposal Document) that the structure and content, including Core Skills, of the proposed Group Award meet the needs identified the sector, level of employment and relevant National Occupational Standards or other professional body requirements for which it has been designed the type of candidate for whom it is intended how the qualification(s) relate to others in SQAs existing provision

5.4
B

Aims
The aims of the qualification should identify both the general and the vocationally-specific competences which the successful candidate will achieve, and should show a clear relationship to the title of the Group Award. The aims should be realistic and commensurate with the type of Group Award proposed and its SCQF level, ie HNC and/or HND. If both an HNC and an HND are proposed, the HNC should be a valid qualification in its own right and not just the first part of the HND. So, where both an HNC and an HND are proposed, there should be a clear identification of the aims of each qualification. The Qualification Design Team should identify the aims of the HNC and/or HND under the two headings of general aims and specific aims.

27

General aims All HNCs and HNDs have a range of broad aims that are generally applicable to all equivalent higher education qualifications. Examples include: developing candidates knowledge and skills such as planning, analysis and synthesising developing employment skills related to the National Occupational Standards or other professional body requirements and so enhancing candidates employment prospects enabling progression within the SCQF developing study and research skills developing transferable skills, including Core Skills, to the levels demanded by employer and/or progression in higher education Specific aims All HNCs and HNDs have aims which specify the knowledge or skills that candidates have to attain to be deemed competent in the subject/occupational area. For example, in the case of IT/ Computing, specific aims might include: preparing for employment in an IT/Computing-related post at technician or professional level developing a range of contemporary vocational skills relating to the use, support and development of IT systems developing options to permit an element of vocational specialisation preparing candidates for progression to further studies in Computing or related disciplines The Aims section should provide an explanation of how the general and specific aims: are met in the structure and content of the proposed Group Award. This could be supported by an appendix which shows the mappings of specific Units to aims. meet the needs of the relevant employment sector and/or higher education and/or professional body represent a significant achievement by the candidate

5.5
B

Recommended access
All Validation Proposal Documents should include an access statement that outlines the knowledge and skills which candidates should ideally bring to their programme of study. This is normally presented as a list of qualifications and/or relevant experience which, in the view of the 28

Qualification Design Team, provide candidates with a suitable preparation for the HNC and/or HND. For example, the entry platform for an HNC should normally recommend a group of qualifications at around SCQF level 6, such as a programme of National Units at SCQF levels 5 and 6, or one or two National Courses at Higher (SCQF level 6). The access requirements of the Group Award should define only the skills and competences which candidates are expected to bring with them at the start. Access statements for individual Units may also refer to lower level Units that would prepare candidates for progression. The access statement for the HNC and or HND should be compatible with the individual Units access statements and vice versa.
Note: the access statement for the Group Award does not replace the access statement for each individual Unit.

Access statements should not present unnecessary barriers to prospective candidates but they should ensure, as far as possible, that those selected have a realistic chance of achieving the qualification within the normal teaching/learning programme. The access statement for the Group Award should clearly define the level, and areas, of competence and knowledge and understanding expected of candidates joining the course of study. The access statement should also contain guidance on the Core Skills level considered appropriate for candidates entering for the qualification.
See paragraph 5.6.5 for more on Core Skills. See also Guidance on Core Skills: using the design principles for Higher National Certificates and Diplomas. This is available on SQAs website (www.sqa.org.uk).

5.6
B

Structure of the qualification

Structure
This section of the document should contain: a list of Units and the Graded Units, giving the correct codes (where validated Units have been included), titles, SCQF credit points and SCQF level, and SQA credit value this is normally presented as a series of tables details of the mandatory or mandatory/optional structure this is often included in the tables above an explanation of how the Graded Unit specifications integrate the principal aims of the Group Award

5.6.1
B

29

 conditions of award clear identification of the number of SCQF credit points to be achieved overall, including the required number of SCQF credit points at appropriate levels to be achieved an explanation of how the Group Award structure meets the appropriate SCQF level. The design principles state that HNCs shall be designed to be at SCQF level 7 and HNDs shall be designed to be at SCQF level 8. This design principle is met in part through the minimum number of SCQF credit points required for each level of Group Award. However, Qualification Design Teams should also ensure that the design of the Group Award meets the required level in terms of the award aims and the output skills and knowledge that will be acquired by the candidate. It should therefore be made clear in the proposal document how the structure of the award will ensure the correct SCQF level will be achieved, eg which Units would be building Units, which Units reflect the competency level of the Group Award, and how the Graded Units contribute to the level of the Group Award.

5.6.2
B

Mandatory or mandatory/optional structure

In the context of an HNC and/or HND Group Award framework, Units can be categorised as: mandatory Units which cover those aspects of the Group Award which refer to skills and knowledge essential to the purpose of the qualification and, therefore, must be achieved by all candidates subject-related optional Units which cover those aspects of the Group Award that are discipline-related and are important but not critical the successful candidate needs to have a range of skills and knowledge in this category broadening optional Units which cover skills and knowledge useful for employment in any sector, and for progression to other education programmes. These should be included where possible, though choice may be restricted by the need to include sufficient subject-related provision. The advantage of a mandatory/optional structure is that it allows a degree of choice to candidates, and makes it possible to meet the different needs of employers, higher education and professional bodies. HNCs and HNDs are normally designed to meet the needs of an occupational sector by developing the knowledge and skills that have been identified in the relevant National Occupational Standards, and which candidates need to gain entry into employment. Information on the alignment of Units to National Occupational Standards should be given and this could by supported by an appendix which maps this alignment.

30

HNCs and HNDs are also often designed to provide candidates with the knowledge and skills required for further study, such as for degree programmes and/or professional body qualifications. The different needs of these exit pathways can be met by including optional Units. For example, articulation to a degree programme may require theoretical knowledge that is not normally required by employers. The structure of the Group Award should provide opportunities for candidates to take different routes through the qualification to meet their exit aspirations. SQA has validated some Units to give recognition of skills gained whilst in employment or to facilitate progression to further study or into employment: Work Role Effectiveness Units These Units can be used to give credit to those who are effective in an occupational role similar (but not necessarily identical) to that defined by National Occupational Standards used at particular levels of SVQs. Personal Development Planning Unit This is an SCQF level 7 Unit which allows candidates the opportunity to develop Core Skills, employability skills or skills required to progress to degree programmes, eg independent study. Wherever possible, these should be offered as options within all HND frameworks developed or revised using the 2003 design principles Qualification Design Teams and/or validation panels would be asked to justify their exclusion from a framework. HNCs, with only 96 SCQF credit points, are normally more focused on specific vocational skills and knowledge, although the PDP Unit could also be offered as an option within HNC frameworks. All HNCs and HNDs must have a mandatory section. For HNCs this will be a minimum of 48 SCQF credit points, including a Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points, at SCQF level 7. For HNDs, it will be a minimum of 96 SCQF credit points, including a Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points, at SCQF level 7, and Graded Unit(s) of 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8.
Please note: The Units in the mandatory section can be at various SCQF levels. However, the Graded Unit for the HNC must be at SCQF level 7 and the Graded Units for the HND must include 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 and 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8.

It is particularly important that validation panel members ensure that the mandatory/optional structure does not allow for widely varying routes to the same qualification. In general, the mandatory Units should normally form the largest part of the qualification, and contain the significant occupational competences. Above all, the qualification should be

31

coherent and balanced, and evidence will be required to show that all possible routes to the qualification achieve its aims. It is also important that the Qualification Design Team and Validation panel members ensure that the structure of the Group Award does not impose unnecessary barriers to access. For example, where the inclusion of a Unit in the mandatory section rather than the optional section might be a barrier to a candidate with disabilities and/or additional support needs accessing the Group Award.

5.6.3
B

Credit transfer transition arrangements

It is envisaged that, during the transition programme (see Section 1.3) some candidates may wish to transfer from: an HNC developed under the 1988 design rules to an HND validated under the 2003 design principles in the same subject area the first part of an HND developed under the 1988 design rules into an HND validated using the 2003 design principles in the same subject area an HNC developed under the pilot design principles to an HND validated under the 2003 design principles in the same subject area the first part of an HND developed under the pilot design principles into an HND validated using the 2003 design principles in the same subject area To facilitate this, it has been agreed that: such candidates need only achieve (within the 240 SCQF credit points required for the revised HND) Graded Units of 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8 (instead of Graded Units of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 and 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8). However: all candidates should be given opportunities to develop the Core Skills required by end-users of the HN qualification the candidate should be able to be given credit for the Units which she/he previously achieved in the 1988 design rules HNC and/or HND towards some of the Units in the revised HND Candidates are still required to meet the conditions of award for the revised HND. This means that a candidate transferring can gain the revised HND by achieving: the mandatory Units (either by credit transfer or normal study) within the revised HND framework a Graded Unit or Graded Units of 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8

32

the remaining SCQF credit points at the SCQF level required (either by credit transfer or normal study) development of the Core Skills required by the end-users of the Group Award

Although, in principle, candidates can be given credit transfer, specific credit transfer must be given on a Unit-by-Unit basis. The Qualification Design Team should decide what credit transfer can be given between Units, based on the extent of changes to knowledge and skills, the inclusion of opportunities to develop Core Skills or Core Skills components, level of demand, and credit value. Candidates using credit transfer from a 1988 or pilot-rules HNC (or first part of HND) will achieve Units of 224 SCQF credit points plus Graded Units at SCQF level 8 of 16 SCQF credit points. The Qualification Design Team should have created an alternative award route to the revised HND based on: giving alternative recognition for the Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 (ie the competences covered by the Graded Unit at SCQF level 7 in the revised award have to be covered by other Units in the 1988/pilot rules award) credit transfer between the candidates achievements from the 1988 design rules or pilot-rules HNC and/or HND and the requirements of the revised HND We recommend that these transition arrangements be presented in the form of a table entitled Alternative Route for Candidates transferring from predecessor HNC/first part HND to second part of revised HND. This table should list the Units in the framework of the revised HND, and those Units from the predecessor HNC and/or HND for which credit can be given. It should also clearly show what the requirements for the award of HND are by this alternative route, ie Units of 224 SCQF credit points, plus Graded Units at SCQF level 8 of 16 SCQF credit points. The HN Arrangements Document (a definitive document derived from the Validated Document) should also clearly state that this alternative award route is only to be made available to candidates using credit transfer from a 1988/pilot rules HNC or first part of an HND and should not be offered to any new candidates. Decisions on credit transfer should have been vetted by an External Verifier, evidence of which should be confirmed by the validation panel.

33

5.6.4
B

Graded Units
HNCs and HNDs are assessed by a combination of Unit assessments and integrative assessment of the Group Award by means of Graded Units. The purposes of the Graded Units are to assess the candidates ability to retain and integrate the knowledge and/or skills gained in the Units; to assess that the candidate has met the principal aims of the Group Award; and to grade the candidates achievement. The Validation Proposal Document should include completed specifications for each of the Graded Units. These specifications will include: the types of Graded Unit, ie project or examination the assessment instrument(s) for the chosen type details of the aims of the Group Award which are to be assessed by each Graded Unit guidance on designing the assessment instrument and assessing candidates details of any Core Skills which are developed within the Graded Unit It is important that validation panel members ensure that where an HND incorporates an HNC, the Graded Units reflect the distinct aims of the Group Award at each level, ie the Graded Unit at SCQF level 7 should reflect the aims of the HNC and the Graded Unit(s) at SCQF level 8 should reflect the aims of the HND.
Section 6 has more detail on the Graded Unit specification. There are Graded Unit specifications in Appendices 7 and 8. See also Guidance on Graded Units: using the design principles for Higher National Certificates and Diplomas. This is available on our website (www.sqa.org.uk).

Qualification Design Teams must always conduct market research, particularly among candidates and employers, to ensure the continuing fitness for purpose of the HNCs and HNDs. Where this clearly indicates that the design principles regarding the use of Graded Units need to be re-interpreted or modified, the Qualification Design Team should have contacted SQA to develop an agreed alternative. Where an alternative has been agreed, the Validation Proposal Document should include strong supporting arguments and a formal SQA statement of the agreed alternative design principle. Validation panel members should confirm the validity of the market research and the fitness for purpose of the proposed alternative.

