Mentoring and competency verification
Why competence has to be shown rather than assumed, what OSHA rules, apprenticeship and credential programs say about training, records and re-checks, and a method for writing a standard, watching the work and signing what was seen.
4 lessons · about 40 min · 12 diagrams · 0 videos
Version 1.0.0
Builds on these modules
Lessons
0 of 4 complete
Lesson 1 · 9 min · 10 slides · 7 questions
Mentoring and competency verification: principles and terminology
Why new workers need verified competence, the difference between being trained, evaluated, certified and competent, who may judge, and how trainees are supervised until they are verified.
You will be able to: Tell training, evaluation, certification, competent person and qualified person apart, name who may train and who may judge, and state the supervision boundary for trainees on live machines.
Not startedStart →Lesson 2 · 11 min · 12 slides · 9 questions
Mentoring and competency verification: standards, records and credentials
The fixed re-check intervals in OSHA rules, the events that trigger retraining, what training records must hold, how registered apprenticeship shows completion, and what NCCER, NRCA and MCA programs verify.
You will be able to: Read OSHA training rules for who trains, what proves it and when it repeats, compare an employer record with an outside credential or a company certification, and choose the right re-check trigger.
Not startedStart →Lesson 3 · 10 min · 10 slides · 8 questions
Mentoring and competency verification: methods and worked application
The write-the-standard, watch-the-work, sign-what-you-saw method, worked on a flat-width check and a pieces-for-a-run count from AFS limits, with the hem checks, the record fields and what contractors and architects can ask for.
You will be able to: Build a documented competency check for one task: a measurable standard, demonstration, supervised practice, observed evaluation, a sign-off record and a re-check date, applied to published AFS limits.
Not startedStart →Lesson 4 · 10 min · 11 slides · 7 questions
Mentoring and competency verification: defects, verification and case study
Six ways a sign-off fails, two published OSHA press brake case histories, how to choose a corrective option, language and feedback, a program audit checklist, and worked re-check dates.
You will be able to: Diagnose why a sign-off failed from its evidence, choose between retraining, re-evaluating and stepping back to supervised work, and audit a competency program with a checklist.
Not startedStart →
Practical task
Build a competency check for one task of your choice, and review a fictional installer-qualifications page. Task A: write a measurable standard, an observation checklist, a completed worked record and a list of re-check triggers. Task B: list what the fictional page shows, what it lacks and what to request.
Hand in
- A measurable standard for one observable task (a flat-width check, a hem check, or a lap-and-fastener sequence from a manufacturer guide): conditions, quantity checked and what counts as acceptable performance
- An observation checklist and a completed worked record with fictional names, separate training and evaluation dates, the trainer, a different evaluator and a re-check date
- A list of re-check triggers with at least one event trigger and one calendar trigger, each tied to a rule or guide named in this module
- For a fictional installer-qualifications page that you invent and label fictional: a gap list that separates personnel credentials from company certifications and names the record fields that are missing
Rubric
| Criterion | Meets the standard when |
|---|---|
| Measurable standard | States the conditions, the quantity checked and the acceptable result so that two evaluators would reach the same pass or fail. |
| Independent evaluation | The record names a trainer and a separate evaluator, with separate dates, and says the evaluator watched the work. |
| Re-check triggers | Lists at least one event trigger and one calendar trigger, each tied to a rule or guide in the module, with no invented intervals. |
| Person versus company | Separates what a personnel credential shows from what a company certification shows, and does not treat either as proof of the other. |
| No invented requirement | The gap list asks for evidence and does not state a requirement that the project specification or a cited rule does not contain. |