More active interaction between those involved in the assessment process

The assessment process for the practical activities in the EP utilises evidence of on-farm performance of the Trainees and theoretical knowledge aspects, as discussed in section 5.4. The Trainee’s competence is confirmed by the Assessor, based on evidence in the EP and a professional conversation that the Assessor will have with the Trainee and the Verifier. Additionally, the assessment process relies on the Verifier and Trainee having also had a discussion about the Trainees’ performance and on-farm evidence they can show of this performance. These discussions between all the parties involved are a critical part of the assessment process and all three groups of participants found that the new EP encouraged and enabled more interaction between participants than had the previous method of assessment.

5.5.1 Better assessment discussions between participants

The data showed that the new EP assessment method resulted in the participants in the assessment process having more discussions and interaction. This improved interaction resulted in more and/or better questions being asked to gather evidence. The initial part of the practical assessment discussion is between the Trainee and the Verifier. This discussion is generally done on an on-going basis, rather than as an event, and enables the Verifier to make a judgement about the Trainee’s ability in practical, on-farm tasks (often referred to as the Verifier “signing off” on tasks). All three

51

groups of participants felt that the discussions, questions and interactions around this part of the assessment process were improved with the new EP assessment system.

The Trainees liked the increased dialogic interaction with the Verifier using the new EP. They thought that it was much better than the previous assessment system which was more “get the work done and sign it off” (Trainee 4). Trainee 6 noted that with the new EP assessment method, the Verifier had to be more involved in the process and felt that it was much better than the previous assessment method, where the Trainee would do the task and write down evidence of this in the work diary and then the Verifier would sign it off. This Trainee found that in the new EP there was much more questioning and discussion involved in the sign off process.

The Verifiers also believed the new EPs had improved the discussion and interaction between themselves and the Trainees. Verifier I found that the new EP prompted them to ask the Trainee more questions during the sign off process than under the previous assessment method. They commented that with the new EP they and the Trainee had to work through it together whereas with the previous assessment method the Trainee just brought it to the Verifier to sign off. Verifier E found having the theoretical knowledge assessments in the EP made it easier to ask questions and helped them have assessment conversations with the Trainee while Verifier G thought that the new EP gave more opportunity for Verifiers to comment on Trainees’ practical tasks. This Verifier felt previously there had not been much actual evidence that Trainees could do practical tasks.

The Assessors agreed that the new EP resulted in better discussion between Trainees and Verifiers. Assessor W felt that under the previous assessment system, Verifiers did not put much effort into the assessment process and were more likely to just “tick the box”. This Assessor felt that the new EPs encouraged Verifiers to give more examples of evidence and have better assessment conversations with the Trainees. Assessors X and Z also thought that the new EPs made the Verifiers more likely to have better assessment discussions with the Trainees and that the Verifiers were much more involved than in the previous assessment method.

The Assessors also found that the assessment discussions they were having with the Verifiers and the Trainees were better with the new EPs than with the previous assessment method. The Assessors found that having the theoretical knowledge evidence available in the EP was helpful in having their assessment discussions with the Verifier. Having this theoretical knowledge also meant that, if necessary, they could discuss with the Tutor before making a final assessment decision.

52 5.5.2 Confidence in a more valid assessment

A further finding from the study was that all the participant groups felt the new EP assessment method resulted in a more valid assessment. This belief was mostly due to there being more evidence, or more validation of evidence, used in the assessment process.

From an Assessor’s perspective, this improvement in the evidence gave them more confidence in the assessment process and outcomes than they had in the previous assessment system. Assessor W believed the EP made it easier for the Assessor to make good assessment decisions as there was much more evidence required from the Trainee, including physical evidence such as photos. This Assessor felt there was more evidence of the Trainee’s performance over time, and of things happening more than once which made for a more robust assessment. Assessor Y stated that they felt much more confident of making good assessment decisions with the new EPs, and felt assessment was more robust due to the triangulation of evidence from the Tutor, Trainee and Verifier. Assessor X thought that the new EP resulted in a better quality assessment due to the Assessor seeing all of the theoretical knowledge assessment evidence as well as having discussions with the Tutor and Verifier before making an assessment decision.

The data also showed evidence from the Trainees that they believed the new EP assessment method resulted in better quality assessment. Trainee 1 thought that the “three-way triple check” between the Assessor, Verifier and Tutor worked well and made sure assessment was sound. This Trainee thought that the amount of evidence that was required in the EP assisted in improving the quality of assessment. Trainee 3 also felt that the new EP was a better assessment method than previously, as they could cross-reference what was happening on farm with what the Tutor was saying, while Trainee 9 believed that the use of photos as evidence in the EP helped to make the assessment evidence more valid.

The Verifiers also thought that the new EP assessment method resulted in a more valid assessment. Verifiers A and D found that the new EP made it easier to have a three-way discussion between Verifier, Trainee and Assessor as there was more information available. This gave them more confidence in making a decision. Verifier G thought that the new EP assessment system was much better than the previous assessment system and that it had more evidence in it that the Trainees could do the practical tasks.

53