5.6.5
B

Core Skills
To meet employment and progression needs, all HNC and/or HND programmes will incorporate opportunities for candidates to develop 34

Core Skills. This would normally mean all five Core Skills should be developed in every HN programme. The Core Skills are: Communication; Numeracy; Information Technology (IT); Problem Solving; and Working with Others. Some of the Core Skills are further broken down into components: Core Skill Communication Core Skill component Oral Communication Written Communication Using Graphical Information Using Number Using Information Technology Critical Thinking Planning and Organising Reviewing and Evaluating Working with Others

Numeracy

Information Technology (IT) Problem Solving

Working with Others

Core Skill levels The definition of each of the Core Skills is set out in SQAs Core Skills Framework (which can be accessed on our website: www.sqa.org.uk). The framework defines each Core Skill at all five levels, from SCQF level 2 to SCQF level 6. It is recommended (though not mandatory) that HN qualifications should normally require a minimum of SCQF level 4 for entry and provide opportunities to further develop Core Skills at SCQF levels 5 and 6. The general differences between the Core Skills at these levels are: SCQF level 4 (recommended for use in entry level only): when using a Core Skill at this level, the candidate will have some responsibility for taking decisions about putting the skill into action. Often the Core Skill will be used in a managed environment, but sometimes the candidate will need to use the skill without close supervision. SCQF level 5: when using a Core Skill at this level, the candidate will need to take decisions abut how to select and apply the skill to meet the demands of activities, which might sometimes be complex. This is the highest level (Standard Grade at Credit level) of Communication, Numeracy, and Information Technology expected of the ablest students after eleven years of compulsory school education. It is adequate for all but specialist business, technical or educational tasks. Setting Core Skills at levels above this would imply very specialist areas indeed. Most progression is not in Core Skills, but in 35

applying this level of Core Skill in increasingly complex tasks or situations. SCQF level 6: when using a Core Skill at this level, the candidate will have responsibility for making decisions about how to use the Core Skill within the context, which will often be a challenging or unfamiliar one. The candidate will analyse, plan, and manage his/her own use of the Core Skill in complex activities. You should note that SCQF level 6 Core Skills should only be included where that particular skill is vital in the sector, eg HN qualifications in Computing should provide candidates with the opportunity to develop IT Core Skill at SCQF level 6. Recommended Entry Level As part of the Recommended Access statement (see section 5.5) the Qualification Design Team will propose a recommended Core Skills entry level which should include all five Core Skills. The entry level should reflect the needs of the appropriate market and occupational sector and specify what candidates would need: as preparation for beginning the HNC or HND to have a reasonable chance of completing the HNC or HND to be prepared for the broad range of activities required by the HNC or HND Validation panel members should ensure that the recommended entry level adequately prepares candidates for study in the Group Award area but that, just as importantly, it is not set unnecessarily high so that it creates a barrier to entry. The relative importance of the five Core Skills will vary across areas. For example, one HNC or HND may require a high level of Numeracy and IT but a low level of Communication and Working with Others, while another HNC or HND may require a completely different set of Core Skills. Developing Core Skills within the Group Award HNCs and HNDs should clearly include opportunities for candidates to develop Core Skills to the levels required by the occupations or progression pathways the HNCs and HNDs support. These development opportunities should equip candidates for progression into employment or further study in the area. The levels required by occupations or progression pathways should be established by market research and validation panel members must ensure that the development of Core Skills at the recommended levels is commensurate with the findings from the market research. Other factors,

36

such as future employability and development of the individual, should also be taken into account. The Validation Proposal Document should include a mapping of the opportunities for developing Core Skills as required by the end-users (principally potential employers). The opportunities identified should include those for embedded and signposted Core Skills and the mapping should identify: the Units or Graded Units where there are opportunities for candidates to develop each of the five Core Skills, including all of the components. (Most new or recently-revised Unit specifications will detail the opportunities for developing Core Skills in the Core Skills and Approaches to Learning and Teaching sections.) the SCQF level at which each Core Skill (or Core Skill component) will be developed whether the Core Skill (or Core Skill component) will be: developed only through the learning and teaching processes developed and assessed formatively developed and assessed summatively, and where evidence can be used as evidence towards Core Skills Units Further information on how Core Skills will be developed through teaching, learning and assessment activities should be given in Approaches to delivery and assessment (see section 5.7.3 of this guide). Although it is not necessary for candidates to be formally assessed and generate evidence of achievement of the Core Skills, validation panel members should ensure that the level of Core Skills is realistic for entry to, and for development in, the Group Award, and takes into account the target candidates and needs of the sector. It is often tempting for Qualification Design Teams to set all of the Core Skills at the SCQF level 6 the highest possible level in the framework. Core Skills at SCQF level 6 represent an optimum level of performance. Some examples of the level of performance expected in contexts specific to the proposed HNC or HND might be given to help validation panels form a realistic judgement of appropriate level. It may be, though, that a detailed report by an independent Core Skill specialist will accompany the proposals, especially if unrevised Unit specifications (with no reference to Core Skills) are signposted as vehicles for Core Skill development. Whatever the situation, validation panel members should ensure that the Core Skill claims in the proposals are appropriate and achievable. In summary, you should determine whether the proposed mapping of Core Skills development opportunities:

37

 meets the needs of the occupational sector meets the possible aspirations of candidates allows progression into employment and further study Qualification Design Teams should adhere to this principle except where they can demonstrate through market research with employers that an occupation does not demand a particular Core Skill at any level whatsoever. The Qualification Design Team should have contacted SQA to agree an amendment to this design principle. The Validation Proposal Document should include strong supporting arguments and a copy of the amendment as agreed by SQA. Validation panel members should confirm the validity of the market research and the fitness for purpose of the proposed amendment. It should be clear that any change would require very thorough market research.

5.6.6
B

Conditions of award
HNC Candidates will be awarded an HNC on successful completion of 96 SCQF credit points which will include successful achievement of all of the Units and the Graded Unit in the mandatory section. The 96 SCQF credit points should incorporate at least 48 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7. There are no other specifications regarding the minimum or maximum SCQF level for the remaining SCQF credit points. Validation panel members should ensure that, overall, the contents of the HNC: meet the identified aims of the Group Award; do not place unnecessary barriers to achievement; and represent an achievement consistent with the level of the Group Award, ie SCQF level 7. HND Candidates will be awarded an HND on successful achievement of 240 SCQF credit points, which will include successful achievement of all of the Units and the Graded Units in the mandatory section. The 240 SCQF credit points should incorporate at least 64 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8. There are no other specifications regarding the minimum or maximum SCQF level for the remaining SCQF credit points. Again, validation panel members should ensure that, overall, the contents of the HND: meet the identified aims of the Group Award; do not place unnecessary barriers to achievement; and represent an achievement consistent with the level of the Group Award, ie SCQF level 8.

38

Please note that for both the HNC and the HND, the minimum number of SCQF credit points at SCQF levels 7 and 8 can be achieved through attainment of HN Units and Graded Units.

5.7
B

Approaches to delivery and assessment

Once the Group Award has been validated, the Validation Proposal Document will be amended to become the Validated Document, which will reflect the decisions of the validation panel. This will then be made available to centres and candidates as the HN Arrangements Document. SQA will publish the HN Arrangements Documents for all consortiabased HNCs and HNDs developed in partnership with SQA. For this reason, the Approaches to delivery and assessment section should provide users (both centres and candidates) with information on each of the following.

5.7.1
B

Content and context

This should provide guidance which helps to contextualise and expand on the rationale and aims of the Group Award. For example, it may give further guidance on the purpose of the Group Award, and any other information that would be helpful to someone using the Group Award for the first time. It may also include further information on the way the Group Award aligns to National Occupational Standards or other professional body requirements, where appropriate, information about recognition by professional bodies or other organisations, and progression pathways to other Group Awards or degree programmes.

5.7.2
B

Delivery and assessment

This should provide guidance on the sequence of delivery and assessment of the Units and, in particular, the timing and conduct of the Graded Units. It should also provide guidance on opportunities for integrating Unit assessments.

5.7.3
B

Core Skills
This should give more detail on how the identified Core Skills can be developed during teaching, learning and assessment in the HNC or HND. Guidance and advice on the development of Core Skills is given in revised Units. The information in the Validation Proposal Document should be based on the guidance from the Unit specifications and any other source, such as a Core Skills specialist. This might include: one or more strategies that might assist lecturers and course managers deliver Core Skills within the context of the Group Award suggestions on which Units or combination of Units optimise opportunities for development

39

Further guidance on signposting Core Skills can be found in Guidance on Core Skills: using the design principles for Higher National Certificates and Diplomas and Writing Higher National Units using the revised format. Both these documents are available on SQAs website (www.sqa.org.uk).

5.7.4
B

Open learning
This should contain a statement on the suitability of the Group Award and Units for open and distance learning and, where possible, contextualised advice on how this might best be carried out. Although the authentication of a candidates work is the responsibility of each centre, guidance on this should also be given.

5.7.5
B

General information for candidates

This should provide a brief summary of the Group Award which can be given out to candidates before they commence on their programme of study. It should include information on: what the Group Award is about the knowledge and skills which will be developed what is involved in assessment the Graded Units, including how these will be assessed what Core Skills will be developed, to what level and how this will be done conditions of award It should also provide information on the possible routes of progression in education or to types of employment available for candidates obtaining the qualification. This is particularly relevant if the Group Award comprises a mandatory/optional structure guidance should be given to assist candidates in making appropriate choices. This guidance should be given as advice on progression pathways (see next paragraph below) from the HNC or HND.

5.7.6
B

Progression pathways
Qualification Design Teams should provide guidance on the different routes through the qualification and what options should be taken. This guidance should be based on the following considerations. Most HNCs form the first part of a corresponding HND. Qualification Design Teams should provide guidance on which optional Units an HNC candidate should choose if he/she wishes to progress to the HND at any time in the future. HNCs and HNDs are normally designed to meet the needs of an occupational sector by developing the knowledge and skills which

40

candidates need to gain entry into employment. Some HNC/Ds are designed to allow specialism within a broad area of expertise. Qualification Design Teams should provide guidance on the implications of choosing particular options in such an award. HNCs and HNDs can also often be designed to provide candidates with the knowledge and skills required for further study in degree programmes and/or professional body qualifications. The different needs of these exit pathways can be met by including optional Units. For example, progression to a degree programme may require achievement of specific knowledge and skills or a higher number of SCQF credit points to be gained at SCQF 7 or SCQF 8 than is specified as the minimum for the award of the HNC or HND. Similarly, those candidates who wish to progress to professional body qualifications may need to be advised on which options to choose.

5.8
B

HN Unit and Graded Unit specifications

The Validation Proposal Document should contain a complete set of specifications for all the Units (mandatory and optional) which are included in the Group Award framework. Where this involves a large number of Units, the document should contain, as a minimum, copies of the section headed General information for centres of all of the Units. As Graded Units assess whether candidates have met the principal aims of the Group Award, the Validation Proposal Document should always contain the full specifications for each Graded Unit.
Please note that the published HN Arrangements Document will not contain copies of the HN Unit specifications. These will be made available to centres via the SQA website (www.sqa.org.uk).

5.9
B

Supporting evidence
Evidence from key stakeholder groups especially employers supporting the case for validation of a new Group Award, should be included as an appendix to the Validation Proposal Document. This evidence should support the need for a qualification of the proposed type, and its structure and content, and it should include an explanation of why existing provision cannot be used. It should also include detailed market research carried out by the development team (which may include generally available statistics tailored to the specific proposal), and letters of support from key stakeholders, such as universities, professional bodies or agencies concerned with economic or community development. Evidence supporting the case for validating revisions to an existing Group Award should include details of the consultation undertaken with candidates, Sector Skills Councils, employers, professional bodies and other higher education providers, along with an explanation of how the comments received have been accommodated in the revised structure. 41

It is for the validation panel to decide whether the evidence presented is sufficient and convincing. This appendix will not normally form part of the subsequent HN Arrangements Document.

42

6
B

Validation of Graded Units

Introduction
The purposes of Graded Units are: to assess candidates ability to integrate and apply the knowledge and/or skills gained in the individual HN Units to demonstrate that candidates have achieved the principal aims of the Group Award to grade candidate achievement Assessing integration of knowledge Graded Units assess knowledge and skills at the level of the Group Award. HNCs require candidates to demonstrate knowledge and skills at SCQF level 7, so the Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points in an HNC (or first part of an HND) should, mostly, assess the retention and integration of the knowledge and skills developed in SCQF level 7 Units. Similarly, HNDs require candidates to demonstrate knowledge and skills at SCQF level 8, so the Graded Units of 16 SCQF credit points in the second part of an HND should assess (predominantly) the retention and integration of knowledge and skills developed in SCQF level 8 Units. Demonstrating achievement of the principal aims Graded Units would normally assess retention and integration of knowledge and skills developed in most, but not necessarily all, of the mandatory Units, and could include assessment of knowledge and skills developed in a range of the optional Units. Grading achievement Each Graded Unit should be designed to enable distinction of the achievement of candidates of differing abilities. Candidates achievements will be assessed as C (competent) or A (highly competent) or B (somewhere between highly competent and competent). Types of assessment There are two types of assessment that can be used in Graded Units a Project or an Examination. Projects should be used to assess the application of knowledge and skills. Examinations are used to assess theoretical knowledge. As HNCs and HNDs are, in the main, designed to provide candidates with the knowledge and skills required for entry into employment, we envisage that most Graded Units will take the form of a project.

