Sounds great
It is a tough one as the very nature of the way CCLD Knowledge Evidence is written, as mentioned before
lends itself extremely openly to regulatory, tutor & student needs. Tutors, Assessors & Verifiers qualify to assess what's required and to present questions, tasks & assignments maybe based on that - where students have the same flexible access they interpret the requirements in a way that best suits them - enabling everyone to act.
The entire nvq structure is absolutely excellent in that it allows everyone the freedom to look for answers that are individual to them - whilst also allowing Tutors the employment opportunities that promote unique individuality... inimitable
There may be better or alternative ways of presenting what's required for evidencing (origins of other qualifications possibly) or stating in the Candidate handbook that ke can be used as questions ... but as a whole I can only see that as hindering one or another in the long run.
For sustainability I think the current system looks good.
Does anyone know if there are plans to reduce the price of handbook guides ?