Dialogue: New assessment system relates to real world

Secondary school qualifications are undergoing a makeover. Education Minister TREVOR MALLARD explains why, despite criticism, he is pressing ahead with the new system.

The 1999 School Certificate English exam included the following question:

"This year you have delivered a speech. Briefly describe:

(i) what your speech was about.

(ii) your intended audience.

(iii) your main aim in delivering the speech."

The question was worth one mark. A further three marks were available for describing how different production techniques were used in that particular speech.

Under the National Certificate in Educational Achievement, Year 11 (fifth form) students could still have to answer such questions in one of the external exams that make up the new system. But they would also be judged through internal assessment on the speech itself - the ideas, the delivery, the body language, and how assured, direct and enthusiastic they were about it.

As a politician, I would love to win marks based on my version of what a speech was about. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen in the real world. Nor is there any advantage in a criminal lawyer writing about what he or she wanted to achieve in summing up a trial.

And that's my point - School Certificate English, and, indeed, the entire secondary school qualifications system, has passed its use-by date.

We're getting ready for an exciting new system. It's a system that will challenge our most gifted students, but will also provide a meaningful assessment for students who in the past, through not passing School Certificate, left school with nothing to show for their achievements.

Every young New Zealander has potential in some areas. We should celebrate the achievements of talented students, but as a country we can't afford to do that at the expense of ignoring everybody else.

The traditional examination system labelled a person as either a success or a failure. A major fault was that it did not give employers or tertiary institutions a decent picture of a young person they were considering for employment or further training.

What good is a carpenter who cannot measure? If they passed School Certificate mathematics, it was assumed they could measure, but there was nothing in the certificate at the end of the year that showed that to be true.

The labour market has changed dramatically over the past quarter-century. Jobs previously requiring no literacy skills now demand the ability to operate a computer. Our school system needs to hold on to those students who used to leave the day they turned 15, and arm them with worthwhile and practical qualifications.

For the more academic students, the National Certificate of Educational Achievement will provide a greater challenge in fostering time management, problem-solving and project-management skills. Exams will still be held at the end of the year, but the certificate provides a good balance between rigorous internal and external assessment.

A survey of employers who have actively recruited university graduates rated "sound academic achievement" third in the list of top 10 skills they sought.

Above it were "strong verbal and interpersonal communication skills" and "problem-solving skills," both of which can be better developed and reported through the certificate.

Exams are a useful way of testing some knowledge and skills, and that's why they will still be a part of the new system. But by strengthening the mix of exams and internal assessment, we get the best of both worlds.

One of the crunch issues surrounding internal assessment is: how many chances do you give a student at getting a mark?

A decision I've just approved is that schools should include provision for no more than one further reportable assessment opportunity within their assessment policy for National Certificate of Achievement standards. This is in the best interests of teaching and learning.

The further assessment opportunity is for students who have not achieved the standard at the first attempt, but have had the opportunity for more learning. It would not be responsible to further assess a student who had made no visible progress against the standard. Constant reassessment would also be an unacceptable load to place on teachers.

This decision will be reviewed after three years because teachers' confidence in, and familiarity with, assessment for the certificate will have increased by then. This decision does not limit a school's ability to use assessment as a normal part of the teaching and learning process. Indeed, some schools already use such a process to give feedback on a pupil's progress towards achieving the standard. That will no doubt continue.

Recent articles in the Herald show that opinion on the certificate is divided. Change is never easy. When what we're changing involves the future of a generation of New Zealanders, we have to tread carefully.

That's why I delayed the implementation of the certificate from this year until next. The previous Government had not paid enough attention to all schools being adequately prepared for the new system.

The Budget provided $14 million of new funding over four years to ensure effective implementation of the certificate. That means total funding next year will be $15.2 million.

Parents of Year 10 students will soon receive information about the certificate. It is a big change for students in some schools. But we can't afford not to change if we want to educate our young people to meet the demands of the changing world.