6.1
B

43

The validation panel will validate the proposed type(s) of assessment for the Graded Unit, the chosen assessment instruments and any associated instructions to be used, and the conditions in which the Graded Unit will be assessed. The Graded Unit specifications will then form part of the mandatory section of the validated HNC and/or HND. Centres wishing to use another type of Graded Unit or another type of assessment instrument are required to submit their proposals, detailing their justification for change, for validation. Once it is validated, assessors will use the Graded Unit specification to develop the assessment instrument to assess whether candidates have met the principal aims of the Group Award, and to grade candidate achievement. Project-based Graded Unit Project-based Graded Units should be used to test the application of the knowledge and skills required to plan, carry out, and evaluate a task in which the candidate does significant work without close supervision. The Graded Unit specification should provide details of the assessment task and the evidence that candidates are expected to produce. It should also allow a degree of choice in the way the project is taken forward so that it fits centres available resources and candidates interests and personal strengths. The assessment task would normally take the form of a case study, an investigation, or a practical assignment. A case study tests and reinforces skills in gathering and interpreting information, analysing, decision-making, and action planning. An investigation tests and reinforces skills in research, analysis, evaluation, and reporting. A practical assignment tests and reinforces the application of practical skills, and knowledge and understanding, to a situation that involves task management. The practical assignment is not concerned exclusively with practical activity the assessment should be based on a combination of the end result of the activity (the product or performance) and the carrying out of the activity (the process). The candidate would normally carry out the tasks involved in the project without close supervision. However, some of the tasks, eg writing up a report, could be undertaken under invigilated conditions. Validation panel members should confirm that the conditions of assessment being proposed are appropriate. Examination-based Graded Unit Examination-based Graded Units should be used to test underpinning knowledge and theoretical understanding of a subject/occupational area. Candidates will be expected to use a wide range of cognitive skills, such 44

as recalling, explaining, distinguishing, estimating, exemplifying, interpreting, inferring, solving, calculating, analysing, evaluating, appraising, synthesising. All examinations used for Graded Units will be unseen. They can be either closed-book or open-book, and should always be conducted under invigilated conditions. In a closed-book examination, candidates are given no information other than the question paper and script book, and are expected to answer questions without the aid of reference material. In an open-book examination, candidates are allowed to use prescribed materials. Details of the prescribed materials must be included in the Graded Unit specification. Decisions about whether to use closed-book or open-book examination should reflect: what is expected of candidates in real-life working situations in the subject/occupational area what information we can reasonably expect candidates to know without the aid of reference material the knowledge and understanding which candidates are being required to retain
For more information, see Guidance on Graded Units on www.sqa.org.uk

The shell documents which Qualification Design Teams use to specify their proposed Graded Units are attached as Appendices 7 and 8 (for project-based and examination-based Graded Units respectively).

6.2
B

The role of the validator

The role of validators is to ensure that the Graded Unit specification is fit for purpose. This means that the type (project or examination-based) and content of the Graded Unit must be appropriate to the general and specific aims of the particular HNC/D of which it is part.

6.3
B

The Graded Unit specification

This section provides summary information for Qualification Design Teams and Validation Panel Members on the main components and subcomponents that must be included in the Graded Unit specification. Expanded information/guidance on two of these components can be found in Sections 6.4 and 6.5 below.

45

General information for centres which includes: Title Code Type (of assessment) Assessment Instrument Credit points and level Purpose Recommended prior knowledge and skills (access statement) Core Skills Assessment

Expanded guidance on what might be contained in this component of the Unit specification is given in section 6.4 below. Administrative information including: Code Title Original date of publication Version History of changes Source Copyright information

This information is provided by SQA and does not need to be checked by those validating the Unit. Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates which includes: Conditions of assessment Instructions for designing the assessment task Guidance on assessing and grading candidates Evidence Requirements (project-based specifications only)

Expanded guidance on what might be contained in this component of the Unit specification is given in section 6.5 below.

46

Support Notes. This section provides the opportunity for giving any additional information that might be helpful to those delivering the Graded Unit or devising assessments. Information might include: advice on how to plan within a course team sequence of delivery in relation to subject Units underpinning the Graded Unit recommendations on progress interviews in project-based Graded Units This section is not mandatory and therefore might vary in length and detail. General Information for candidates, which includes: the purpose of the particular Graded Unit and how it relates to the Group Award details of how the Unit will be assessed what the basis of grading will be opportunities to develop Core Skills within the Graded Unit

6.4
B

General information for centres

Title
The title of the Graded Unit should be the title of the HNC and/or HND to which the Graded Unit contributes, accompanied by the number 1 to indicate that it belongs to an HNC or the first part of an HND, or by the numbers 2 and 3 to indicate that it belongs to the second part of an HND. For example, the titles of the Graded Units for the HNC Marketing would be: Marketing: Graded Unit 1 Similarly, the titles of the Graded Units in the HND Marketing would be: Marketing: Graded Unit 1 Marketing: Graded Unit 2 Marketing: Graded Unit 3 The SCQF level will always appear in the Graded Unit specification and on the candidates certificate.

6.4.1
B

47

6.4.2
B

Code
Graded Unit codes are allocated by SQA. Once a Graded Unit has been validated and allocated a code, any significant changes would require to be validated. It would then be allocated another code.

6.4.3
B

Type
The type of Graded Unit can be either project-based or examinationbased.

6.4.4
B

Assessment instrument
For project-based Graded Units, this will be a case study, investigation or practical assignment. For examination-based Graded Units, this will be either a closed-book examination or an open-book examination.

6.4.5
B

Credit points and level

Like HN Units, all Graded Units are allocated credit points which indicate the volume of achievement 8 SCQF credit points (one SQA HN credit) indicates a notional design length of 40 hours of structured learning. Similarly, a Graded Unit of 16 SCQF credit points (two SQA HN Unit credits) indicates a notional design length of 80 hours of structured learning. Graded Units at SCQF level 7 (HNC/first part HND) will be designed to have 8 SCQF credit points. Graded Units at SCQF level 8 (second part HND) can be designed to have 8 or 16 SCQF credit points, ie one Unit at 16 SCQF credit points or two Units at 8 SCQF credit points each.

6.4.6
B

Purpose
The purpose statement should say which of the principal aims of the Group Award the Graded Unit is designed to assess. The purpose statement should not make any claims which go beyond what is assessed within the Graded Unit.

6.4.7
B

Recommended prior knowledge and skills

This recommended prior knowledge and skills (access) statement should provide guidance on the level of knowledge and skills candidates need to be able to achieve the Graded Unit in the time allotted. This section should give guidance on which Units from the Group Award should have been undertaken by candidates before embarking on the Graded Unit(s). Since Graded Units should assess knowledge and skills at the level of the Group Award, the recommended access requirements for the Graded Unit in an HNC or the first part of an HND should be made up 48

predominantly of SCQF level 7 Units. The recommended access requirements for the Graded Unit(s) in the second part of an HND should be made up predominantly of SCQF level 8 Units. The recommended access requirements would include most of, but not necessarily all, the mandatory Units and some of the optional Units.

6.4.8
B

Core Skills
This section should indicate the opportunities (embedded or signposted) for candidates to develop Core Skills or Core Skill components at a particular SCQF level. For example, project-based Graded Units may provide candidates with the opportunity to develop the Core Skill of Problem Solving at SCQF level X.

6.4.9
B

Assessment
This section begins with a standard SQA statement about the production of evidence by centres. However, this section should also indicate whether any assessment exemplars for the Graded Unit have been produced. In this case, the standard statement, An exemplar instrument of assessment and marking guidelines have been produced to indicate the national standard of achievement required at SCQF level X, should be included.

6.5
B

Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates

Project-based Graded Units
Conditions of assessment This is a standard statement detailing the conditions in which assessment should take place. Additional, contextualised information may be given by Qualification Design Teams provided it does not contradict the information in the standard statement. Normally, HN candidates would be expected to carry out the work involved in the project without close supervision. However, there may be reasons for some of the project work being done under invigilated conditions, (eg the writing of the evaluation report or the conduct of a laboratory experiment). Invigilated conditions should be used where the conditions of assessment contribute to the national standard and reflect the needs of end-users, such as professional body recognition requirements. They should not be used solely as a means to authenticate candidates work there are many other ways to do this, eg a short personal interview or witness testimony. Validation panel members should ensure that proposed 49

6.5.1
B

conditions of assessment, and in particular the use of invigilated conditions, are necessary, meet the requirements of end-users of the qualification, and do not present any unnecessary barriers to achievement. Instructions for designing the assessment task A standard SQA statement is provided. This specifies the minimum design requirements of any project-based assessment task, whether it is a case study, investigation, or practical assignment, ie each project must contain the stages of planning, development and evaluation. In addition, the Qualification Design Team should provide further instructions specific to their HNC and/or HND, eg instructions for writing the project brief. Validation panel members should ensure that the instructions are adequate and do not place unnecessary restrictions on choice. Evidence Requirements This section should detail the minimum Evidence Requirements for each of the three stages of the project planning, developing, and evaluating for the Group Award subject area. Validation panel members should ensure that the Evidence Requirements are sufficient to demonstrate that candidates meet the Group Award aims that the Graded Unit has been designed to assess. Guidance on grading candidates Candidate achievement will be graded as C (competent), or A (highly competent), or B (somewhere between highly competent and competent). Examples of grade related criteria for project-based Graded Units are given in Guidance on Graded Units available on the SQA website (www.sqa.org.uk). Qualification Design Teams should adapt and contextualise the generic grade related criteria for the Group Award area and include it in this section of the Graded Unit specification. Note: Grade C must meet the minimum Evidence Requirements.

6.5.2

Examination-based Graded Units

Conditions of Assessment This is a standard SQA statement detailing the conditions in which the assessment should take place. Any changes to the standard statement should be discussed and confirmed during the validation process. The Qualification Design Team may have provided additional information specific to their HNC and/or HND.

50

Length of the examination Examinations should be a single event of three hours duration. However, there may be some circumstances where the examination is divided into a number of separate events. This could be where totally different skills are being tested, eg when assessing the listening and written comprehension of a foreign language or undertaking part of the assessment online. The reasons for holding a number of separate examinations, or having examinations which are of less or more than three hours duration, should be discussed and approved by validation panel members. Validation panel members should ensure the integrative aspect of the Graded Unit is not compromised. Type of examination The Qualification Design Team should have specified whether the examination is to be closed-book or open-book. If open-book, the Qualification Design Team should specify all the materials to which the candidate will have access. Instructions for designing the assessment task This section asks Qualification Design Teams to specify: The topics, ie the critical knowledge and skills, to be covered in the examination. This should not be a repetition of Unit titles but should specify the topic from within or across the Units on which examination questions will be based. The level of demand for each topic, eg: description, explanation, analysis, application, calculation, etc. Whether the examination must have a set number of questions, eg three extended response questions. If this is not given, then centres devising Graded Unit assessments can decide on the appropriate number of questions, providing they adhere to other requirements in the Graded Unit specification. In these cases, the mark allocation for each topic will be important, as the weighting for each topic will be the same irrespective of the number of questions which cover that topic. The relative weighting/mark allocation to be given for each topic within the examination, eg: 40% of the marks should be allocated to Topic A, 20% to Topic B, 30% to Topic C, 10% to Topic D Further allocation of marks within each question, if appropriate. This might include such things as technical detail, development, analysis, drawing conclusions and integration. Where marks are allocated to integration of knowledge and understanding, the nature of integration needs to be clear as this may be different for each Group Award. Guidance on grading candidates The examination will be marked out of 100. Assessors will aggregate the marks achieved by the candidate to arrive at an overall mark for the 51

examination. Assessors will then assign a grade to the candidate for this Graded Unit based on the following grade boundaries: A = 70% 100% B = 60% 69% C = 50% 59% These grade boundaries cannot be changed. Success in the examination will be based on achievement of 50% of the overall marks. Validation panel members should confirm the validity both of the assessment instrument and any marking criteria.

52

7
B

Validating HN Units
Introduction
The importance of the Unit specification
The quality of the Unit specification is extremely important. The Unit is the cornerstone of all SQA qualifications and sets out the standards and levels of performance expected of candidates. Unit quality is not just about good presentation, but about communicating clear and unambiguous information about the type of activities being carried out and the levels of achievement associated with good, competent, performance. It is important to remember that, once published, a Unit enters the public domain this means it needs to meet SQAs criteria for national recognition (see Appendix 4).

7.1
B

7.1.1

7.1.2

The role of the validator

The role of the validator is to ensure that the Unit specification meets the highest standard in terms of both content and format. The following sections give advice on what information validators should look for in each component of the Unit specification

7.2
B

Revised format
The format of HN Units has been revised to encourage a more holistic approach to assessment. The new HN Unit specification places the emphasis on assessing whole Outcomes, or a combination of Outcomes, rather than Performance Criteria. This should reduce the assessment load for both candidates and assessors, and help to improve credit transfer between HNC and/or HND and degree programmes. There is no longer a merit statement all Units will be achieved by attainment of the standards specified.
See Appendix 9 for the revised HN Unit specification.

Each Unit written using the revised HN Unit specification must have the following components. General information for centres which includes: Unit title Unit code Unit purpose 53

 Credit points and levels Recommended prior knowledge and skills statement (access statement) Core Skills Context for delivery Assessment Expanded guidance on what might be contained in this component is given in Section 7.3 below. Statement of standards which includes: Outcomes Knowledge and/or skills statement Evidence Requirements Assessment Guidelines

Expanded guidance on what might be contained in this component is given in Section 7.4 below. Administrative information which includes: Unit title Unit code Superclass category Original date of publication Version History of changes Source Copyright information

This information will be provided by SQA following the validation of the Unit. Support notes which includes: Guidance on the content and context Guidance on the delivery and assessment, including information on the development of Core Skills Open learning Candidates with disabilities and/or additional support needs Expanded guidance on what might be contained in this component is given in Section 7.5 below. 54

General information for candidates: A summary of the purpose and content of the Unit, which has been written in user-friendly language. Expanded guidance on what might be contained in this component is given in Section 7.6 below.

