Work Record Validator List
The Work Record Validator List (WRVL) is a high-level, chronological overview of an applicant’s work experience and is the first form to be completed in the CBA process.
-
A series of steps for submitting the Work Record Validator List within the APEGA membership application.
- Simplified drawing of a computer monitor with five completed checkboxes and the text: Start the online application. Complete the first five steps
- Step 6, highlighted to indicate this is the current step: Complete and submit the WRVL (Work Record Validator List)
- Step 6: Complete and submit your CBAT (Competency-Based Assessment Tool)
- Next: Finish application submission and pay
- Second submit on WRVL and CBAT
- MRefQ (Modified Reference Questionnaires) and VRFs (Validator Response Forms) received
- Application in queue to be processed, VORFs (Validator Overall Reference Forms) to be requested
The WRVL is the first e-Form to be completed in the Competency Based Assessment System. It includes dates of employment, employment position titles, responsibilities, and reference/validator information.
Each WRVL page must include:
- The name of the employer and the position that was held
- The country the work was performed
- The start date, end date, and total months that were worked with the company
Applicants must provide at least forty-eight (48) months of engineering experience supported by validators and references. Periods of unemployment, education, parental/maternity leave or non-engineering experience are not required and should not be listed. Applicants are encouraged to provide all their relevant experience. Gaps should be no longer than seven (7) years. When describing the brief overview of a position, applicants must explain how and where they personally applied engineering theory through:
- Design
- Design Review
- Analysis
- Problem Solving
They must also briefly describe:
- The engineering problem they solved
- Focus on their specific contribution to the work, structure or process
- The calculations and/or analysis they performed
- Engineering principles applied
Also, applicants should avoid using examples where they performed:
- Routine maintenance
- Testing
- Construction
- Assembly
These should only be included if it involved a problem for which they provided an engineering solution (i.e., the applicants applied engineering principles)
You must type your employment history in a chronological order and provide contact information for your validators and references.
Once the application has been paid for and submitted, the applicant will have to submit their WRVL and CBAT for a second time to allow the Modified Reference Questionnaires (MRefQ's) to sent out.
Verifying Work History and Competency
Work experience history and competencies must be verified in two ways:
- References confirm the applicant was employed for a given period and position
- Validators review and score the competencies in the CBAT that the applicant has claimed for that position
| Role | Responsibility | Professional Background | Number Required |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reference | Confirms employment, duration, and position(s) |
| At least one for each position |
| Validator | Validates and scores each listed competency | Expected to be a P.Eng. or equivalent practitioner in engineering who took technical responsibility for the applicant's technical work. | At least three |
Practitioner: A non-P.Eng. that has an engineering degree and (4 or more years of) professional engineering experience.
Technical Responsibility: Taking technical responsibility could mean providing guidance on the applicant’s technical work and/or authenticating the work and/or conducting a detailed review of the applicant’s technical work.
For competency examples in a Canadian context, it is expected that validators are a Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) who was registered during the work period they are validating. For non-Canadian experience, validators are expected to be a practitioner in engineering.
Any validator who is not a P.Eng. must explain how they are a practitioner in engineering. This may include providing their engineering qualification (engineering degree and professional designation). If needed, this information will be requested by the Registration Program Coordinator during processing.
Additionally, family members and relatives are not allowed to be references or validators. If a family member is used as a reference or validator, an explanation must be provided. Acceptability of the reference or validator is at the discretion of the APEGA Board of Examiners.
Failure to provide an appropriate validator or reference could result in an application being deferred or refused. The onus is on the applicant to ensure that they are using appropriate validators and references.
Work Record References
A reference is a person who can confirm the applicant's position and duration of their experience with a company. Ideally this person is also listed as a validator however, the reference can be a manager, colleague, or a human resources staff member. The reference does not need to have technical knowledge of the applicant's work and does not need to have been their direct supervisor.
There needs to be at least one reference for each employer the applicant has worked for.
