• Brief description of the program(s) under review.
• Alignment of the program with CAA standards and the National Qualifications Framework (NQF).
• Scope of the external reviewer’s evaluation.

Data Sources Reviewed:

• Assessment instruments (e.g., exams, assignments, practical assessments).
• Grading rubrics and criteria.
• Course syllabi and learning outcomes.
• Samples of graded student work across various levels.
• Alignment of assessments with the NQF and competency-based approaches.

Process of Validation:

• Analysis of the design and delivery of assessments.
• Cross-verification of grades assigned by internal assessors.
• Evaluation of competency-based assessment practices.

4.1 Quality of Student Assessments

• Proportion of assessments that meet quality standards based on:
  • Clear and specific grading rubrics.
  • Consistency in application of grading criteria.
  • Use of reliable and valid assessment tools.
• Examples of assessments meeting/exceeding quality benchmarks.

4.2 Alignment with Grading Criteria and NQF Levels

• Evidence of alignment between assessments and the NQF level descriptors (knowledge, skills, and competencies).
• Verification of the alignment of grading criteria with program learning outcomes (PLOs).
• Consistency in grading across different assessors and sections.

4.3 Competency-Based Assessments

• Validation of assessments designed to measure student competencies effectively.
• Use of practical, real-world scenarios to test application-level skills.
• Observations on the balance between theoretical and applied assessments.

4.4 External Verification

• Percentage of student assessments reviewed by external verifiers that align with quality standards.
• Summary of discrepancies, if any, between internal and external verifications.

• Highlight best practices observed in the design, grading, or validation of assessments.

• Specific areas requiring enhancements to meet quality standards.
• Recommendations for aligning assessments more closely with NQF levels and competency frameworks.

Short-Term Actions

• Specific, actionable recommendations for immediate improvement.
• Examples: Revision of grading rubrics, workshops for assessors on consistent grading practices.

Long-Term Strategies

• Suggestions for continuous improvement in assessment design and external validation processes.
• Examples: Incorporation of innovative competency-based assessment methods.

• Observations on the effectiveness of internal quality assurance mechanisms for assessments.
• Feedback on how assessment practices support the program's learning outcomes and CAA standards.

Supporting Documents:

• Samples of assessments reviewed.
• Detailed feedback on specific instruments or assignments.
• Grading rubrics and their alignment with NQF descriptors.

Reviewer Profile:

• Statement of impartiality and professional integrity in conducting the validation.