7.3
B

General information for centres

Unit title
Validators should be satisfied that the Unit title gives a clear indication of what the Unit is about. The title should reflect what candidates will be able to do or the skills and/or knowledge they will have developed on achieving the Outcomes. The title should clearly indicate the area of skills and/or knowledge followed, if necessary, by a further statement indicating any specialism or qualifying factor, eg: Video Production Technology: Basic Skills Graphic Design: Childrens Book Illustration Research Methods in Social Sciences Management: An Introduction to Team Leadership

7.3.1

Numbers should not be used in a title even where there is a clear progression between Units. This progression should be reflected in the wording of the title and also the recommended prior knowledge and skills section.

7.3.2

Unit code
Unit codes are allocated by SQA. Once a Unit has been validated and allocated a code, the Unit cannot be significantly altered or amended in any way, except through validation. After validation it would be allocated another code.

7.3.3

Unit purpose
The purpose statement should give a clear, brief summary of what the Unit is about, followed by the statement On completion of this Unit, the candidate should be able to, and then the list of Outcomes as they are written in the Statement of Standards. The purpose statement should not make claims which go beyond what is in the Outcomes. Validators should check that the Outcomes in this section match those contained in the Statement of Standards section of the specification.

55

7.3.4

Credit points and levels

Credit points All HN Units are allocated SCQF credit points which indicate the volume of achievement. Qualifications are allocated SCQF credit points on the basis of the volume of learning involved, ie a notional learning time with one SCQF credit point being allocated for each 10 hours of timetabled and individual learning. HN candidates are normally expected to undertake equivalent hours of non-contact time or candidate-led effort to consolidate and reinforce learning for each hour of programmed learning. Using this model, 40 hours (the recommended normal duration of a single SQA credit HN Unit) of programmed learning would attract eight points in the SCQF. Although HN Units are normally designed to have a programmed length of 40 hours (8 SCQF credit points), they can also be designed in multiples of 0.5, eg as 20-hour Units (4 SCQF credit points); 60-hour Units (12 SCQF credit points); or 80-hour Units (16 SCQF credit points). By exception, 10-hour Units (2 SCQF credit points) can be used where circumstances warrant it. The justification for using 10-hour Units will be closely examined at validation. Validators should be satisfied that the credit value takes account of the estimated amount of programmed learning, teaching, and assessment time needed for an average candidate to achieve the Outcomes. Level All HN Units will include the SCQF level of the Unit. HN Units will be allocated a level appropriate to their position in the SCQF. Validators can check the SCQF level allocated by referring to the SCQF level descriptors (see Appendix 3), in conjunction with any current benchmarks such as National Units and levelled HN Units that have been used to confirm the proposed level of the Unit. Not only those Units which have been written using the revised HN Unit specification will be allocated a level, but also any existing Units imported into the new/revised HNC or HND. This means: Any Unit (including any existing Units which have not been revised using the new HN Unit specification known as non-revised Units) to be used in a HNC or HND framework designed using the design principles will have to be validated by SQA. The minimum change to be made in validating a non-revised Unit will be the allocation to a SCQF level, the re-coding of the Unit, and the removal of the merit statement. The Unit specification should

56

have been amended to reflect these changes. Merit statements should only be retained where the Units contribute to a framework validated using the 1988 design rules. Units imported from another subject area will need to be allocated to a SCQF level by the SQA officer responsible for that area.

7.3.5

Recommended prior knowledge and skills statement

Validators should check that the recommended prior knowledge and skills (access) statement provides appropriate guidance on the level of knowledge and/or skills candidates need to be able to achieve the Unit in the allotted time. Ideally, this section of the Unit should contain examples of the type and level of qualification and/or other experience which might demonstrate appropriate prior knowledge and skills. It should also be used as an indication of where one Unit progresses directly from another, eg Communication : Introduction to Communication : Intermediate, or where certain skills or knowledge underpin the content of the Unit. This access statement applies to the individual Unit for which it is written, not to the Group Award framework of which it may form part. It is not mandatory, and expresses only the preferred prior achievements.

7.3.6

Core Skills
There are four possible statements on Core Skills within the Unit. Validators should be satisfied that the appropriate statement has been chosen and is congruent with other information on Core Skills in the Unit specification. The four possible statements are: Where a claim for an embedded Core Skill has been validated, a standard statement will be added by SQA. The achievement of this Unit gives automatic certification of the following: (give Core Skill, or component, title and level) Where Core Skills development is signposted, use the wording: There are opportunities to develop the Core Skill(s) of (give Core Skill, or component, title + level) in this Unit, although there is no automatic certification of Core Skills or Core Skills components. Where Core Skills are both embedded and signposted, use the wording The achievement of this Unit gives automatic certification of the following: (give Core Skill, or component, title and level). There are also further opportunities to develop the Core Skill(s) of (give Core Skill, or component, title + level) in this Unit.

57

Where no Core Skills are either embedded or signposted, the following statement will be used There are no opportunities to develop Core Skills in this Unit.

7.3.7

Context for delivery

The statement If this Unit is delivered as part of a Group Award, it is recommended that it should be taught and assessed within the subject area of the Group Award to which it contributes will be used in all HN Units. The statement could be expanded to provide further guidance on the integration of the delivery of the Unit, if this is appropriate. Validators should be satisfied that any additional guidance is appropriate.

7.3.8

Assessment
This section should summarise the assessment strategy for the Unit, ie it should indicate whether and how assessment could be integrated for the Unit as a whole or for combination of Outcomes. It should also recommend the type of assessment instrument(s) that could be used. Validators should be satisfied that the information given in this section of the Unit specification is congruent with other sections such as the Evidence Requirements, Assessment Guidelines and Support Notes sections of the Unit specification.

7.4
B

Statement of standards
Outcomes
The aim of a Unit is to identify, and provide a breakdown of, the essential activities (eg explanations, descriptions, applications of theories or techniques) in a particular area of skills and/or knowledge. These essential activities are expressed in the form of Outcomes. These give a clear indication of what a candidate should be able to do on completion of the Unit. When considering the Outcomes in a Unit, validators should take into account the following points. The main feature of an Outcome is that it is written in terms of final output of achievement of knowledge and/or skills and, therefore, should be able to be prefaced by the phrase, The candidate will be able to. Examples are: use spreadsheet models to prepare business information for decision making analyse the main theories of class stratification

7.4.1

58

The Outcome should be clear so that even a non-expert can understand what candidates are being asked to do. As a rough guide, each Unit specification should have between three and five Outcomes this is not a fixed rule, but a recommendation drawn from experience. A large number of Outcomes in the same Unit specification can lead to fragmentation, and it militates against the holistic approach to assessment we are trying to encourage. There should be a clear link between the different Outcomes in the same Unit specification, and there should be a clear link between the Outcomes and the rationale for the Unit, its purpose and its objectives.

7.4.2

Knowledge and/or skills statements

A knowledge and/or skills statement should be included for each Outcome or, where the Unit is assessed holistically, for a combination of Outcomes or for the Unit as a whole. When considering the knowledge and/or skills statements, validators should take into account the following points:

this section should specify only the knowledge and/or skills that are essential for the achievement of the Outcome, and for which candidates would have to produce evidence knowledge and/or skills statements should not be written as performance criteria the level of knowledge and/or skill to be assessed should be clear from the Evidence Requirements

7.4.3

Evidence Requirements
Evidence Requirements can be written for each Outcome, for a combination of Outcomes, or for the Unit as a whole. There is no standard format for writing Evidence Requirements, but they must be easily understood by the users of the Unit. Validators should consider whether the Evidence Requirements state: the type of evidence required, ie exactly what candidates have to do or produce to demonstrate that they have achieved the Outcome (or Outcomes, or Unit) the standard of evidence required, ie a clear statement about the national standard of achievement (this was covered in the Performance Criteria in the old-style HN format) the amount of evidence the candidate has to produce. For instance, where it is not possible to demonstrate all of the items listed in the knowledge and/or skills section through holistic assessment,

59

sampling can be used as a method of gaining additional evidence (see next sub-section) the conditions in which the evidence has to be produced, ie any restrictions on the way the evidence can be generated to ensure that a valid and reliable assessment of a candidates achievement can be made. For example, if open-book assessment is used, then the Evidence Requirements should specify the source materials candidates can have access to Validators should note that Evidence Requirements are mandatory and therefore should not prescribe the Instrument of Assessment unless this is crucial to the standard required to achieve the Unit. Sampling One of the aims of the revised HN Unit specification is to reduce the assessment load for both centres and candidates, so the knowledge and/or skills developed in an Outcome (or Outcomes or the Unit as a whole) can be assessed by sampling. However, it is important to ensure that candidates cannot spot the assessment in advance of the assessment event. For this reason, sampling assessments, (ie assessments which cover a proportion of the content of the Outcome or Unit) must always be carried out in supervised conditions, and the sample (the part of the content that is covered) must be changed at each assessment event. To ensure consistency across all centres, and to ensure that assessors know the standard against which to judge the evidence, regardless of the sample assessed, the Evidence Requirements must clearly set out: the standard of evidence required for each knowledge and/or skills item so that satisfactory performance can be judged, whatever items are sampled on any one occasion the proportion of knowledge and/or skills which can be sampled whether any items must be included in the sample on each assessment occasion, eg if it is crucial to the achievement of the Outcome or to an embedded Core Skill the fact that a different sample should be chosen on each assessment occasion to prevent candidates being able to foresee what they will be asked the conditions of assessment

7.4.4

Assessment guidelines
This section should give guidance on how best to conduct the assessment, eg recommending the use of a particular assessment instrument. This guidance should provide a clear template for assessors to develop an assessment instrument. It should also, where applicable,

60

provide guidance on how to integrate assessment of the whole Outcome or how to link assessment with other Outcomes in the Unit. When considering Assessment guidelines, validators should take note of the following points: each HN Unit must contain assessment guidelines. Although the assessment guidelines are in the statement of standards section, it is not mandatory for centres to follow them anything which is mandatory should be in the Evidence Requirements section the assessment guidelines should not pose any unnecessary barriers to achievement for particular categories of candidates, eg those with additional support needs or those undertaking the Unit by open or distance learning like the section on Evidence Requirements, the assessment guidelines can be written for each Outcome, for a combination of Outcomes within the Unit, or for the Unit as a whole

7.5
B

Support Notes
When considering the Support Notes, validators should note the points in the following sub-sections 7.5.1 7.5.4.

7.5.1

Guidance on the content and context

This section should contextualise and expand on the statement of standards. It may give further information on the purpose of the Unit, more detail on each of the Outcomes, or any other information that would be useful for someone using the Unit for the first time. It should provide further details of what should be covered in the delivery of the Unit. While the knowledge and/or skills section covers essential knowledge and/or skills on which candidates will be assessed, there may be other areas of content of which they should be aware if they are to gain full benefit from undertaking the Unit. Where appropriate, this section should provide details of alignment to National Occupational Standards, any recognition given by professional bodies or other organisations, any Group Award to which the Unit contributes, and to progression pathways. For example, if part of the rationale for the Unit is to provide underpinning knowledge for an SVQ, this could be expanded on here.

7.5.2

Guidance on delivery and assessment

This section should provide guidance on how the delivery and/or assessment of the Unit could be integrated with other Units. This is particularly relevant if the Unit has been developed as part of a Group Award.

61

Likewise, this section should offer guidance on how best the Unit would fit into the sequence of delivery if part of an HNC and/or HND or on how it could be delivered as a free-standing Unit. Although the authentication of candidates work is the responsibility of each centre, guidance should also be given on how evidence can be authenticated for this Unit. Opportunities for developing Core Skills This section should also be used to give details of all opportunities (embedded or signposted) to develop Core Skills or Core Skill components. If such opportunities exist, information should be provided on the name and the SCQF level of the Core Skills (or components) being developed. It should also specify the Outcomes or assessments in which the Core Skills or components are being developed, and say whether it is being: developed only through the learning and teaching process developed and assessed formatively developed and assessed summatively and where evidence can be used as evidence towards Core Skills Units The type of teaching, learning and development activities that might lead to Core Skills development should be specified.

7.5.3

Open learning
This section should contain guidance on the suitability of the Unit for open and distance learning delivery. Where this is possible, it should include contextualised advice on how that mode of delivery is best managed.

7.5.4

Candidates with disabilities and/or additional support needs

SQA will insert a standard statement in all SQA HN Unit specifications.

7.6
B

General information for candidates

This section should provide a brief summary of the Unit which can be given out to candidates before they start. Validators should be satisfied that it is written in plain English. It should say what the Unit is about, what candidates have to know, how they will be assessed, and the opportunities to develop particular Core Skills embedded or signposted including SCQF levels.

62

8
B

Validation checklists
Checklist for use in the validation of HNCs and HNDs
This checklist does not provide an exhaustive list of issues. You should feel free to identify other relevant issues for discussion with the Qualification Design Team.

8.1
B

Heading Title

Checklist Yes The title should make clear to everyone what the successful candidate has achieved. Is it appropriate? Is it precise and unambiguous? Does it conflict with existing titles? Does it clearly reflect the sum of the competences of the qualification? If more than one area of occupation competence is included, does the title reflect this? A Group Award must have a clear rationale that justifies its aims, structure and level in terms of the demand from employers and its position within the framework of national qualifications. Are the nature and purpose of the qualification clearly explained? Is the level of the qualification clearly explained? Is the target audience for the qualification clearly identified? Is there significant evidence of demand from employers and/or higher education and/or professional bodies for such a qualification? Is the qualification worthy of certification in its own right? Will successful candidates have access to a range of employment opportunities or higher education programmes? Is the qualification unique? Does the qualification relate to others in the SQA framework? Are there progression routes available to degrees etc?

