Starting August 4, 2030 6 days


This unit standard is for people who conduct internal or external moderation of outcomes-based assessments. The assessments could be in terms of outcomes defined in a number of documents, including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

Those who have achieved this unit standard will be able to moderate assessments in terms of the relevant outcome statements and quality assurance requirements. The candidate-moderator will be able to use the prescribed Quality Assurance procedures in a fair, valid, reliable and practicable manner that is free of all bias and discrimination, paying particular attention to the three groups targeted for redress: race, gender and disability.

In particular, people credited with this unit standard are able to:

  • Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system,
  • Plan and prepare for moderation,
  • Conduct moderation,
  • Advice and support assessors,
  • Report, record and administer moderation, and
  • Review moderation systems and processes.


Demonstrate understanding of moderation within the context of an outcomes-based assessment system.  Moderation is explained in terms of its contribution to quality assured assessment and recognition systems within the context of principles and regulations concerning the NQF.

A variety of moderation methods are described and compared in terms of strengths, weaknesses and applications. The descriptions show how moderation is intended to uphold the need for manageable, credible and reliable assessments.  Key principles of assessment are described in terms of their importance and effect on the assessment and the application of the assessment results. Examples are provided to show how moderation may be effective in ensuring the principles of assessment are upheld.

Examples are provided to show how moderation activities could verify the fairness and appropriateness of assessment methods and activities used by assessors in different assessment situations.  Assessment situations for gathering evidence of abilities in problem solving, knowledge, understanding, practical and technical skills, personal and attitudinal skills and values. Plan and prepare for moderation.

The planning and preparation are to take place within the context of an existing moderation system, whether internal or external, as well as an existing assessment plan.  Planning and preparation activities are aligned with moderation system requirements.  The scope of the moderation is confirmed with relevant parties.  Parties include the assessors and moderating bodies where these exist.

Planning of the extent of moderation and methods of moderation ensures manageability of the process. Planning makes provision for sufficient moderation evidence to enable a reliable judgement to be passed on the assessments under review.  The contexts of the assessments under review are clarified with the assessors or assessment agency, and special needs are taken into consideration in the moderation planning.

Moderation methods and processes are sufficient to deal with all common forms of evidence for the assessments to be moderated, including evidence gathered for recognition of prior learning.  The documentation is prepared in line with the moderation system requirements and in such a way as to ensure moderation decisions are clearly documented.

Required physical and human resources are ensured to be ready and available for use. Logistical arrangements are confirmed with relevant role-players prior to the moderation.  Conduct moderation.


  • Moderation to address the design of the assessment, activities before, during and after assessment, and assessment documentation.
  • Moderation to include assessments of candidates with special needs and for RPL cases. Where assessments do not include special needs or RPL cases, evidence for this may be produced through scenarios.
  • Evidence must be gathered for on-site and off-site moderation. Evidence must be show candidate-moderators are able to moderate in situations where:
  • The moderation process confirms the assessment results, and where
  • The moderation process finds it cannot uphold the assessment results.
  • The moderation is conducted in accordance with the moderation plan.
  • Unforeseen events are handled without compromising the validity of the moderation. The assessment instruments and process are checked and judged in terms of the extent to which the principles of good assessment are upheld.
  • Moderation confirms that special needs of candidates have been provided for but without compromising the requirements specified in the relevant outcome statements.
  • The proportion of assessments selected for checking meets the quality assurance body’s requirements for consistency and reliability.
  • The use of time and resources is justified by the assessment history or record of the assessors and/or assessment agency under consideration.
  • Appeals against assessment decisions are handled in accordance with organisational appeal procedures.
  • The moderation decision is consistent with the quality assurance body’s requirements for fairness, validity and reliability of assessments to be achieved.
  • The “moderation decision” includes agreement or disagreement with the results of the assessments. requirements include the interpretation of assessment criteria and correct application of assessment procedures.
  • Advise and support assessors.
  • The nature and quality of advice facilitates a common understanding of the relevant outcomes and criteria, and issues related to their assessment by assessors.
  • The nature and quality of advice promotes assessment in accordance with good assessment principles and enhances the development and maintenance of quality management systems in line with ETQA requirements.
  • Advice on quality management systems includes planning, staffing, resourcing, training and recording systems. Support contributes towards the further development of assessors as needed.
  • All communications are conducted in accordance with relevant confidentiality requirements. Report, record and administer moderation.
  • Moderation findings are reported to designated role-players within agreed time-frames and according to the quality assurance body’s requirements for format and content.
  • Role-players could include ETQA or Moderating Body personnel, internal or external moderators and assessors. Records are maintained in accordance with organisational quality assurance and ETQA requirements.


  • Part-time
  • Full time


6 days


Learner is required to have a minimum Grade 12. Must able to speak and write in English.


All learning material included in tuition fee.


Enquire at Teachers Bubbles


On successful completion of course, the learner will receive a certificate


Confidentiality of information relating to candidates and assessors is preserved in accordance with organisational quality assurance and ETQA requirements.  Review moderation systems and processes.  Strengths and weaknesses of moderation systems and processes are identified in terms of their manageability and effectiveness in facilitating judgements on the quality and validity of assessment decisions.  Recommendations contribute towards the improvement of moderation systems and processes in line with ETQA requirements and overall manageability.  The review enhances the credibility and integrity of the recognition system.


The information provided may vary or change at the discretion of Teacher Teacher Bubbles will formally notify learners of any changes or variations.