Assessment Tools For Automotive Technology Trainer Makoto Miyagi Essay.

Makoto Miyagi was an Automotive Technology Teacher in Tokyo for seven years. He moved to Australia with his family two years ago. In the last two years, he focused on developing his English communication skills, and completing his qualification for AUR40616 Certificate IV in Automotive Electrical Technology. He aims to work as an automotive electrical technology trainer in Australia.

This part is divided into three steps:

• Review and analyse the assessment requirements
• Prepare an assessment plan for each of the units
• Identify modification and contextualisation requirements for existing assessment tools

The next cluster after the Design Cluster is the Delivery Cluster.

Task 1: Complete the two RPL Assessment Plans for Makoto

Task 2: Contextualise the RPL Assessment Instruments for Makoto

This task requires you to contextualise the RPL Assessment Instruments for Makoto. You will need to consider Makoto’s previous work and learning experiences, and review them against the unit requirements.

Contextualizing the RPL Assessment Instruments for Makoto

The case study chosen for this assignment is case study 2. It is about Makoto Miyagi. He was an automotive technology teacher for seven years before moving to Australia about two years ago. He has been focusing on developing his English communication skills and also completion for his qualification for AUR40616 Certificate IV in Automotive Electrical Technology.  He is actually aiming to work as an automotive electrical technology trainer in Australia.

Based on this case study, various assessment tools were developed as clearly shown in project 1. An assessment for five candidates, Makoto being one of the candidates was planed and organized where two of the assessments were RPL assessments and the other three were the training and assessment pathway. Two assessment instruments were also developed covering the two units chosen therein. This is done in project 2. Finally there is three validation sessions based on Makoto case and these have been shown in project 3 (van der Aa et al, 2016).

Development of Assessment tools

Assessment can be defined as the actor rather a process of judging whether the required level of competency has been reached or not (Lovegrove et al, 2016). It looks into whether an individual or a group of persons has performed according to the required standards. An assessment system, on the other hand, is some kind of policies and procedures that are documented; they may also include tools and other materials. These procedures and policies are put to ensure that assessments are fully consistent with the assessment principles and rules. Assessment tools often contain the instructions and rules required for interpretation and gathering of required evidence in any assessment process (van der Aa et al, 2016). The assessment tool I designed and developed are clearly explained below each supporting different assessment methods and addresses at least one unit of competency.

Educators and teachers are to observe and watch students in the classrooms. It is from these random observations that teachers make decisions. This tool primarily involves observation and documentation. Here observation can be done is a multiple of ways. First, it may involve focusing on the students’ performance in just one class act. The other way may involve focusing or a number of random class activities.  It is also mandatory that there be a formulated method of how the observations made will be recorded since it’s very easy to forget an unrecorded observation. It is also important to note that these observations should be focused on skills, behaviors and generally how the student responds to certain issues in the class over a period of established time. Checklists, on the other hand, are meant to show and indicate if indeed the student can accomplish the therein outlined and listed objectives. Here the quality of performance is not mandatory, what is of importance is whether the student has the capability of accomplishing the task (van der Aa et al, 2016).

Understanding Assessment and Assessment Systems

It is also significant that the teacher predetermines the kind of skill and behavior that they want to observe before designing the observation checklist (Lovegrove et al, 2016). The students should be made aware of the skills and behaviors to be observed, this is not mandatory but it provides these students with the appropriate guidelines for self-monitoring if need be. Another important requirement for this assessment tool is that the teacher is expected to focus on a few students at one particular time (Lovegrove et al, 2016). They may decide for instance t6o focus on a section of the students in a class each day, but at long last, all the students should be observed. Instructors and educators do watch and watch understudies in the classrooms. It is from these irregular perceptions that educators decide. This apparatus principally includes perception and documentation. Here perception should be possible is different of ways. To begin with, it might include concentrating on the understudies' execution in only one class action. The other way may include centering or various irregular class exercises. It is additionally obligatory that there be figured technique on how the perceptions made will be recorded since it's anything but difficult to overlook an unrecorded perception. It is likewise essential to take note of that these perceptions ought to be centered on aptitudes, practices and by and large how the understudy reacts to specific issues in the class over a time of set up time. Agendas then again are intended to appear and demonstrate if in fact the understudy can achieve the in that plot and recorded targets. Here the nature of execution isn't compulsory, what is of significance is whether the understudy has the capacity of achieving the errand.

It is additionally huge that the educator predetermines the sort of attitude and conduct that they need to see before planning the perception agenda (Lovegrove et al, 2016). The understudies ought to be made mindful of the abilities and practices to be watched, this isn't compulsory however it furnishes these understudies with the suitable rules for self-checking if require be. Another critical necessity for this evaluation device is that the instructor is required to center on a couple of understudies at one specific time (Lovegrove et al, 2016). They may choose for example t6o center around an area of the understudies in a class every day, except finally every one of the understudies ought to be watched.

Observation Checklist Tool

This tool supports the observation method of assessment for competency. This is so since it needs the student to not only showcasing what they know but also what they are capable of doing and at what level of capability can they do it. This tool also supports the portfolio method of assessment which comprises -ups and even photographs (Thomsen et al, 2015). Units of competency mainly give information on the task and the skills that the student is expected to accomplish and demonstrate by the end of the unit and in our case is climate change. Knowledge evidence, for instance, is a component that is clearly addressed by the observation checklist tool. This is due to the fact that it in details describes the skills and knowledge that student is expected to have so as to accomplish certain tasks. This tool also focuses on the skills and the knowledge that the students portray when tackling certain issues (Thomsen et al, 2015).

This tool usually involves like some kind of card that clearly outlines the situation to the student, the teacher or any other third party. Instructions should also be provided to the various persons involved in that scenario. Moreover, students should also be told in advance what is it exactly that they are going to be assessed during that scenario. This should be accompanied by any other vital information that would in any way help the student in the assessment (Thomsen et al, 2015).

This assessment tool is supported by the in-tray exercise method of assessment where students are supposed to be presented with some kind of test which they do before the real questions are presented (Thomsen et al, 2015). The student then uses this information from the paper they are provided with o solve some other related issues and real-world problems. This assessment tool is valid, in that the evidence therein relates to the competency of the students directly. It is also fair since we can see that all students and somehow provided with an equal chance for assessment.

Workplace simulation

This is another tool used in the assessment. Before a workplace simulation is done, a number of factors need to be put into consideration (Thomsen et al, 2015). The students to be assessed must be considered, and here usually the student’s characteristics and general needs are given the highest priority (Lovegrove et al, 2016). The cost and the availability of the stimulated workplace should also be considered among other things. The process is of much importance as the end product and therefore an observation checklist should be made to keep track of each and everything that needs to be captured and that would play an important role in the assessment process. Students were the most important part of any assessment tool must also be prepared psychologically. A brief discussion should be made to the students on the types of assessment methods to be used and the general assessment process (Lovegrove et al, 2016).

Scenario Tool

This tool is supported by various methods of assessment such as portfolios of evidence, review of products, and third-party feedback among others. This tool is the most reliable and flexible. This is due to its unique characteristic of being able to be changed so as to accommodate the various and distinct need of various students (Thomsen et al, 2015).

Plan and Organize Assessment

Part I-Training and assessment pathway

Five candidates to be assessed here are five.

Assessment one

There are a number of elements and performance criteria that need to be looked at among the five candidates available for assessment. These elements have been outlined below; Determination of assessment approach-This involves clearly identifying the candidates which are in turn followed by confirmation of the main purpose of assessment and in our case, the purpose of the assessment is to determine the competency in effective communication, negotiation, and mediation (Bennett  et al, 2017). This purpose of assessment should put into considerations factors like the organizational and ethical requirements (Lovegrove et al, 2016). Preparation of an assessment plan-Here the evidence that is needed as a measure of competence is identified and this is often based on the rules of the evidence. Once the assessment plan has been developed, it should get approval from various people among these should be stallholders.

Identification of relevant requirements-The information obtained from the five candidate's data should be put into use (Lovegrove et al, 2016). There also should be a proper analysis of the available assessment tools.

