Demystifying Nvqs And Standards-naughty怎么读

Business For many employers, managers and trainers, NVQs and .petence based standards are still a mystery. It is unfortunate, perhaps, that the emphasis of many marketing events has been on the technical issues involved in standards development rather than the benefits and implications of introducing NVQs. As a consultant working at organisational and national level in the field of .petence based developments, I frequently find that people have been misinformed or have serious gaps in their knowledge regarding the use of occupational standards of .petence within their organisation. Frequently, the new form of qualifications is seen as a new form of bureaucracy. This often turns out to be due to the way in which the system has been explained with an emphasis on approval procedures and administration rather than on the potential flexibility offered by standards and work based assessment. Many organisations recognise the benefits of clear standards, and also find the idea of line managements full involvement in the assessment process an option which can only help to improve overall performance. Difficulties arise however, in several areas. The first, and perhaps one of the most important of these has been access to information. The standards programme, administered by the Training, Enterprise and Education Directorate of the Employment Department (TEED) ex TA is still progressing, with over 100 Industry Lead Bodies busily developing and testing standards for their occupational sectors. Those who have developed standards are sometimes reluctant to provide copies to those who request them (assuming they have found out where to make the request). This reluctance is understandable there is little point in issuing draft standards which may bear little or no resemblance to the final product. In some respects, the Lead Bodies are between the devil and the deep blue sea damned if they do issue them and damned if they dont! However, the lack of access to standards, .bined with the lack of information about why access is being denied has not helped to heal the frustration of many training managers. A second difficulty has been the structure of NVQs and the content of units of .petence. Discussions within lead Bodies have been intense regarding agreement of an NVQ structure. Which units actually constitute an acceptable .bination? Does that .bination reflect work roles at the right level? Does the .bination provide a structure which makes NVQs accessible? At organisational level, this dilemma takes on a slightly different aspect. Does the .bination of units reflect actual work roles within the .anisation? What if it doesnt? Many people are battling with these and other problems at present. I continually find that the support needed must start with a basic understanding of concepts. The NVQ system and its operation requires a definite shift in thinking. The initial struggle with terminology, and the balance of units, work roles, jobs, evidence and assessment criteria can prove too much for an already overworked trainer! Shirley Fletcher FITD 2011 Fletcher Europe About the Author: 相关的主题文章: