(09-09-2015, 01:38 PM)mdbolton Wrote: I have just completed 2012 under exam conditions and of the three questions I chose I cannot find a thread that discusses Q6.
Please see attached my attempt, I would appreciate feed back from one and all. Personally I am concerned I should of kept it less specific to particular skills and a more generic answer may have been more appropriate but as we all know time does not allow you to change the direction of your answer once you've started!
Many Thanks
Mike
Yes think you were rather too specific and be careful of using abbreviations such as NR SWT and CofC (although I do see that later on you explained them)
There was too much continuous writing so not easy to see the structure and there is a danger of examiner overlooking items, so better to have used bullets etc. to make very clear and separate
e.g. As a major works TiC (Tester In Charge) I use 2 distinct sources:
1. NR SWT (Signal Works Testing) CofC (Certificate of Competence)
2. IRSE Licence.
1. Predefined form, listing tasks and applicable equipment types on which it may be undertaken each assessed as
- X Not Competent
- M Mentored
- R Restricted
- C Fully Competent
Qualified Proposer makes assessment, supported by training courses and mentoring records; Approved by senior in company; held in NR database
2. Broader assessment of ability to perform a particular role:
- Principles Tester
- Functional tester
- Assistant Tester
based on an independent assessment judged against Competency Assessment Criteria for various elements,
justified by a range of techniques including: Workplace Observation, Witness Testimony, Questioning etc.
assessment evidence then reviewed by a Competency Assessor.
and so forth.......
I am not actually saying that it was right to go into this level of detail when answering this part of the question, but if you do, then you should lay it out rather more as I have above than in a page of almost unbroken text.
I think in the first part of your answer, you should have said a bit more about the PURPOSE; I would have said something about
having a mechanism that is capable of demonstrating that the person has the correct attributes - specific task training,
- broad underpinning knowledge of the domain and environment,
- experience of undertaking such a task in a range of circumstances,
- display appropriate responsible attitude and behaviours,
to be able consistently to undertake the task to a professionally acceptable standard of performance.
In a sense you wrote that the purpose of Competence Management is to manage competence- which although true, doesn't actually add much to be able demonstrate your understanding!
Conversely I would not have gone into quite the detail you did here about how it SHOULD WORK; I would perhaps have kept some of the detail for the part B. Having said that there are 12 marks for part A and I think I might expect to get 4 for the above, so I have 8 still to claim in this section. I would certainly have started more gerically before giving a specific example and have talked about-
a) definition of what is being benchmarked and relevant standard
b) assessment against those
c) recording of that assessment
d) allocation to tasks subsequently being based on that assessment record.
Then perhaps go on to describe the example of the tester and the two complementary systems as indicated above.
In part B you have talked about mentorship, but never really described what is actually meant by that term- you hint at it when speaking about the gathering of evidence and forms, but much more important to concentrate on the essence of what it is seeking to achieve. I know that you know, but you must describe to the examiner.
Something like:
An individual working under mentorship is - initially constantly under the watchful eye of an already competent person who can give helpful advice should the mentoree be in need of it whilst they are gradually gaining experience of working in real-world conditions, or intervene if necessary to prevent an undesirable situation from resulting from a mistake;
- later on, when the mentor has gained good confidence that the mentee is broadly capable and is aware of the limits of their experience, then the mentorship may become more "arms length", but the mentor remains responsible for the correct performance of the work, but may satisfy themselves by discussing after the activity has been undertaken and reviewing the results before countersigning for the task.
However be careful, because actually the question was about the EVIDENCE NEEDED and you should start with that as the main focus; however given that this evidence has almost invariably to be gathered whilst the individual is under mentorship then this does indeed become relevant in addressing the bit on HOW IT IS TO BE GATHERED.
For the last part you again I think should have been more general. However given that you were thinking about the tester scenario, then I'll comment on what you wrote. Suppose errors were made by a tester when commissioning an Ebi track circuit; would a complaint on the IRSE licence be appropriate if the error was actually quite specific to defective knowledge about that sort of track circuit?
- The IRSE licence category is functional tester and the person may actually be perfectly fine to undertake controlled changeovers and through test SSI locations, test signal, points and probably also DC track circuits.
- If however the error was due to failure to follow process, perhaps undertaking a set-up and drop/pick up test of that track when in fact no-one had checked it was actually installed correctly according to the design drawings and the individual had then signed for tasks that they hadn't actually undertaken, then a complaint on their IRSE licence would certainly seem more appropriate because it shows a failure to follow due process that is probably generically applicable across the role as a whole.
Having made the distinction re the separate complementary measures of competence in the first part of the question,rather surprising that you did not utilise that distinction here!
So overall I do agree with your own critique in that specific examples are good but did dominate too much that it narrowed the question just to the sub-set rather than being just that- an example.
Also do avoid long length of prose in your answers
USE:
- Bullet Lists
- Diagrams
- Tables
- Lines of space to separate