No

Rationale

63

Aims

The aims of the qualification should be consistent with the nature of the target employment sector and the level of the qualification. They should also support progression to higher education and provide generic skills that would be of general value in employment. Are the aims clearly and adequately stated? Are the aims appropriate to the target employment sector? Is there evidence of employer support for the aims of the qualification? Do the aims reflect the qualification title? Do the aims represent a significant achievement by the successful candidate? Do the aims provide a basis for progression to higher education? Do the aims include the development of generic skills of value in other sectors of employment?

Access

The qualification should have no features which create barriers to achievement by placing unnecessary restrictions on the place, pace or mode of learning. Are the selection criteria for access to the qualification clear? Is there a realistic indication of the previous achievement or experience which a candidate should have on entry to the qualification? Does the access statement clearly define the required level of prior knowledge and skills? Is access to the qualification based on recognised qualifications? Are the access requirements appropriate to the level of the qualification? Is there consistency between the Group Award and Unit specifications access criteria? Is access to the qualification restricted to a specific group of candidates? If there are restrictions, are they justified? Is the recommended Core Skills entry level appropriate?

64

Structure

The structure of the qualification should be clearly stated and all possible routes to achieving it should be of a standard consistent with the type of qualification. The aims of the qualification should be satisfied by all allowable combinations of Units and Graded Units. Mandatory or mandatory/optional structure Is the structure of the qualification clear and unambiguous? Does the structure of the qualification offer an appropriate balance between mandatory and optional Units? Does the structure of the qualification meet the minimum mandatory number of credits? Does the structure of the qualification have the required number of credits at the right level for the Group Award? Do all the possible routes to the qualification satisfy the aims of the qualification? Are all routes equal in terms of the number of credits? Is there a logical progression between the Units of the qualification? Is there evidence of coherence between the Units of the qualification? Is there evidence of support from employers for the structure of the qualification? Transition arrangements Is there information on what specific credit transfer can be given between predecessor and revised Units? Is there evidence that an external verifier has vetted the credit transfer arrangements? Is the alternative award route (224 SCQF credit points, plus Graded Units at SCQF level 8 of 16 SCQF credit points) clearly specified? Is it clear that this route is not available to new candidates? Graded Unit Do the chosen methods of Graded Unit and assessment instruments integrate the specified aims of the Group Award? Core Skills Are all five Core Skills included at levels appropriate to intended future employment or education? Is this exit Core Skills level based on sound market research? 65

Structure (cont)

Is there a clear indication of how each of the Core Skills in the exit level will be achieved? Conditions of award For each allowable combination of Units and Graded Units, is the total credit value achieved consistent with the credit value for the Group Award, ie: do all routes for the HNC add up to 96 SCQF credit points, ie 88 SCQF credit points from Units plus 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 from Graded Units? do all routes for the HND add up to 240 SCQF credit points, ie 216 SCQF credit points from Unit credits plus 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7 and 16 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8 from Graded Unit credits? For each allowable combination of Units and Graded Units, does the total credit value achieved consist of Units and Graded Units at the right level?

Approaches to delivery and assessment

Content and context This should provide information which helps to contextualise and expand on the rationale and aims of the Group Award. Does it give further information on the purpose of the Group Award? Does it state which recognition (if any) is given by professional bodies or other organisations? Does it provide information on progression pathways to or from other Group Awards? Delivery and assessment This should provide guidance on the sequence of delivery and assessment of the Units and the Graded Units. Does it provide information on the recommended sequence in which Units should be delivered? Does it provide information on how and when Graded Units should be undertaken? Does it provide guidance on how the assessment of Units can be integrated? Are the opportunities for developing Core Skills well signposted and realistic? Open learning Is there guidance given on the suitability of the Group Award for open and distance learning? 66

Approaches to delivery and assessment (cont)

If not, is there an explanation or justification? If so, is further guidance given on the authentication of candidates work? General information for candidates Is the information clear and helpful? Is it written in a style and tone appropriate for candidates? Does it give information on: what the aims of the Group Award are? what knowledge and skills will be developed? what is involved in the assessment, and in particular, the Graded Units? what the conditions of award are? what the possible progression routes are? what type of employment opportunities may be available? The validation document should contain a complete set of specifications for all of the Units (both mandatory and optional) and the Graded Units which make up the Group Award framework. Where this involves a large number of Units, as a minimum the document should contain copies of the first section headed General information for centres of all of the Units and copies of the full specifications for each Graded Unit. Does the validation document contain copies of the Unit and Graded Unit specifications which contribute to the Group Award framework? There should be evidence to support the claims made within the validation document in the form of an appendix which should include details of the consultation undertaken, and a summary of the feedback obtained. Is there evidence to support the claims made within the validation document, eg market analysis, professional body recognition? Does the evidence include feedback from appropriate users, eg candidates, higher education and/or the employment sector?

Specifications

Supporting evidence

67

Issues to be raised with the Qualification Design Team:

68

8.2
B

Checklist for validation of a Graded Unit specification

Checklist Yes No

Heading Title

General information for centres

Does the title reflect the HNC and/or HND to which the Graded Unit contributes? Type of Is the type of assessment identified as either project or assessment examination? Is it appropriate? Assessment Is the assessment instrument identified? Instrument Is it appropriate? Can the assessment be conducted within the notional time allocated? Credit value Is the level of demand appropriate to the allocated (SCQF level) SCQF level? Purpose Is the nature and purpose of the Graded Unit clearly explained? Is it appropriate? Does it specify which aims of the Group Award are being assessed? Recommended Does the access statement clearly define the required prior level of prior knowledge and skills? knowledge and Are the access requirements appropriate to the level of skills the Graded Unit? Is access to the Graded Unit restricted to a specific group of candidates? If there are any restrictions, are they justified? Core Skills Are opportunities for developing Core Skills well signposted? Are these opportunities realistic? Assessment Has the standard statement been used? Where an assessment exemplar has been produced, is this clearly stated? Instructions for designing the assessment task (project-based) Conditions of Has the standard statement been used? assessment If not, is there adequate justification for change? Is any additional information to the standard statement appropriate? Instructions Has the standard statement been used? for designing Are there further instructions specific to the HNC and/or the assessment HND to which the Graded Unit contributes? task Are they clear and appropriate?

69

Guidance on grading candidates Evidence Requirements and weighting of marks

Is the guidance contextualised and specific to the Group Award? Is the Grade C criteria commensurate with the minimum Evidence Requirements? Do the Evidence Requirements clearly state what evidence is required to demonstrate achievement of the HNC and/or HND aims being assessed? Do the minimum evidence requirements cover the achievement of any embedded Core Skills and Core Skills components? Has weighting of marks been allocated to each stage of the project, ie planning, developing and evaluation? Is the weighting appropriate?

Instructions for designing the assessment task (examination-based) Conditions of Has the standard statement been used? assessment If not, is there adequate justification for change? Is any additional information to the standard statement appropriate? If the examination is to be less or more than three hours duration, is this justified? Instructions Does the type of examination (ie whether closed or for designing open-book) reflect: the assessment what would be expected of candidates in real-life task working situations in the subject/occupational area? what information we can reasonably expect candidates to know without aid of reference material? the knowledge and understanding which candidates are expected to retain? If an open-book examination is specified, are details given of the reference and/or source materials to which candidates will have access? Do the topics assess the specified aims? Do the topics specify the critical knowledge and/or skills to be assessed? Is the level of knowledge and understanding to be assessed clear and appropriate? Is the relative weighting/mark allocation to be given to each topic appropriate? Guidance on Is the guidance contextualised and specific to the Group grading Award? candidates

70

Support Notes Support Notes Candidates with disabilities and/or additional support needs

Do the support notes provide relevant and useful information? Has the standard statement been included?

General information for candidates General Is this section written in plain user-friendly English? information Does the information reflect the content of the Graded for candidates Unit specification? Does this section give details of: type of Graded Unit? assessment instrument? timing of assessment? the basis of grading?

71

Issues to be raised with Qualification Design Team:

72

8.3
B

Checklist for validation of an HN Unit

Your role in validating HN Units is to determine whether the proposed Unit specification meets SQAs validation criteria, namely: that the qualification conforms to the SQA design principles and other technical requirements that are current at the time of its validation that there is a demonstrable need for the HN Unit which fills a gap in the qualifications framework and makes a valuable contribution to SQAs portfolio of qualifications While technical requirements of Unit specifications and their conformity to design principles are largely a matter for SQA officers, you need to be confident that the specifications are clear and unambiguous. Your primary concern will be with the coherence of the subject content of the Unit, its credit value, level, and fitness for purpose.

Heading Unit title

Checklist General information for centres The title should make clear to everyone what the successful candidate has achieved. Is it precise and unambiguous? Does it reflect the scope and level of difficulty of the Unit? Is it meaningful? If the Unit is part of a sequence, does the title reflect the Units place in the sequence? The Unit should have a clear statement detailing what the Unit is about, who it is aimed at and what candidates will be able to do as a result of undertaking the Unit. Is the nature and purpose of the Unit clearly explained? Is it consistent with the Unit title and the Unit content? Is the target audience for the qualification clearly identified? Is there a concise statement which encompasses all the Outcomes of the Unit?

Yes

No

Unit purpose

73

Credit value

All HN Units are allocated a credit value which indicates the volume of achievement and a level appropriate to their position within the SCQF. Is the credit value appropriate to the amount of content in the Unit? Does it reflect an appropriate allocation of time for delivery and assessment? Is the content of the Unit appropriate for the level allocated to it? If the Unit forms part of a sequence, is the level appropriate to the Units place in that sequence? Is the level identified for the Unit consistent with its position in the SCQF and comparable qualifications?

Recommended prior knowledge and skills

The Unit should give clear guidance on the level of knowledge and/or skills expected of candidates to enable them to achieve the Unit in the time reflected in the credit value. It is important, though, that unnecessary restrictions or barriers to achievement are not introduced. Are the selection criteria for access to the Unit clear? Is there a realistic indication of the previous achievement or experience which a candidate should have on entry to the Unit? Does the access statement clearly define the required level of prior knowledge and skills? Are the access requirements appropriate to the level of the Unit? Is access to the Unit restricted to a specific group of candidates? If there are restrictions, are they justified?

Core Skills

Context for delivery

Assessment

Have the opportunities for developing Core Skills or Core Skills components been identified? Have SCQF levels for each Core Skill or component been identified? Has expanded information been given in the Support Notes? This is a standard statement. However, where the learning experience for candidates could be enhanced by the Unit being delivered in tandem with another Unit, this advice should be given here. If appropriate, has advice been given on enhancing the learning experience, eg delivering the Unit in tandem with another Unit? There should be a summary of how the assessment for the Unit may be conducted and whether integration of 74

assessment of its Outcomes is possible: Is the assessment strategy proposed for the Unit appropriate? Does it steer users towards holistic assessment where this is possible? Does the statement adequately summarise the assessment guidance given with the statement of standards? Does it recommend the types of assessment instruments which can be used? Statement of standards Outcomes should give a clear indication of what a Outcomes candidate is able to do. Does each Outcome relate clearly to the Unit title and purpose? Is each Outcome distinct and necessary? A knowledge and/or skill statement should be included for each Outcome, or where the Unit is assessed holistically, for a combination of Outcomes or for the Unit as a whole. It should contain only that knowledge and/or skills for the achievement of the Outcome(s). Are all of the items listed essential for achieving the Outcome? Do the items build on the recommended prior knowledge and skills statement? Is each item stated clearly and concisely? Are the knowledge and/or skills consistent with the level of the Unit? Evidence Requirements should state clearly and unambiguously what candidates have to do, and to what standard, to demonstrate that they have achieved the Outcome and how much evidence is required to provide that they have done so. Do the Evidence Requirements clearly specify: type of evidence? standard of the evidence? amount of evidence? conditions in which the evidence has to be produced? Do the Evidence Requirements relate accurately to the Outcome(s) and content of the knowledge and/or skills section? 75

Knowledge and/or skills

Evidence Requirements

Assessment guidelines

Where Evidence Requirements are specified for a combination of Outcomes, do they cover the full content of the combination? If the Evidence Requirements involved sampling of knowledge and/or skills, do they state clearly exactly how sampling will be carried out with regard to: proportion? confidentiality? conditions of assessment? If the Evidence Requirements involve sampling, do they provide the type and standard of evidence for all of the items in the knowledge and/or skills section? Do the conditions of assessment ensure that candidates cannot spot the sample in advance? Guidance should be given on how best to conduct assessment and how, if possible, integration of assessment can be achieved. If the Evidence Requirements are stated for combination of Outcomes or for the Unit as a whole, are the assessment guidelines similarly structured? If the assessment guidelines are followed, will they produce sufficient evidence to meet the Evidence Requirements? Do the assessment guidelines encourage holistic assessment and indicate how this could be achieved? Do the assessment guidelines create any barriers to achievement or to delivery of the Unit through open or distance learning?

Support notes Guidance on the content and context

Is the information given clear and helpful, particularly to someone using the Unit for the first time? Does it give details of any content additional to what is listed as essential under knowledge and/or skills, ie content which although not assessed would enrich the learning experience? Where appropriate, does it give information on alignment to National Occupational Standards and/or Standard setting body requirements? Does it put the Unit in its context, eg by giving details to which Group Awards it contributes or of any professional body recognition? Does it give details of any progression routes, particularly if designed as part of a sequence?

76

Guidance on delivery and assessment

Is the information clear and helpful, particularly to someone using the Unit for the first time? Is there any advice on where the Unit would best fit into the sequence of delivery and/or assessment of a Group Award or on how to deliver it as a free-standing Unit? Is there any advice on how to enhance the effectiveness of delivery and/or assessment? Is the advice on developing Core Skills or Core Skill components clear, comprehensive and realistic? Is there guidance given on the suitability of the Unit for open and distance learning? If not, is there an explanation or justification? Is there guidance on how evidence can be authenticated?

Open learning

General information for candidates Is the information clear and helpful? Is it written in a style and tone appropriate for candidates? Does it give information on: what the Unit is about? what the candidate has to know? what the candidate has to do, ie how he/she may be assessed? anything else which would be useful for the candidates to know?

77

Issues to raise with Qualification Design Team/Unit writer:

78

Appendix 1: Summary of the design principles for developing HNCs and HNDs
B

To continue to uphold the tradition of Higher National Certificates and Diplomas as the leading qualifications for technician, technologist and first line management occupations, Qualification Design Teams should adhere to the design principles and develop or revise qualifications which ensure the continuing fitness for purpose of those qualifications. It should be noted, however, that these are principles rather than rules and are designed to ensure that all HNC/Ds are developed and validated to a consistently high standard. Therefore, where market research, particularly among candidates and employers, clearly indicates that any design principle needs to be re-interpreted or modified, SQA will work with the Qualification Design Team to develop alternatives, which are coherent with the other principles. In particular, this applies to those marked with an asterisk. Any re-interpretation or modification of design principles needs to be indicated and negotiated at the outset of development. Design principles cannot be challenged at the point of validation. The validity of the market research and the fitness for purpose of the proposed alternatives will be confirmed at validation. Further considerations for Qualification Design Teams are also indicated.

Design principles
SCQF level and credit points
1 HNCs shall be designed to be at SCQF level 7 and shall comprise 96 SCQF credit points. 2 HNDs shall be designed to be at SCQF level 8 and shall comprise 240 SCQF credit points. 3 HNCs should incorporate at least 48 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7. 4 HNDs should incorporate at least 64 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 8.

79

Core Skills 5 HNC and HND programmes shall incorporate opportunities for candidates to develop Core Skills. 6 *HNCs and HNDs should clearly include opportunities for candidates to develop Core Skills to levels required by the occupations or progression pathways the HNs support. This would mean all five Core Skills should be developed in every HN programme. Mandatory Section 7 *HNCs should include a mandatory section of at least 48 SCQF credit points including a Graded Unit. (See Principles 9 and 10 under Graded Units below). 8 *HNDs should include a mandatory section of at least 96 SCQF credit points, including Graded Units. Graded Units 9 *HNCs should include one Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7. 10 *HNDs should include one Graded Unit of 8 SCQF credit points at SCQF level 7, plus 16 SCQF credit points of Graded Unit(s) at SCQF level 8. The purposes of Graded Units are to assess the candidates ability to integrate and apply the knowledge and/ or skills gained in the individual HN Units to demonstrate that they have the principal aims of the Group Award, and grade candidate achievement.

Further considerations
HN Unit and Graded Unit Specifications SQA produces guidance on how to write HN Unit and Graded Unit Specifications. These include templates and examples of how the specifications should be laid out. This guidance should always be used in developing new or revised HN Unit or Graded Unit Specifications. The minimum change to current Unit specifications would be to remove the merit statement and to add an SCQF level and SCQF credit points. Validation of HN Unit Specifications A key part of validation is to confirm the proposed allocation of SCQF levels and SCQF credit points to each Unit, and this needs to be seen to be done consistently. Until the process of devolving this to centres is fully worked out, SQA will validate all new or revised HN Unit

80

specifications. Centres may continue to develop HN Unit specifications for validation by SQA. Validation of HN Group Awards and Graded Units Group award validation may continue to be done by those centres with devolved powers to do so. As Graded Units relate to the principle aims of a Group Award, these too may be validated by devolved centres as part of Group Awards. Validation periods HN Units, Graded Units and Group Awards will be kept under review by design teams in order to ensure continuing fitness for purpose. Normally, these will be reviewed every five years or more frequently if recommended by validation panels. However, specific time periods of validation will not be specified.

81

Appendix 2: SQA qualifications and the SCQF

B

The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) has been developed by a partnership composed of: the Quality Assurance Agency for higher education (QAA), the Scottish Executive, SQA, and Universities Scotland. The SCQF is a 12-level framework designed to include everything from Access 1 Units to PhDs. It brings all SQA qualifications (National Qualifications, Higher National Qualifications and SVQs) into a single unified framework along with qualifications offered by Scottish universities. The levels of the Framework occupied by SQA qualifications are: SCQF level 12* 11* 10* 9* 8* 7* 6 5 4 3 2 1 National Qualification level Higher National level SVQ level

SVQ 5 HND HNC SVQ 4 SVQ 3 SVQ 2 SVQ 1

Advanced Higher Higher Intermediate 2 Intermediate 1 Access 3 Access 2 Access 1

* Levels 7 to 12 also contain the 6 levels of Scottish degree studies Each SQA Unit is allocated a number of SCQF credit points at a specific level. One point equates to ten hours of notional learning. The SCQF is intended to make the overall system of Scottish qualifications easier to understand by making the relationships between qualifications clear. It should also make it easier to establish links between qualifications and make it easier for learners to transfer credit from one course of study to another.

82

Appendix 3: SCQF level descriptors

B

SCQF level 9 (SHE level 3, Ordinary degrees are examples of qualifications at this level)
Note: The descriptors set out the characteristic generic outcomes of each level. They are intended to provide a general, shared understanding of each level and to allow broad comparisons to be made between qualifications and learning at different levels. They are not intended to give precise nor comprehensive statements and there is no expectation that every qualification or programme should have all of the characteristics. The descriptors have been developed through a series of consultations and are offered as a first working guide and will be revised in the light of feedback on their use. Knowledge and Understanding Practice: Applied knowledge and understanding Generic Cognitive Skills Communication, ICT and numeracy skills Autonomy, accountability and working with others

Characteristic outcomes of learning at each level include the ability to: Demonstrate and/or work with: a broad and integrated knowledge and understanding of the scope, main areas and boundaries of a subject/discipline a critical understanding of a selection of the principal theories, principles, concepts and terminology knowledge that is detailed in some areas and/or knowledge of one or more specialisms that are informed by forefront developments Use a selection of the principal skills, techniques, practices and/or materials associated with a subject/discipline. Use a few skills, techniques, practices and/or materials that are specialised or advanced. Practise routine methods of enquiry and/or research. Practise in a range of professional level contexts which include a degree of unpredictability. Undertake critical analysis, evaluation and/or synthesis of ideas, concepts, information and issues. Identify and analyse routine professional problems and issues. Draw on a range of sources in making judgements. Use a range of routine skills and some advanced and specialised skills in support of established practices in a subject/discipline, for example: make formal and informal presentations on standard/mainstream topics in the subject/discipline to a range of audiences use a range of IT applications to support and enhance work interpret, use and evaluate numerical and graphical data to achieve goals/targets Exercise autonomy and initiative in some activities at a professional level. Take some responsibility for the work of others and for a range of resources. Practise in ways which take account of own and others roles and responsibilities. Work under guidance with qualified practitioners. Deal with ethical and professional issues in accordance with current professional and/or ethical codes or practices, seeking guidance where appropriate.

83

SCQF level 8 (SHE level 2, Dip HE, HND, SVQ 4 are examples of qualifications at this level)
Note: The descriptors set out the characteristic generic outcomes of each level. They are intended to provide a general, shared understanding of each level and to allow broad comparisons to be made between qualifications and learning at different levels. They are not intended to give precise nor comprehensive statements and there is no expectation that every qualification or programme should have all of the characteristics. The descriptors have been developed through a series of consultations and are offered as a first working guide and will be revised in the light of feedback on their use. Knowledge and Understanding Practice: Applied knowledge and understanding Generic Cognitive Skills Communication, ICT and numeracy skills Autonomy, accountability and working with others

Characteristic outcomes of learning at each level include the ability to: Demonstrate and/or work with: a broad knowledge of the scope, defining features, and main areas of a subject/discipline detailed knowledge in some areas understanding of a limited range of core theories, principles and concepts limited knowledge and understanding of some major current issues and specialisms an outline knowledge and understanding of research and equivalent scholarly/academic processes Use a range of routine skills, techniques, practices and/or materials associated with a subject/discipline, a few of which are advanced or complex. Carry out routine lines of enquiry, development or investigation into professional level problems and issues. Adapt routine practices within accepted standards. Undertake critical analysis, evaluation and/or synthesis of ideas, concepts, information and issues which are within the common understandings of the subject/discipline. Use a range of approaches to formulate evidence-based solutions/responses to defined and/or routine problems/issues. Critically evaluate evidencebased solutions/responses to defined and/or routine problems/issues. Use a range of routine skills and some advanced and specialised skills associated with a subject/discipline, for example: convey complex information to a range of audiences and for a range of purposes use a range of standard applications to process and obtain data use and evaluate numerical and graphical data to measure progress and achieve goals/targets Exercise autonomy and initiative in some activities at a professional level. Take significant managerial or supervisory responsibility for the work of others in defined areas of work. Manage resources within defined areas of work. Take the lead on planning in familiar or defined contexts. Take continuing account of own and others roles, responsibilities and contributions in carrying out and evaluating tasks. Work in support of current professional practice under guidance. Deal with ethical and professional issues in accordance with current professional and/or ethical codes or practices under guidance.

84

SCQF level 7 (SHE level 1, Cert HE, HNC, Advanced Higher are examples of qualifications at this level)
Note: The descriptors set out the characteristic generic outcomes of each level. They are intended to provide a general, shared understanding of each level and to allow broad comparisons to be made between qualifications and learning at different levels. They are not intended to give precise nor comprehensive statements and there is no expectation that every qualification or programme should have all of the characteristics. The descriptors have been developed through a series of consultations and are offered as a first working guide and will be revised in the light of feedback on their use. Knowledge and Understanding Practice: Applied knowledge and understanding Generic Cognitive Skills Communication, ICT and numeracy skills Autonomy, accountability and working with others

Characteristic outcomes of learning at each level include the ability to: Demonstrate and/or work with: a broad knowledge of the subject/discipline in general knowledge that is embedded in the main theories, concepts and principles an awareness of the evolving/changing nature of knowledge and understanding an understanding of the difference between explanations based in evidence and/or research and other forms of explanation and of the importance of this difference Use some of the basic and routine professional skills, techniques, practices and/or materials associated with a subject/discipline. Practise these in both routine and non-routine contexts. Present and evaluate arguments, information and ideas which are routine to the subject/discipline. Use a range of approaches to addressing defined and/or routine problems and issues within familiar contexts. Use a wide range of routine skills and some advanced skills associated with the subject/discipline for example: convey complex ideas in well-structured and coherent form use a range of forms of communication effectively in both familiar and new contexts use standard applications to process and obtain a variety of information and data use a range of numerical and graphical skills in combination use numerical and graphical data to measure progress and achieve goals/targets Exercise some initiative and independence in carrying out defined activities at a professional level Take supervision in less familiar areas of work. Take some managerial responsibility for the work of others within a defined and supervised structure. Manage limited resources within defined areas of work. Take the lead in implementing agreed plans in familiar or defined contexts. Take account of own and others roles and responsibilities in carrying out and evaluating tasks. Work with others in support of current professional practice under guidance.

85

SCQF level 6 (Higher, SVQ 3 are examples of qualifications at this level)

Note: The descriptors set out the characteristic generic outcomes of each level. They are intended to provide a general, shared understanding of each level and to allow broad comparisons to be made between qualifications and learning at different levels. They are not intended to give precise nor comprehensive statements and there is no expectation that every qualification or programme should have all of the characteristics. The descriptors have been developed through a series of consultations and are offered as a first working guide and will be revised in the light of feedback on their use. Knowledge and Understanding Practice: Applied knowledge and understanding Generic Cognitive Skills Communication, ICT and numeracy skills Autonomy, accountability and working with others

Characteristic outcomes of learning at each level include the ability to: Demonstrate and/or work with: generalised knowledge of a subject/discipline factual and theoretical knowledge a range of facts, ideas, properties, materials, terminology, practices, techniques about/associated with a subject/discipline Apply knowledge and understanding in known, practical contexts. Use some of the basic, routine practices, techniques and/or materials associated with a subject/discipline in routine contexts which may have nonroutine elements. Plan how skills will be used to address set situations and/or problems and adapt these as necessary. Obtain, organise and use factual and theoretical information in problem solving. Make generalisations and predictions. Draw conclusions and suggest solutions. Use a wide range of skills for example: produce and respond to detailed and relatively complex written and oral communication in both familiar and unfamiliar contexts select and use standard applications to process, obtain and combine information use a wide range of numerical and graphical data in routine contexts which may have non-routine elements Take responsibility for the carrying out of a range of activities where the overall goal is clear under nondirective supervision. Take some supervisory responsibility for the work of others and lead established teams in the implementation of routine work. Manage limited resources within defined and supervised areas of work. Take account of roles and responsibilities related to the tasks being carried out and take a significant role in the evaluation of work and the improvement of practices and processes.

Relate the subject/discipline to a range of practical and/or everyday applications.

86

SCQF level 5 (Intermediate 2, Standard Grade Credit level, SVQ 2)

Note: These descriptors set out the characteristic generic outcomes of each level. They are intended to provide a general, shared understanding of each level and to allow broad comparisons to be made between qualifications and learning at different levels. They are not intended to give precise or comprehensive statements, and there is no expectation that every qualification or programme should have all of the characteristics. The descriptors have been developed through a series of consultations and are offered as a first working guide and will be revised in the light of feedback on their use. Knowledge and Understanding Practice: Applied knowledge and understanding Generic Cognitive Skills Communication, ICT and numeracy skills Autonomy, accountability and working with others

Characteristic outcomes of learning at each level include the ability to:

Demonstrate and/or work with: basic knowledge in a subject/discipline which is mainly factual but has some theoretical component a range of simple facts and ideas about and associated with a subject/discipline knowledge and understanding of basic processes, materials and terminology Relate ideas and knowledge to personal and/or practical contexts Complete some routine and nonroutine tasks using knowledge associated with a subject/discipline Plan and organise both familiar and new tasks Select appropriate tools and materials and use safely and effectively (eg without waste) Adjust tools where necessary following safe practices Use a problem solving approach to deal with a situation or issue which is straightforward in relation to a subject/discipline Operate in a familiar context, but where there is a need to take account of or use additional information of different kinds, some of which will be theoretical or hypothetical Use some abstract constructs eg make generalisations and/or draw conclusions Use a range of routine skills for example: produce and respond to detailed written and oral communication in familiar contexts use standard applications to process, obtain and combine information use a range of numerical and graphical data in straightforward contexts which have some complex features Work alone or with others on tasks with minimum supervision Agree goals and responsibilities for self and/or work team with manager/supervisor Take leadership responsibility for some tasks Show an awareness of others roles, responsibilities and requirements in carrying out work and make a contribution to the evaluation and improvement of practices and processes

87

Appendix 4: Validation quality elements

B

Criterion
6.1 The validation process for qualifications is defined and in the public domain 6.2 The qualification conforms to the SQA design rules and principles and other technical requirements which are current at the time of its validation 6.3 There is a demonstrable need for the qualification which fills a gap in the qualifications framework and makes a valuable and unique contribution to SQAs portfolio of qualifications 6.4 The qualification is accessible to all candidates who could potentially achieve it 6.5 The qualification requires a candidate to demonstrate significant, achievable outcomes in a recognised curricular or vocational area 6.6 The qualification is coherent and its title accurately reflects its content

The centre
a) ensures that submissions to SQA of locallydevised proposals for validation comply with the SQAs system, procedures and timescales a) uses SQAs design rules and principles and other technical requirements as the basis for development of proposed qualifications to be submitted to SQA for validation

SQA
a) operates a validation system b) publishes the system, procedures and timescales for the validation of new and revised qualifications and makes them known to centres a) publishes design rules and principles and other technical requirements and guidance on their use b) develops qualifications and validates them to ensure that all of these qualifications comply with the design rules and principles and the technical requirements* a) works with stakeholders to identify the qualifications required to meet the needs of Scottish society* b) consults with appropriate bodies to identify the need for the qualification* c) operates a system of collecting feedback from stakeholders to regularly review the qualifications and engage in a programme of updating a) ensures that all qualifications which it validates are free from unnecessary barriers to achievement* b) conducts regular reviews of competences to ensure that they are not discriminatory* a) ensures that qualifications which it validates meet this criterion* b) ensures that qualifications which it validates have assessment arrangements appropriate to the outcomes which candidates must demonstrate* c) operates a feedback system to collect stakeholders views on the extent to which National and Higher National Qualifications meet this criterion* a) ensures that qualifications which it validates meet this criterion* b) operates a feedback system to collect stakeholders views on the extent to which qualifications meet this criterion*

Centres with devolved authority for validation of qualifications must: have and operate a system and procedures which ensure that all validations are appraised against the validation criteria in the column for centres as well as the criteria marked * in the SQA column have documentation describing all validations carried out, including the result of the appraisal of the proposed new or revised qualification against each of the criteria in the column for centres as well as the criteria marked * in the SQA column ensure that the outcome of devolved validations is promptly reported to SQA

88

Appendix 5: Specimen programme for a Higher National Group Award validation meeting
B

0915 0930

Arrival at centre/venue (Preliminary introductions and coffee) Private meeting of validation panel (To draw up a programme for the day, to identify issues to be raised with the Qualification Design Team and to allocate functions to the various team members) Coffee Meeting with Qualification Design Team (To discuss the Group Award specifications in relation to the validation criteria) Lunch Meeting with Qualification Design Team (To discuss any matters not covered in the morning session) Coffee and private meeting of validation panel (To reach a decision and make any appropriate recommendations and set any necessary conditions) Meeting with Qualification Design Team (To inform Qualification Design Team of the validation panels decision) Depart

1030 1045

1230 1330

1530

1615

1630

89

Appendix 6: Form Validation Reports

B

90

Form HN V1

HN UNIT(S) VALIDATION REPORT

To be completed by the SQA lead officer immediately after the Unit(s) validation meeting/consultation has taken place, authorised by the Qualifications Manager into whose portfolio the Unit will lie, and returned to the HN/SVQ Product Team. In the absence of the Qualifications Manager and Business Managers authority should be gained. Please note that applications for approval cannot proceed until this information has been received.

SECTION A

UNIT TITLE(s) HN Project No: HN Project Title

Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 8 Unit 9

SECTION B
1. Date of Validation Event (if applicable)

VALIDATION DETAILS
DD MM YYYY

2. Method and/or Use of Validation

Formal Validation Meeting SQA Officer Decision (supported by consultation) Combination of above Validation of a single New Unit A minor amendment to a Unit Allocation of SCQF level to a Unit

91

SECTION B
3. a) Validation Personnel

VALIDATION DETAILS (continued) b) Interest/designation c) Method of consultation

SECTION C
1 2 3 4 5 Validated

VALIDATION OUTCOME
(Go to 4 below) (Go to Section D)

Not Validated (until conditions have been met) Not Validated MM YYYY Suggested review date Recommendations.

Are any recommendations attached?

No Yes (Go to 5 below)

List any recommendations. Each recommendation should be cross-referenced to the relevant topic in section E.

SECTION D1

VALIDATION CONDITIONS METHOD FOR LIFTING

If the Outcome is not validated until conditions have been met, please complete all of section D.
Please indicate which mechanism has been agreed for lifting conditions:

92

SECTION D2

VALIDATION CONDITIONS SUMMARY

List any conditions. (Each condition should be cross-referenced to the relevant Unit and to the relevant topic in section E.)

SECTION E

VALIDATION CRITERIA

Are SQAs technical requirements satisfied in respect of the validation criteria listed below? Please tick the appropriate box (Yes/No) and add comments where required. Identify comments against appropriate Unit titles and/or number (from section A). Continue on a separate sheet if required.
General information for centres including:

Unit titles Unit purpose SCQF level and credit points Recommended prior knowledge/skills Statement on Core Skills Context of Delivery Assessment

Yes Comments:

No

Statement of Standards including:

Outcomes Knowledge/skills Evidence Requirements Assessment guidelines

Yes Comments:

No

Support notes including:

Guidance on the content and context Guidance on the delivery and assessment Guidance on open learning

Yes Comments:

No

93

General Information for students Comments:

Yes

No

SECTION F
Unit Title:

DEVELOPMENT DETAILS

Record the details below for information and future use

Unit Commissioned by: Unit Written by: Unit Core Skills Audited by:

94

SECTION G
1. Incomplete Validation SQA lead officers Signature SQA lead officers Name 2. Completed Validation

SIGN-OFF

Insert name, signature and date below, if not validated or not validated until conditions have been met.
Date

Insert name, signature and date below, when validation has been successfully achieved. Please attach any appropriate conditions form (HN V3) duly completed.
Date

SQA lead officers Signature SQA lead officers Name Qualification Managers Signature Date HN V1 copied by HN Review Project Office to Approval Section

Date Date For Office Use Only: File Reference No.

When completed this form should be sent to: HN/SVQ Product Team Scottish Qualifications Authority The Optima Building 58 Robertson Street Glasgow G2 8DQ

Filed by

95

96

Form HN V2

HN GROUP AWARD VALIDATION REPORT

The SQA representative should return this form with all sections completed within one week of the meeting/event.

SECTION A

GROUP AWARD DETAILS

HN Project No:

1. Into which category does the qualification fall? (tick as appropriate) HNC HND PDA 2. Title(s)

3. Scottish Qualifications Authority Host Date of Meeting

SECTION B1
Name

VALIDATION EVENT DETAILS

PANEL MEMBERSHIP Education/industry Contact address/telephone/e-mail

97

SECTION B2

VALIDATION EVENT DETAILS

VALIDATION OUTCOME

Panel Decision (tick as appropriate) 2.1 2.2 2.3 Validated Not Validated until conditions have been met Not Validated DD Conditions to be met by: / MM YYYY / / Now go to section C1 Now go to section C2 Now go to section C3

(applicable to option 2.2 only) (if applicable)

Recommended review date: Session

SECTION C1

RECOMMENDATIONS

List any recommendations. Each recommendation should be cross-referenced to any relevant sub-section in the Validation Report (Section D).

98

SECTION C2

DETAILS OF CONDITION(S)

List any conditions which must be met before the Group Award is validated. Each condition should be cross-referenced to any relevant sub-section in the Validation Report (Section D).

Please indicate which mechanism has been agreed for lifting conditions: 1. Who will be responsible for collating papers to lift these conditions? 2. Who will receive and these papers? 3. Who will decide if conditions have been met?

NB In all cases a completed Validation Conditions Form (HN V3) should accompany these documents

SECTION C3

NON-VALIDATION

List reasons for withholding validation. Any reason should be cross-referenced to the relevant sub-section in the Validation Report (Section D).

99

SECTION D

VALIDATION REPORT

Please give details of the panels comments regarding the compliance of the proposals with the validation criteria under the following headings. Where conditions and recommendations have been set the reason should be explained under the appropriate section heading. Additional pages should be used as required.
1. Group Award Title(s)

100

2. Rationale for the Group Award

101

SECTION D

VALIDATION REPORT (continued)

3. Aims of the Group Award

4. Access to the Group Award

102

SECTION D

VALIDATION REPORT (continued)

5. Structure of the Group Award

6. Graded Units

103

SECTION D

VALIDATION REPORT (continued)

7. Approach to Delivery and Assessment

SECTION E
Report drafted by: Chair of Panel Address

SIGN-OFF

Name

Signature Date Name Signature Date Name Name Signature Signature Date Date

Centre Signatory (if host) Position SQA Representative SQA Business Manager

Where required, supplementary sheets may be used to provide additional information, these should be titled as per this award and numbered as supplementary page(s) 1 of _ etc. Where conditions have been applied, please use HN Unit/Group Award Validation Conditions Form (HN V3) to report progress on conditions.
When completed this form should be returned to: HN/SVQ Product Team Scottish Qualifications Authority The Optima Building 58 Robertson Street Glasgow G2 8DQ

104

105

Form HN V3 HN UNIT/GROUP AWARD VALIDATION CONDITIONS

This form should be completed by the SQA representative who attended the validation meeting once the documentation which addresses validation conditions has been made available. Where appropriate, that representative should seek the agreement of other panel members including the chair. SECTION A VALIDATION DETAILS HN Project No
1 Title of HN Unit*/Group Award* 2 Date of Validation Meeting/ Consultation 4. Date definitive document received

SECTION B

MECHANISM FOR LIFTING CONDITIONS

Please indicate if the mechanism agreed at the validation meeting for lifting the conditions involved the revised. Document being considered by:
Please tick as appropriate

the attending Scottish Qualifications Authority Representative only the Scottish Qualifications Authority Representative and chair all panel members with comment to the chair a re-convened meeting of the full validation panel other (please specify below)

SECTION C

DECISION
Yes No

Have the conditions been met to your satisfaction?

(please tick as appropriate)

SECTION D

REASON(S)

I do/I do not* recommend lifting the conditions for the following reasons:
(please continue overleaf if required)

SQA Officer Name Signature Qualifications Manager Name Signature

*delete as appropriate

Date Date

106

SECTION D

REASON(S) (Continuation)

Group Award/Unit Title

Please attach all relevant correspondence from other panel members and return to: HN/SVQ Product Team Scottish Qualifications Authority The Optima Building 58 Robertson Street GLASGOW G2 8DQ

107

Appendix 7: Higher National Graded Unit Specification: Project

B

Higher National Graded Unit Specification General Information for Centres

This Graded Unit has been validated as part of the (insert title). Centres are required to develop the assessment instrument in accordance with this validated specification. Centres wishing to use another type of Graded Unit or assessment instrument are required to submit proposals detailing the justification for change for validation.

Graded Unit Title: Graded Unit Code: Type of Graded Unit: Assessment Instrument: Credit points and level: HN Credit(s) at SCQF level *: (X SCQF
credit points at SCQF level *)
*SCQF credit points are used to allocate credit to qualifications in the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). Each qualification in the Framework is allocated a number of SCQF credit points at an SCQF level. There are 12 SCQF levels, ranging from Access 1 to Doctorates.

Project

Purpose: This Graded Unit is designed to provide evidence that the

candidate has achieved the following principal aims of the (insert title):

Recommended Prior Knowledge and Skills: It is

recommended that the candidate should have completed or be in the process of completing the following Units relating to the above specific aims prior to undertaking this Graded Unit:

108

General Information for Centres (cont) Core Skills: (One of the following statements should be used)
Where a claim for an embedded Core Skill has been validated, a standard statement will be added by SQA. The achievement of this Unit gives automatic certification of the following: (give Core Skill, or component, title and level) Where Core Skills development is signposted, use the wording: There are opportunities to develop the Core Skill(s) of (give Core Skill, or component, title + level) in this Unit, although there is no automatic certification of Core Skills or Core Skills components. Where Core Skills are both embedded and signposted, use the wording: The achievement of this Unit gives automatic certification of the following: (give Core Skill, or component, title and level). There are also further opportunities to develop the Core Skill(s) of (give Core Skill, or component, title + level) in this Unit. Where no Core Skills are either embedded or signposted, the following statement will be used: There are no opportunities to develop Core Skills in this Unit.

Assessment: This Graded Unit will be assessed by the use of (insert assessment instrument). The developed (insert assessment instrument) should provide the candidate with the opportunity to produce evidence that demonstrates she/he has met the aims of the Graded Unit that it covers.

109

Administrative Information
Graded Unit Code: Graded Unit Title: Original date of publication: Version: History of Changes: Version Description of change Date

Source:

SQA

Scottish Qualifications Authority This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part for educational purposes provided that no profit is derived from reproduction and that, if reproduced in part, the source is acknowledged. Additional copies of this Graded Unit specification if sourced by the Scottish Qualifications Authority can be purchased from the Scottish Qualifications Authority. Please contact the Customer Contact Centre for further details, telephone 0845 279 1000.

110

Higher National Graded Unit Specification: Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates Graded Unit Title: Conditions of Assessment
The candidate should be given a date for completion of the (insert assessment instrument). However, the instructions for the assessment task should be distributed to allow the candidate sufficient time to assimilate the details and carry out the assessment task. During the time between the distribution of the assessment task instructions and the completion date, assessors may answer questions, provide clarification, guidance and reasonable assistance. The assessment task should be marked as soon as possible after the completion date. The final grading given should reflect the quality of the candidates evidence at the time of the completion date. The evidence for the project is generated over time and involves three distinct stages, where each stage has to be achieved before the next is undertaken. Thus any reassessment of stages must be undertaken before proceeding to the next stage. If a candidate fails the project overall or wishes to upgrade, then this must be done using a substantially different project, ie all stages are undertaken using a new project, assignment, case study, etc. In this case, a candidates grade will be based on the achievement in the reassessment.

Instructions for designing the assessment task

The assessment task is a project. The project undertaken by the candidate must be a complex task which involves: variables which are complex or unfamiliar relationships which need to be clarified a context which may be familiar or unfamiliar to the candidate

The assessment task must require the candidate to: analyse the task and decide on a course of action for undertaking the project plan and organise work and carry it through to completion reflect on what has been done and draw conclusions for the future produce evidence of meeting the aims which this Graded Unit has been designed to cover

111

Guidance on grading candidates

B

Candidates who meet the minimum Evidence Requirements will have their achievement graded as C competent, or A highly competent or B somewhere between A and C. The grade related criteria to be used to judge candidate performance for this Graded Unit is specified in the following table.
B

112

Higher National Graded Unit specification: Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates (cont)
Grade A Is a seamless, coherent piece of work which:

Grade C Is a co-ordinated piece of work which:

The project will be marked out of 100. Assessors will mark each stage of the project, taking into account the criteria outlined. The marks will then be aggregated to arrive at an overall mark for the project. Assessors will then assign an overall grade to the candidate for this graded unit based on the following grade boundaries. A = 70% B = 60% C = 50% 100% 69% 59%

Note: the candidate must achieve all of the minimum evidence specified below for each stage of the project in order to achieve the Graded Unit.

Evidence Requirements
B

The project consists of three stages: planning; developing; and evaluating. The following table specifies the minimum evidence required to pass each stage. Note: The candidate must achieve all of the minimum evidence specified below for each stage of the project in order to pass the Graded Unit.

113

Project Stage Stage 1 Planning

Minimum Evidence Requirements

The candidate must achieve all of the minimum evidence specified above in order to pass the Planning stage. Stage 2 Developing

The candidate must achieve all of the minimum evidence specified above in order to pass the Developing stage. Stage 3 Evaluating

The candidate must achieve all of the minimum evidence specified above in order to pass the Evaluating stage.

114

Higher National Graded Unit specification: Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates (cont) Support Notes

Candidates with Disabilities and/or Additional Support Needs

The additional support needs of individual candidates should be taken into account when planning learning experiences, selecting assessment instruments or considering special alternative assessment arrangements. For information on these, please refer to the SQA document Guidance on Assessment Arrangements for Candidates with Disabilities and/or Additional Support Needs, which is available on SQAs website: www.sqa.org.uk.

115

General Information for Candidates

116

Appendix 8: Higher National Graded Unit Specification: Examination

B

Higher National Graded Unit Specification General Information for Centres

This Graded Unit has been validated as part of the (insert title). Centres are required to develop the assessment instrument in accordance with this validated specification. Centres wishing to use another type of Graded Unit or assessment instrument are required to submit proposals detailing the justification for change for validation.

Graded Unit Title: Graded Unit Code: Type of Graded Unit: Assessment Instrument: Credit points and level: HN Credit(s) at SCQF level *: (X SCQF
credit points at SCQF level *) *SCQF credit points are used to allocate credit to qualifications in the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). Each qualification in the Framework is allocated a number of SCQF credit points at an SCQF level. There are 12 SCQF levels, ranging from Access 1 to Doctorates.

Examination

Purpose: This Graded Unit is designed to provide evidence that the

candidate has achieved the following principal aims of the (insert title):

Recommended Prior Knowledge and Skills: It is recommended

that the candidate should have completed or be in the process of completing the following Units relating to these specific aims prior to undertaking this Graded Unit:

Core Skills: There are no Core Skills embedded in this Graded Unit
specification.

117

General Information for Centres (cont) Assessment: This examination-based Graded Unit is (insert
assessment instrument). It will consist of a written examination of three hours.

118

Administrative Information
Graded Unit Code: Graded Unit Title: Original date of publication: Version: History of Changes: Version Description of change Date

Source:

SQA

Scottish Qualifications Authority This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part for educational purposes provided that no profit is derived from reproduction and that, if reproduced in part, the source is acknowledged. Additional copies of this Graded Unit specification (if sourced by the Scottish Qualifications Authority), can be purchased from the Scottish Qualifications Authority. Please contact the Customer Contact Centre for further details, telephone 0845 279 1000.

119

Higher National Graded Unit specification: Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates Graded Unit Title: Conditions of Assessment
B

The assessment is based on a (insert assessment instrument) examination lasting three hours. If a candidate does not achieve a pass or if a candidate wishes to upgrade, this must be based on a significantly different examination from that given originally. A candidates grade will be based on his/her achievement on the new event using a significantly different examination. The examination should be unseen and the assessment should be conducted in controlled and invigilated conditions. At all times, the security, integrity and confidentiality of examinations must be ensured.

Instructions for designing the assessment task:

The examination should be designed to assess the candidates critical knowledge and understanding of the topics relating to the specific aims which this Graded Unit is designed to cover. The questions and corresponding marks should be designed in accordance with the ranges indicated in the table that follows. However, the overall total mark for the examination is 100. Key Topics Level of demand Percentage weighting for each topic

The examination will be marked out of 100. Assessors will aggregate the marks achieved by the candidate to arrive at an overall mark for the 120

examination. Assessors will then assign a grade to the candidate for this Graded Unit based on the following grade boundaries: A = 70% 100% B = 60% 69% C = 50% 59%

121

Higher National Graded Unit specification: Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates (cont)
Candidates who meet the minimum Evidence Requirements will have their achievement graded as a C (competent), A (highly competent), or B (somewhere between A and C). The grade related criteria to be used to judge candidate performance for this Graded Unit is specified in the following table: Grade A Is a seamless, coherent piece of work or exam script which consistently:

Grade C Is a co-ordinated piece of work or exam script which:

122

Higher National Graded Unit specification: Instructions for designing the assessment task and assessing candidates (cont) Support Notes

Candidates with Disabilities and/or Additional Support Needs

The additional support needs of individual candidates should be taken into account when planning learning experiences, selecting assessment instruments or considering special alternative assessment arrangements. For information on these, please refer to the SQA document Guidance on Assessment Arrangements for Candidates with Disabilities and/or Additional Support Needs, which is available on SQAs website: www.sqa.org.uk.

123

General information for candidates

124

Appendix 9: Higher National Unit Specification

B

125

Higher National Unit Specification General information for centres Unit title:
B

Unit code: Unit purpose: (text 11)

On completion of the Unit the candidate should be able to:

Credit points and level: xx HN Credit at SCQF level *: (X SCQF credit

points at SCQF level *)

*SCQF credit points are used to allocate credit to qualifications in the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). Each qualification in the Framework is allocated a number of SCQF credit points at an SCQF level. There are 12 SCQF levels, ranging from Access 1 to Doctorates.

Recommended prior knowledge and skills: Core Skills:

(One of the following statements should be used)

Where a claim for an embedded Core Skill has been validated, a standard statement will be added by SQA. The achievement of this Unit gives automatic certification of the following: (give Core Skill, or component, title and level) Where Core Skills development is signposted, use the wording: There are opportunities to develop the Core Skill(s) of (give Core Skill, or component, title + level) in this Unit, although there is no automatic certification of Core Skills or Core Skills components. Where Core Skills are both embedded and signposted, use the wording: The achievement of this Unit gives automatic certification of the following: (give Core Skill, or component, title and level). There are also further opportunities to develop the Core Skill(s) of (give Core Skill, or component, title + level) in this Unit. Where no Core Skills are either embedded or signposted, the following statement will be used: There are no opportunities to develop Core Skills in this Unit.

126

General information for centres (cont) Context for delivery: If this Unit is delivered as part of a Group Award, it is recommended that it should be taught and assessed within the subject area of the Group Award to which it contributes. Assessment: Text Size 11

127

Higher National Unit specification: statement of standards Unit title: (text size 14) Unit code: (text size 14)
The sections of the Unit stating the Outcomes, knowledge and/or skills, and evidence requirements are mandatory. (If you think holistic assessment is the best assessment strategy for the Unit and you wish to state Knowledge and/or Skills and Evidence requirements for the Unit as a whole, please add the following statement here: Please refer to Knowledge and/or skills for the Unit and Evidence requirements for the Unit after the Outcomes.) Where evidence for Outcomes is assessed on a sample basis, the whole of the content listed in the knowledge and/or skills section must be taught and available for assessment. Candidates should not know in advance the items on which they will be assessed and different items should be sampled on each assessment occasion.

Outcome 1
(text 11)

Knowledge and/or skills

(text 11)

Evidence Requirements
Candidates will need to provide evidence to demonstrate their knowledge and/or skills by showing that they can: (text 11)

Assessment guidelines
(text 11)

128

Higher National Unit specification: statement of standards (cont) Unit title: Outcome 2

Knowledge and/or skills

Evidence Requirements

Assessment guidelines

129

Higher National Unit specification: statement of standards (cont) Unit title: Outcome 3

Knowledge and/or skills Evidence Requirements

Assessment guidelines

130

Administrative Information
Unit code: Unit title: Superclass category: Original date of publication: Version: History of Changes: Version Description of change Date (text 12)

Source:

SQA

Scottish Qualifications Authority This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part for educational purposes provided that no profit is derived from reproduction and that, if reproduced in part, the source is acknowledged. SQA acknowledges the valuable contribution that Scotlands colleges have made to the development of Higher National qualifications. Additional copies of this Unit specification can be purchased from the Scottish Qualifications Authority. Please contact the Customer Contact Centre for further details, telephone 0845 279 1000.

131

Higher National Unit specification: support notes Unit title:

This part of the Unit specification is offered as guidance. The support notes are not mandatory. While the exact time allocated to this Unit is at the discretion of the centre, the notional design length is xx hours.

Guidance on the content and context for this Unit

Guidance on the delivery and assessment of this Unit

Opportunities for developing Core Skills (This section should be used to provide information on the opportunities to develop Core Skills in this Unit. It should expand on the summary information given on page 1).

Open learning

Candidates with disabilities and/or additional support needs

The additional support needs of individual candidates should be taken into account when planning learning experiences, selecting assessment instruments or considering alternative Outcomes for Units. For information on these, please refer to the SQA document Guidance on Assessment Arrangements for Candidates with Disabilities and/or Additional Support Needs, which is available on SQAs website: www.sqa.org.uk.

132

General information for candidates Unit title:

133

Feedback Form
B

Guide to Validation for Qualification Design Teams and Validation Panel Members: using the design principles for Higher Certificates and Diplomas.

Your name: Job title: Address:

Telephone number: How useful do you find this guide?

Can you highlight any particular benefits to you in having access to this guide?

Is there any way(s) in which you would like to see this guide improved?

General points you would like to make:

Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your comments. Please return this form to: HN/SVQ Product Team Scottish Qualifications Authority The Optima Building 58 Robertson Street G2 8DQ

Or e-mail comments to hn.product@sqa.org.uk