Development of assessment instruments-This involves the putting down of extremely clear instructions for the five candidates involved in relation to the assessment instruments used. The drafted assessment instruments should be double checked and confirmed that they indeed meet the required standards before being employed in the assessment.

Assessment two

This assessment would involve the checking of the most common foundation skills among the five candidates. The unit of competency to be considered is Effective communication, negotiation, and mediation, therefore, a skill such as writing, reading. Oral communication, interactions with others and getting the work done should be looked into (Thomsen et al, 2015).

These are explained below;

Reading-This is put on purpose and it is accomplished by selecting and analyzing documents related to the assessment of effective communication, negotiation, and mediation (Lovegrove et al, 2016). Interaction with others-This is meant to indicate the extent to which the selected candidates to collaborate with others as they undertake their daily activities. This is solely based on how they communicate and negotiate with the others.

In-Tray Exercise Tool

It is also important that these five candidates portray and be in a position to demonstrate effectiveness in completing the task listed in the above elements. They should be having reliant information such as; they should be conversant with the features and characteristics of the unit of competency, for our case Effective communication, negotiation and mediation (Lovegrove et al, 2016).

They should have clear guidelines to help in the contextualizing the effective communication, negotiation, and mediation.

They should be conversant with the assessment methods that are likely to be used by the assessor. This helps them in getting the right evidence in form of documentation (Cekada, 2010).

They should also be conversant with the assessment tool to be used.

Under this, it is also important to note that the assessors must be in a position to satisfy the assessment applicable in vocational education and training legislation VET by all means possible or the whole assessment process would be considered null and void (Thomsen et al, 2015).

It is important to note that under the RPL there are certain specific units that are available for recognition and these are Economics of development, project management, climate change, urban design, effective communication, negotiation, and mediation among others (Thomsen et al, 2015). This assessment consists of two five candidates and it basically involves these five candidates presenting evidence that they have indeed obtained and attained the knowledge and skills that are presented in a particular unit. The unit of competency to be used here is Effective communication, Negotiation, and Mediation.

Assessment one

Here these five candidates are supposed to provide documentation evidence and proof that they are capable and have the competence of performing.  In our case, they must provide evidence that they indeed have the right skills and have deeply mastered the art of effective communication, negotiation, and mediation (Lovegrove et al, 2016).Their evidence provided herein must have the following characteristics;

Must be valid-This implies that the evidence must, by all means, be in a position to relate to the application request.

Must be sufficient-It must be in a position to provide information and details that would help the assessor in making a decision.

Must be Authentic- The evidence provided must be genuine.

Some of these documents to be used are certificates, academic transcripts, and statements of attainment among others.

These documents should be provided by these five candidates as hard copies. It is also advised that original documents should not be provided since they would be returned afterward.

Workplace Simulation Tool

The assessor then gives feedback to the five candidates involved after they look into all the factors in comparison to the evidence and documents they have provided. It’s either they are competent enough or they are not (Lovegrove et al, 2016). The five hopefuls should give documentation confirmation and verification that they are able and have the ability to perform. For our case, they should give confirm that they, in fact, have the correct aptitudes and have profoundly aced the specialty of compelling correspondence, transaction, and intercession. Their confirmation gave in this must have the accompanying attributes; Must be legitimate this infers the proof should by all methods be in a situation to identify with the application ask. Must be adequate it must be in a situation to give data and points of interest that would help the assessor in settling on a choice. Must be Authentic-The confirmation gave must be certified. A portion of these reports to be utilized are authentications, scholarly transcripts, and proclamations of fulfillment among others. These reports ought to be given by these five competitors as printed versions. It is additionally prompted that unique archives ought not to be given since they would be returned a short time later. The assessor at that point offers input to the five applicants required after they investigate every one of the variables in contrast with the proof and records they have given. It is possible that they are sufficiently able or they are not (Lovegrove et al, 2016).

