Alasdair Thompson: Show us the evidence that these assessments are consistent

Alasdair Thompson

The importance of the NCEA to our students, parents and employers cannot be overstated.

Employers place a heavy reliance on the certificates of achievement in selecting who to take on to their payrolls, and it is unrealistic to expect them to accept without question the assurances of the Qualifications Authority that the NCEA is always consistent between schools and over time.

In the absence of evidence that the standards are applied consistently, employers do not accept that their concerns are misplaced. Independent research to back the authority's assurances is required.

Saying that "the NCEA is consistent across the board because every year the authority samples marked work from every subject at every school in the country" is not adequate.

Students, parents and employers need to know how the samples of work submitted for moderation testing were chosen.

Is the present moderation process more concerned with its procedures than with the quality of students' work?

How is it that some schools achieved remarkably different standards of achievement between 2002 and 2003 in the same subjects, and does this mean we cannot ensure consistency of results from year to year?

Another area of discrepancy needing explanation is why internally assessed pass rates across six mainstream subject areas in some schools have shown improvements while external assessments showed a drop in standards.

Are the standards required for internal achievement in some schools less than those for external achievement standards?

Why, too, do some schools allow students just one re-sit of an assessment, while others allow their students to re-sit an assessment many times?

Why does the external examination allow the same three hours for students to answer one achievement standard or as many as four of the standards?

One principal told me they know standards between schools vary because they can see it when students transfer to a new school.

The NCEA offers much more valuable information about students' knowledge than hitherto. Providing a certificate that shows what students know and can do is a welcome development.

It is especially useful for identifying achievement and aptitude of those less academically oriented and who are more likely to choose a vocational or trades career.

But the NCEA could become a better tool yet, and it needs to, to generate a high level of unreserved acceptance and trust.

The community, and employers, want evidence that the moderation processes applied are objective and publicly transparent to ensure our education standards are nationally consistent.

To improve the NCEA the following should be done:

* The NCEA processes and results should be reviewed and researched by authoritative, independent educationists to identify areas for improvement.
* The standards moderation process over time and between schools must be improved to establish the highest level of statistical precision. Schools must not be permitted to choose which students' work is submitted for moderation assessment.
* Four grades of achievement - not achieved, achieved, merit, and excellent - are not enough. Ten levels of achievement are required.
* A three-hour compulsory exam in English and mathematics should be introduced, perhaps in year 12, to ensure tertiary students have proven levels of competence.
* Specific periods for each achievement standard in external exams should be set
* Some subject areas should be consolidated into larger achievement standards to ensure they are not trivialised.

* Alasdair Thompson is the chief executive of the Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern).