KEY POINTS:
I have been a long-time critic of the NCEA, particularly when I was studying for it. But despite having gone through the system and come out the other end (with what can now be termed NCEA Mark I), last week's announcement of improvements to the NCEA has me impressed.
What a revolution in responsibility. These are exactly the kinds of improvements that students need.
It was hardly fair that a person who sat six gruelling exams, and did extremely well in all of them, ended up with the same certificate as people who took internal assessments and had to be "reassessed" five times before they passed in each standard.
That is now a thing of the past. Now, NCEA certificates can be identified with a higher level - merit or excellence - based on earning a set number of achievement standards (the building blocks of the qualification).
And from next year, a similar system will apply for individual subjects. All failure will be recorded and reported, too.
It was hardly motivational that hard work was not perceived to be rewarding.
When I was doing the NCEA I lost count of the times that my peers said they weren't going to try hard because it "didn't count as more". Sure, it was recorded on their Record of Learning but that wasn't enough. It was a recipe for disaster. But with these changes, it's clear that it counts. You can't get much more motivation than that.
With the establishment of full-time assessment moderation (marking quality control) teams, there will be an end to teachers having their marking marked down by a faceless moderator for an unexplained reason.
By being able to communicate with their moderators, teachers will be treated like the professionals they are.
Once again the NCEA is recognising that education is not "one size fits all". Already the choice available under the NCEA is outstanding. Schools have the freedom to tailor programmes to suit. Schools have the choice to also offer alternative qualifications. And they do, though it's a measure of success for the NCEA just how many don't.
While we don't yet know the exact details of the operation of some of these changes, last week's announcement can be taken as a signal of a change of approach. You only need to look past the changes to the announced reviews of several other aspects of the system to see that.
In the meantime, I have some suggestions of my own.
The Rules & Procedures document could define when to offer reassessment - another chance, and then another. Even international qualifications with a "high stakes" exam are always going to have inequalities based on the student's school and teacher, for instance in some schools more relevant material is taught. With the NCEA we are in a unique position to minimise that difference.
The exams could be set with a varying time limit. Currently the number of papers a student chooses to sit in the subject does not vary the length of the exam. But because of this choice, students can have vastly more time than others to complete the same piece of work. This simple change would make it better for all.
The marking guide could be released immediately after exam marking had finished.
At present, if a student wants to appeal their exam grades they have to guess if they have a good case. They aren't given the guide that is used by markers unless, of course, they happen to know a teacher, or their teacher knows a teacher who was an external examiner and has the marking guide. By removing that inequality we could have a fairer, more accountable system.
Now that the Government has shown the courage to act on the NCEA we should stop blaming the system and start working together on building this bridge to the future. It's important that we get it right.
* Jack Edmonds, who previously criticised the NCEA system while at Onslow College in Wellington, is now a law student at Victoria University.
