KEY POINTS:
One way of looking at the latest review of the NCEA is to compare it to fine tuning an engine after 10,000km. As a prototype, the secondary schools' qualification system has been coughing and spluttering since its first road test. Overhauls haven't ironed out the glitches yet but further technical adjustments should have it purring, say backers. Others are adamant that no amount of tinkering can fix a fatally flawed model.
Principals this week learned the mechanics of the NZ Qualifications Authority's Review of Standards _ a routine-sounding exercise for an operation which goes to the heart of the much maligned national qualifications framework. The NCEA is a standards-based way of assessing our future plumbers and brain surgeons: the standards specify the expected outcome of a student's learning about a particular topic. Or, from your 16-year-old's viewpoint, what they need to do to get a credit. (80 are needed for Level 1 NCEA).
Coupled with other steps taken in the past year _ the addition of merit and excellence (as well as not-achieved) grades for achievement standards and increased sampling and moderating of internal assessments _ the standards review focuses on many of the big concerns which have embarrassed the NCEA in its first six years.
The reaction of schools and employers suggests that, while some will never be convinced, it's past time when the preferred fix for NCEA was to toss it on the scrapheap.
"This is the students' qualification," says Lynfield College deputy head Murray Black. "We need to present it to the best of our ability to support the students who have to live with it." He believes the moves will improve management of the NCEA and boost its credibility.
It certainly needs a boost _ though critics argue most of the flaws should have been sorted before the complex hybrid was launched, such is its potential influence on the lives and future careers of today's teenagers. Ten per cent of the country's 400 secondary schools now offer alternatives such as Cambridge or International Baccalaureate _ though most other schools are not rushing to join them.
Checks on internal assessments at 89 schools last year found moderators disagreed with teachers in 28 per cent of cases. Analysis of students' external vs internal marks also found widespread variation _ with students who passed internal papers failing external exams and vice versa.
This added weight to anecdotal complaints that teachers at some schools are too "soft" in internal assessments _ raising doubts over the reliability of annual grade tables which show some schools getting high pass rates while others appear to be doing poorly. In fact, the sampling suggests teachers are often too hard on pupils _ failing students who go on to do well in external exams or marking "achieved" on work deserving merit or excellence.
Greater consistency in assessments between schools, and between internal and external results, is expected to come from steps already taken to boost moderation. These include the appointment of 33 full- and part-time moderators who each year will check 10 per cent of internal assessments, instead of the previous 3 per cent. Schools must randomly select work for each standard they assess. Moderators will also act as third umpires, with teachers able to refer "borderline" decisions _ for instance, when they are unsure whether work deserves an achieved or merit grade.
The standards review will address related concerns, including credit parity (ensuring credits for different topics involve roughly the same amount of work) and duplication of standards. This takes us into the arcane realms of unit standards (which generally relate to industry skills or polytechnic prerequisites) and achievement standards (for traditional curriculum subjects such as English and maths). But curriculum subjects can also be taken as unit standards, as the NCEA allows students to mix and match "pathways". Some standards are based on broadly similar content so it's possible to gain easy credits by taking similar topics. But duplication is most common between credits which are internally assessed and those gained externally.
Attempts to ensure credit parity follow concerns that some (mainly unit) standards are basic while others are far more demanding, but all are equal under NCEA. There's concern that credits towards a supported learning certificate, such as crossing the road or making a phone call, are open to all-comers. This fuels accusations that some schools artificially inflate their pass rates (particularly at levels 1 and 2) by designing programmes heavy with easy unit standards. Teachers counter that unit standards at advanced levels in, say, maths can be far tougher than achievement standards.
The review signals greater consistency. "In general, one credit should reflect a notional 10 hours of learning, practice and assessment for an average candidate," it says. (Notional learning time includes time spent in class learning, self-paced learning and practice).
To address duplication, it promises: "Any situation in which candidates can use credits from two standards that have substantial overlap ... needs to be addressed."
There's also the promise of more specific guidelines for teachers in assessing whether a student has reached the standard, and to distinguish between the four grades (not achieved, achieved, merit and excellence) available with achievement standards.
And the review will address concerns that some schools offer multiple resits and feedback to students who fail a standard or want to turn an achieved into a merit or excellence. "It is important that conditions of assessment provide national guidelines about authenticity strategies, including whether the assessment can be undertaken outside formal contact time with the assessor, and what limits on formative feedback and advice ... are necessary." Subject experts will review the standards.
Bali Haque, the NZQA's deputy chief executive qualifications, says reviewers will have to make some judgments about the levels of difficulty and amount of work to get parity across standards. He cites the example of a student needing the same number of credits to do level 3 calculus as a student learning to drive a forklift _ "but if you take a typical student's programme the credit parity issue would not be a huge one".
It's also possible that merit and excellence grades could be extended to unit standards, depending on their content. Credits for crossing the road or ordering food were "unlikely to warrant merit or excellence grades".
Employer groups Business NZ and the Northern Employers and Manufacturers Association say concerns about the robustness of qualifications are less of an issue among employers than perennial complaints about literacy, numeracy, technology skills and "work readiness". They have other areas of concern _ including the place of woodwork and metalwork in secondary schools _ but these are not NZQA's domain. Haque says the NCEA is gaining acceptance from students, teachers and principals but will remain a work in progress.
"We're a small economy and our most precious resource is students and education. We have to provide a qualification system which provides some flexibility for them.
"Clearly people want to see improvements but I suspect in 10 years they still will _ that's the way it should be."
PRINCIPALS' REPORT
It's scary that NCEA loopholes are being plugged six years after the first students passed or failed. But while strident NCEA critics officially welcome the review, some privately describe the changes as "rearranging the deckchairs".
Byron Bentley
Education Forum chairman, principal of Macleans College in Howick
The review is barely more than cosmetic and fails to address the qualification's fundamental weaknesses. These include inconsistencies in external exams, the need for additional grading scales and getting students back to learning whole subjects rather than just specific areas.
Lynda Reid
St Cuthberts College principal
It's timely to look at the comparability of achievement standards between subject areas and the relationship between unit and achievement standards.
While there will always be a margin for error, teacher judgments over time are much more accurate than external exams and retro moderating around exam performance.
Brent Lewis
Avondale College principal
The review is a positive step, but there's a long way to go to make the qualification simple, clear, coherent and fair. Variations in assessments are a serious concern but the moderation changes bring no guarantee that unfair results will be reversed.Relating credits to the time spent learning will not create consistency between, say, advanced physics as opposed to buying a burger."
Murray Black
Lynfield College deputy head
The review goes further than just responding to the familiar problem areas. The introduction of more specific guidance and parameters for teachers is welcome.
"To say `this standard could be achieved in these different ways' gives the opportunity for it to be more interesting and relevant to student needs."
Suggesting possible ways to assess against standards is another step forward. If carried through, the changes should give the NCEA more credibility with students and the community.
Gary Moore
Rutherford College principal
The review signals a more holistic approach to assessment, which should address concerns about capable students being marked down for missing one or two elements specified in the standard.
It should also help teachers to distinguish different levels of achievement. "Students and staff who have done their homework are getting pretty close to knowing what the prescribed standard should be and what's required to move through the different grade boundaries. People are starting to get a better understanding of the level of thinking and application required to move through."