Modified Reference Questionnaires
APEGA sends the Modified Reference Questionnaire (MRefQ) out to any reference identified on the Work Record Validator List (WRVL).
References should review the work record, looking at the dates the applicant worked for the company, the details the applicant has provided, and the validator the applicant provided. These details are included on page 3 of the questionnaire. It is highly encouraged to incorporate comments on the Modified Reference Questionnaire (MRefQ) to assist APEGA in their review of the applicant. The reference will need to complete each MRefQ that they receive from APEGA.
References waiting for outstanding MRefQs, should check the spam, junk, and quarantined folders of their inbox. The emails come from an auto-send email address and may be flagged.
The Modified Reference Questionnaires are confidential.*
If an applicant is providing two or more validators for the same employment position, copy and paste the details of the position onto separate pages of the WRVL and provide each validator's information on a different page.
If an applicant is not using their experience at a company to prove a competency, they may include their reference's information in the validator section.
Work Record Validators
A validator is a Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) or Professional Licensee Engineering (P.L.(Eng.)) who took technical responsibility for the applicant's work.
They must have first-hand knowledge of the provided examples and be able to comment on the quality and competence of the work.
Types of Validators
- Managers
- Supervisors
- Mentors
- Colleagues
- Clients
Applicants must provide at least three (3) different validators. Colleagues, mentors, or clients that did not directly work with the applicant do not qualify.
If the validator is not a registered Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) with a Canadian engineering regulatory body, they must provide a current, detailed resume containing the following:
- Relevant education, including dates of program/graduation
- Work history, including dates of employment, duties, and responsibilities
- Applicable Professional Designation(s), past and present
The resume can be emailed to [email protected] with the name of the applicant in the subject. This information must be in the form of an email and/or attached document (PDF, Word, etc.).
The onus is on the applicant to ensure the appropriate validators are being used and the necessary information is being provided. Failure to provide an appropriate validator may result in the application being deferred.
Validator Response Forms (VRFs) & Validator Overall Reference Forms (VORFs)
APEGA requires validators to complete 2 forms for a CBA application, the Validator Response Form (VRF) and Validator Overall Reference Forms (VORF).
The Validator Response Form (VRF) is sent to validators at the beginning of the application as the validator and they will evaluate the competency against the action, situation and outcome provided by the application. The validator will then score that competency based on the example provided. Comments are only mandatory for scores of 0, 1, 2, and 5 but it is strongly encouraged to provide a comment to assist the review of the application.
The validator will have to complete as many VRFs as they were assigned by the applicant; a minimum of 1, a maximum of 20.
Validator Overall Reference Form (VORF) is sent to the validator 1 – 3 months after the application has started processing. The VORF questionnaire is based on the validators experience with the applicant.
They will confirm the following:
- Their designation and discipline
- Their relationship with the applicant
- How long they have known the applicant and the dates they worked with the applicant
- If they have taken technical responsibility for the applicant's work
- Exhibition of good character
- The applicant’s knowledge and understanding of the application of the Code of Ethics
- The applicant’s awareness of the social implications of their work
- The applicant’s communication abilities
Technical Responsibility: Taking technical responsibility could mean providing guidance on the applicant’s technical work and/or authenticating the work and/or conducting a detailed review of the applicant’s technical work.
When completing the VORF, the validator does not need to provide comments however it is strongly encouraged they do so, to provide more context and details for the reviewer.
Validator waiting for VRFs and VORFs, should check the spam, junk, and quarantined folders of their inbox. The emails come from an auto-send email address and may be flagged.
Both the Validator Response Forms and Validator Overall Reference Forms are confidential.*
*All Modified Reference Questionnaire, Validator Response Forms and Validator Overall Reference Forms are confidential and will not be released to the applicant unless the application has been refused and the applicant has requested a Section 32 Appeal. In the case of an appeal, the Registration Department is required to provide all application documentation to the Appeal Board and applicant.