Assessment II

In this, the five candidates are expected to complete the required application form and also pay the fee that is required. They should then make applications in the form of write-ups but addressing the competencies of at most two units. The candidates are then expected to go through a checklist of assessment so that they can be in a position to have an insight of what is it exactly that the assessors would be looking for (Walsh et al, 2015)

They should then supposed to have their supporting documents and these include the relevant certificates that would be needed for the assessment process (Thomsen et al, 2015). The assessor then gives feedback to the five candidates involved after they look into all the factors in comparison to the evidence and documents they have provided. It’s either they are competent enough or they are not.

Assessment instruments can be classified using so many factors. The most common way of classification is according to their implications on results; here there exists the low implication and the high implication systems.

Plan and Organize Assessment

Another way is in accordance with their general and technical features and characteristics. Here we have the direct and the indirect measures.

It should be noted that these classifications are of less significance here since we are going to look at the instruments of assessment in regard two units. These two units are the Design and development of learning programs and the Address on adult language, literacy and numeracy skills (Shaharan & Neary, 2014).

The Design and development of learning programs

 Here we look at various instruments of assessment and these include the online discussions, internships and practicum’s, capstone which includes the project or maybe a portfolio, course projects, write up papers which could be in terms of a research, creative writing among others and the publications or presentations (Shaharan, & Neary, 2014).

Address on adult language, literacy and numeracy skills

Various instruments are put into consideration under this unit and these include creations and performances, observations, tests and examination which may be in the form of essays or even reports among others (Thomsen et al, 2015).

Validation Sessions

Validation of assessment is primarily done to ensure that the indeed the assessment of the student done is valid and reliable. During the validation process there are a number of factors that must be put into consideration; there are a number of expectations and qualifications that are needed for an individual to be in a position to participate in the validation. It should be noted that individuals having the skills and the relevant current knowledge in vocational training and learning can participate in the validation process. The participants might also be RTO employees (Richards et al, 2015).

These individuals mentioned above, however, cannot participate in the validation process alone but must be accompanied or participate as a team with a group of other qualified validates

Validation is some kind of professional practice and as we all know any professional practice should be guided by certain accepted codes and conducts. These codes are explained below (Shaharan, & Neary, 2014).

Transparency- The general process and implications of the validation process should be predetermined and should be as transparent as possible to all the parties involved.

Confidentiality- Confidentiality is mandatory. Information on the individuals and the persons providing it is expected to be treated with great caution and sensitivity.

Tolerance- By tolerance, it is implied that any validation method whosoever should have some kind of margin of error. It should be noted that evidence available will variations depending on the available standards. Approval of evaluation is fundamentally done to guarantee that the, in reality, the appraisal of the understudy done is substantial and solid (Saharan & Neary, 2014). During the approval procedure, there are various elements that must be put into thought; there are various desires and capabilities that are required for a person to be in a situation to take an interest in the approval. It ought to be noticed that people having the right stuff and the important current information in professional training and learning can take an interest in the approval procedure. The members may likewise be RTO representatives (Moss et al, 2015). These people specified above, be that as it may, can't take an interest in the approval procedure alone yet should go with or take part as a group with a gathering of other qualified validates.

Elements and Performance Criteria for Makoto Miyagi

Approval is some sort of expert practice and as we as a whole know any expert practice ought to be guided by certain acknowledged codes and directs (Thomsen et al, 2015). These codes are clarified beneath;

Straightforwardness The general procedure and ramifications of the approval procedure ought to be foreordained and ought to be as straightforward as conceivable to every one of the gatherings included.

Secrecy Confidentiality is obligatory. Data on the people and the people giving it is relied upon to be treated with awesome alert and affectability.

Resistance By resilience, it is inferred that any approval technique whosoever ought to have some sort of room for giving and take. It ought to be noticed that proof accessible will varieties contingent upon the accessible norms.

There are various stages that are involved in the validation process and these stages are clearly explained below (Richards et al, 2015).

Validation I-Validation before the assessment

This is usually done for three main reasons and these are to review any possible benchmarks, to review the tools of assessment and the evidence guide. The last but not least reason is to review the activities of the process of assessment (Thomsen et al, 2015).

