When can a workplace assessment use simulation?

You can use a simulation for a rarely occurring workplace situation only if the relevant assessment requirements permit it. Start with the qualification handbook, unit requirements or applicable apprenticeship assessment plan. Check exactly which criteria can be assessed this way, what conditions apply and whether approval is needed before the activity takes place.

A realistic role-play can provide useful evidence of a learner’s response to a difficult situation. It cannot, by itself, establish that the same response would be sustained across every real workplace situation. The assessor must judge the evidence against the requirements that apply.

1. Check permission before designing the task

Find the current documentation for the learner’s particular qualification, unit and assessment version. Do not rely on a rule from a different qualification or assume that a rare event is sufficient justification.

For example, the City & Guilds and ILM centre assessment standards say that permission for simulation or a realistic working or learning environment will be indicated in the relevant qualification handbook or assessment documentation. Where such an environment is permitted, the standards describe matching workplace facilities, equipment, relationships, constraints and pressures. ([cityandguilds.com](https://www.cityandguilds.com/-/media/ilm-website/sharepoint-documents/_published-documents/qas-centre-assessment-pdf.pdf))

Before proceeding, record:

• The qualification, unit or assessment plan and version checked.
• The specific criteria or outcomes for which simulation is permitted.
• Any required assessment method, conditions, limits on simulated evidence or additional workplace evidence.
• Who must approve the task, if approval is required, and where that decision is recorded.

If the wording is unclear, ask your quality assurance lead or the awarding or assessment organisation before counting the evidence. For apprenticeships, Skills England describes simulation as an assessment method, but that general description does not give permission to use it in every apprenticeship assessment. The applicable plan and assessment organisation’s requirements remain the starting point. ([gov.uk](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/requirements-for-apprenticeship-assessment/annex-1-assessment-method-definitions))

2. Plan a realistic customer-service scenario

Imagine a learner works at a service desk where serious delivery complaints are uncommon. For this fictional example, assume the applicable rules allow a role-play for the criteria below and the task has been approved where necessary. These are illustrative criteria, not requirements from a named qualification.

A customer says a promised delivery has not arrived and wants an immediate refund. The order record shows a delivery delay but no confirmed delivery date. The learner can apologise, check the facts and arrange a follow-up; refunds above the stated limit must be referred to a manager.

Give the learner the same kind of information and tools they would normally have: a fictional order record, a complaints procedure and a way to record the interaction. A colleague plays the customer using a short briefing. The colleague can ask why the order is late and request a refund, but should not coach the learner towards an answer.

Agree a reasonable duration based on the real task and any assessment rules. Keep the level of challenge comparable between learners without turning the role-play into a memory test for an identical script. Plan any approved reasonable adjustments in advance and preserve the skill the assessment is intended to measure.

What should the assessor look for?

Record what the learner actually did or said, the conditions, and any prompts or assistance. Distinguish a routine question from coaching that changed the response. Compare the observed performance and completed note with each applicable criterion; do not infer competence from the learner’s confidence or a polished script.

3. Decide what the evidence does—and does not—cover

Suppose the learner checks the order, explains the refund limit and records that a manager will contact the customer the next working day. The assessor could use those observations, together with the learner’s note, to judge the illustrative criteria for this task. The judgement should still reflect any requirement for additional evidence or performance over time.

For example, the role-play would not demonstrate that the learner completed a real refund or handled an ongoing caseload. If those are required elsewhere, identify the gap and plan how to collect permitted evidence rather than stretching the role-play result.

4. If simulation is not permitted

Use the role-play for practice if helpful, but label it as practice and do not count it towards a criterion that requires another method. Tell the learner what remains outstanding and agree a review date.

Explore legitimate opportunities with the employer: a suitable naturally occurring task, or another workplace setting if the rules allow it. Check whether existing workplace records, prior evidence or a suitable witness account are acceptable and sufficient under the assessment requirements. Do not assume that any one of these can replace direct observation. If no compliant opportunity is available, raise the problem with the quality assurance lead and awarding or assessment organisation; keep the criterion open while the permitted route is clarified.

Keep the judgement alongside the evidence

In EduMark Marking Studio, an assessor can review submitted work alongside the question, criteria and evidence, then record criterion outcomes and feedback. For this example, the submitted work could include the learner’s fictional customer-service note, with the assessor referring to the observation record in the judgement as appropriate to the centre’s process. Marking Studio keeps the submission attempt, recorded decisions and feedback together; the assessor remains responsible for the decision. ([edumark.ai](https://www.edumark.ai/marking-studio))

A useful final check is simple: can another reviewer see why simulation was allowed, what the learner demonstrated and what still needs evidence?