ANNEX H - 7
companies and the Defence Science & Technology Laboratories, collaborated with qualifications
specialists to develop National Occupational Standards in MCSO. Subsequently, these Standards
were field-tested prior to the drafting of N/SVQs for each discrete role within the industry.
These draft N/SVQs were then subjected to rigorous scrutiny by practitioners and trainers serving
the industry prior to submission for accreditation by the regulatory authorities. Accreditation
was granted in 2002 and the N/SVQs were launched at the National Army Museum in London on
21 October 2003.
19.
In late 2003, at the request of the MOD's Defence Ordnance Safety Group, the SSB undertook to
repeat this process for the whole of the Explosives Substances & Articles (ESA) sector (often known
as “ordnance, munitions and explosives” (OME), including research and development, safety
management, test and evaluation, manufacture, maintenance, procurement, storage, transport,
facilities management, disposal and civil applications (eg special effects, oil and gas exploration,
mining and quarrying).
20.
During 2004 and 2005, the SSB’s Occupational Working Group for ESA (OWG for ESA) held over 50
meetings and 45 one to three day workshops at which managers and practitioners assisted the
SSB’s expert adviser in:
•
mapping the scope and size of the sector;
•
defining its over-arching function (or mission);
•
analysing the sector's key roles and functions;
•
drafting NOS.
21.
Almost 400 individuals participated in various parts of the process, although a central team of
about 20 individuals bore the brunt of the work. The validation process alone involved over 300
people at 16 sites across the industry. The cash costs of the project of around £350k were met
largely by principal stakeholders, although limited public funding was received through Science
Engineering & Manufacturing Technologies Alliance (SEMTA), the Sector Skills Council (SSC)
responsible at the time. The true cost of the project was probably to £900k.
22.
Once the NOS were validated and endorsed by the OWG for ESA in late 2005, they were
submitted to the appropriate authorities for accreditation. Then, work was carried out to:
•
develop N/SVQs for people working at different levels (from operator to operational
manager) based on the NOS;
•
draw up evidence specifications, assessment guidance, centre and candidate guidance
and model portfolios;
•
map the NOS to Key Skills.
23.
Consideration continues to be given to assuring the continuing fitness for purpose of the ESA NOS
and to devising fundable apprenticeship frameworks.
The Occupational Standards.
24.
The full details of all the explosives-related standards and/or qualifications can be found at the
following websites:
24.1.
UK Commission for Employment and Skills:
http://www.ukstandards.co.uk/Pages/index.aspx
ANNEX H - 8
24.2.
Homeland Security Qualifications – brings the ESA occupational standards together:
http://www.homelandsecurityqualifications.co.uk/documents/
24.3.
Mineral Products Qualifications Council:
http://www.mpskills.co.uk/industry-
qualifications/
25.
The Occupational Standards for Explosive Substances and Articles, as at 30 Jun 15 are at
Appendix A.
26.
A typical Standard consists of:
26.1.
a one-line descriptor, which is what people often refer to when they talk about ‘The
Standard’
26.2.
Contexts. The Contexts describe the critical parameters of competent performance
which may include internal and external factors, options or situations. Someone cannot be
deemed to be competent unless they can meet the performance criteria in all the situations
describe by the contexts. So, looking at ESA standard 7.9 Supervise the selection,
preparation and despatch of explosive substances and/or articles, a Storage Supervisor
could not be deemed competent if he or she could only deal with single orders, single
consignments that were fulfilled in part with full resources. A competent Storage Supervisor
can also deal with mixed order, multiple consignments that were fulfilled in full with limited
resources. Achievement of the contexts shows the breadth of someone’s competence and
the fact that they can deal with the non-routine and unpredictable as well as the full range
of expected situations.
26.3.
Performance Criteria. The performance criteria are the outcomes against which
someone’s performance would be measured. Because they are written as outcomes, they
can be assessed (by a suitably qualified and experienced assessor) and the assessment
judgments that result should be fair and unequivocal. The ESA standards were written to
describe competence in the workplace so it follows that the performance criteria must be
evidenced by real work. People cannot prove their competence against the performance
criteria by sitting an examination or writing a report and only in very rare situations would
evidence from simulated activities be acceptable. As each ESA standard is designed to be a
stand-alone specification of competence, any requirement that is relevant to that standard
must be included in it. So, all the ESA standards begin with the same performance criterion
[you need to]: work safely at all times, complying with health and safety, environmental and
other relevant regulations, legislation and guidelines.
26.4.
Knowledge Criteria. Some of the knowledge that is needed to fulfil the performance
criteria can be inferred from competent performance. For example, if you adhere to
reporting procedures at all times (and this would be assessed over a period of time), then it
follows that you know what those procedures are. However, some knowledge cannot be
inferred from competent performance. This is specified in the Knowledge requirements.
The intention of all these standards is that competence would be measured in the
workplace. However, for some points of knowledge, this could be taught off the job in a
training module. For example, a training course could cover the legislative and regulatory
requirements of health and safety and the rules governing mixing hazard divisions and
compatibility groups. On the other hand, it might be more appropriate to assess whether
someone knows how long it takes to assemble orders in the workplace because this will
Dostları ilə paylaş: |