It is also important to note that here there exists also various distinct approaches that can be applied in the validation process, One there is the review of the assessment design in relation to the assessment principles available, tow there is the review of the evidence in relation to the accepted rules and regulations, the last one is the review if indeed the benchmarks conducted adequately give a reflection on the performance (van der Aa et al, 2016).

Validation II-During Assessment

 This validation looks into two major factors and these are the review on the assessment itself and the general outlined assessment process where the emphasis is put in the assessment process as the learner undertakes it. It is a simultaneous process which also takes into consideration the suitability and availability of resources in relation to the process of assessment (Richards et al, 2015).

The other factor being looked at in this validation part is the review of the overall performance of the person doing the assessment. Here the overall rating and general judgment of the assessor in relation to the performance of the student is exactly what brings out the consistency of the assessor (Becker et al, 2016).

Validation III-After Assessment

Conclusion

Here three factors have to be considered, these factors and clearly explained below;

The review on the procedures and guidelines of managing records and reporting-Under this comparison is done to the procedures and guideline of reporting to ensure that they are in unison with the established and mandated guidelines (Salas et al, 2017). A review on the performance of the student and the decisions made as a result of assessment-As we have seen earlier, it is always important that there exists a margin of error that is somewhat tolerable, therefore a review on the decisions made is done to see to it that this is indeed established. Review of the assessment process-This is usually done in relation to the students’ needs so as to make sure that these needs are indeed met in the process of assessment (Becker et al, 2016).

References

Lovegrove, C., Novara, G., Mottrie, A., Guru, K. A., Brown, M., Challacombe, B., ... & Dasgupta, P. (2016). Structured and modular training pathway for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): validation of the RARP assessment score and learning curve assessment. European urology, 69(3), 526-535.

Thomsen, A. S. S., Subhi, Y., Kiilgaard, J. F., la Cour, M., & Konge, L. (2015). Update on simulation-based surgical training and assessment in ophthalmology: a systematic review. Ophthalmology, 122(6), 1111-1130.

Cekada, T. L. (2010). Training needs assessment: Understanding what employees need to know. Professional Safety, 55(03), 28-33.

Bennett Jr, W., Alliger, G. M., Colegrove, C. M., Garrity, M. J., & Beard, R. M. (2017). Mission Essential Competencies: A Novel Approach to Proficiency-Based Live, Virtual, and Constructive Readiness Training and Assessment. In Fundamental Issues in Defense Training and Simulation (pp. 63-78). CRC Press.

Becker, A. M., Meyers, E., Sloan, A., Rennaker, R., Kilgard, M., & Goldberg, M. P. (2016). An automated task for the training and assessment of distal forelimb function in a mouse model of ischemic stroke. Journal of neuroscience methods, 258, 16-23.

Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Weaver, J. (2017). 12 Command and Control Teams: Principles for Training and Assessment. Incident command: tales from the hot seat.

Moss, E. L., Redman, C. W. E., Arbyn, M., Dollery, E., Petry, K. U., Nieminen, P., ... & Leeson, S. C. (2015). Colposcopy training and assessment across the member countries of the European Federation for Colposcopy. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 188, 124-128.

Narasimhan, G. V., & Ramanarayanan, C. S. (2014). Analysis of training needs assessment and implementation-a comparative study of public and private sector banks. Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, 5(3), 71.

Richards, M. K., McAteer, J. P., Drake, F. T., Goldin, A. B., Khandelwal, S., & Gow, K. W. (2015). A national review of the frequency of minimally invasive surgery among general surgery residents: assessment of ACGME case logs during 2 decades of general surgery resident training. JAMA surgery, 150(2), 169-172.

van der Aa, J. E., Goverde, A. J., Teunissen, P. W., & Scheele, F. (2016). Paving the road for a European postgraduate training curriculum. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 203, 229-231.

Shaharan, S., & Neary, P. (2014). Evaluation of surgical training in the era of simulation. World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 6(9), 436.

Walsh, C. M. (2016). In-training gastrointestinal endoscopy competency assessment tools: types of tools, validation and impact. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology, 30(3), 357-374.