Where does it say a credit has to be equal to 10 hours of study?
Ultimate keyboard Warrior
Where does it say a credit has to be equal to 10 hours of study?
Ultimate keyboard Warrior
Night rider
I have been a representive on the ESITO group trhat sets unit standards and credits. 10 hours study per credit is the criteria that we worked to in deciding how many credits each standard was worth.Originally Posted by Headbanger
Time to ride
Ultimate keyboard Warrior
Interesting.
I can see why that system is flawed then.
How can you define how much new knowledge a person (presumably certified as average) can retain from 10 hours of study? Rigorous scientific testing? was his mind wiped of prior knowledge before starting? And was this compared to a group being trained specifically for that unit standard?
If every industry is just having a punt on what a credit is equal to, or even just a punt on how much knowledge will be retained by their trainees over a period of time then there is going to be massive variance across the board.
Personally I'm pretty comfortable with the system where if you satisfy the requirements of the unit standard then its awarded to you.Hell, I've sat down with some modules and powered through them with nothing but a pen and the crap in my head. Nice and tidy, send it away, get the credits.
I was even asked to write my own document based on the requirements of the unit standard and submit that as they hadn't drawn up an assessment.....
They call me Mr Fahrenheit
Aha! thus the missing search results earlier.
21550 != 25510 - stoopid computers
Glad you got your credits. We do our own CS training, and peeps can turn up to site with all manner of credits & unit standards, but they still need to have done our course to be involved in CS work.
Keep on chooglin'
Ultimate keyboard Warrior
Indeed, and its what I would expect from a competent orginisation.
I've done and overseen a lot of dangerous work in the past, and it doesn't matter how many courses anyone has done, They are a nublitt and start at the bottom only graduating up to the real work as they learn the systems in the real world and prove their competency.
A flash of lightning
Typical bureaucratic nonsense. In the real world an employer could care less how many hours of study it took a person to aquire a skill. It is the skill that counts, not the hours. Some people can learn a skill in 10 minutes that others could not aquire in 100 years...
Ride fast or be last.
Hardcore Biker
It's "you're" not "your". Does that make it a draw?
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My signature is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless.
The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Night rider
Absolutely correct. And nowhere does it say that someone must study for 10 hours to get each credit. In the NZQA criteria it is the ability to demonstrate a skill or knowledge that is important, not the amount of time that is spent in a course. Also why cousres that don't have any assesment attached are meaningless. However there has to be some method to determine which standard is worth 10 credits compared to one that is only worth 3 credits. The average effort required to gain that standard is a good place to start.
Time to ride
Invisible up close
Not unreasonable. The provider may well be crooked. Taking registration fee then not submitting results so not having to pass on fee. Or more likely completely rubbish administration. Contact NZQA let them know and also contact whoever paid for the course they have a vested interest in seeing their bucks achieve results.
Only a biker knows why a dog sticks his head out of a car window.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks