| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 79221 | 2007-05-12 22:17:00 | What is the NZQA thinking... | somebody (208) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 549373 | 2007-05-13 11:10:00 | The same people would still be in charge of writing the exams and deciding things like what sort of calculators are acceptable etc, so I don't know that would achieve anything. NCEA is very simple to understand, and is actually very similar to how university is structured (I can't comment on school C etc because I don't know the details). Each subject is broken down into three levels (level 1,2,3 vs stage 1,2,3), each subject has a small amount of internal assessment (assuming we are talking traditional subjects like English, Calculus, History, Chemistry etc) and an end of year exam (similar to having assignments and essays and an exam at university) and your final grade for each subject is a letter (A,M,E vs A+, A, A-, B+ ... C-). Pretty similar, although with many flaws that need to be addressed such as not listing failed grades, using AME for every single aspect of each assessment instead of just the final grade, and not having the equivalents of +'s and -'s (ie. just three possible grades). If they could fix all that up, then there would be very few flaws left. Most of the other issues would happen regardless of whether it was NCEA or not (ie. NZQA would still be deciding to do stupid things like allow text message language in essays).:2cents: Yeah the grading is very confusing. It all seems to be very PC, where they don't like telling people that they have failed you. I mean what is wrong with the good old A, B , C, for pass and D , E, F for fail. I do now recall that bursary did have a bit of internal assessment in it. I don't think School C did at all. |
rogerp (6864) | ||
| 549374 | 2007-05-13 11:27:00 | NCEA is very simple to understand, and is actually very similar to how university is structured (I can't comment on school C etc because I don't know the details). Each subject is broken down into three levels (level 1,2,3 vs stage 1,2,3), each subject has a small amount of internal assessment (assuming we are talking traditional subjects like English, Calculus, History, Chemistry etc) and an end of year exam (similar to having assignments and essays and an exam at university) and your final grade for each subject is a letter (A,M,E vs A+, A, A-, B+ ... C-). Biggest load of bull**** I ever heard. When I finish a year at uni, I get a report with 8 different grades on it - one for each paper I took. When I finished a year at school, I get a report with almost 50 separate grades on it, for only 6 subjects. Now I don't know about you, but in my eyes this is far from similar. |
roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 549375 | 2007-05-13 11:29:00 | I do now recall that bursary did have a bit of internal assessment in it. I don't think School C did at all. Yes School C did. Maths, for example, was 100% internally assessed at my school for School C. The key difference doesn't lie with the distribution of internal and external assessments, it's more about the breakdown of the subjects into multiple standards. |
roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 549376 | 2007-05-13 19:45:00 | This is pathetic. Rich students who can spend $475 on a calculator will have a massive, massive advantage over everybody else, while not learning anything :(. In every decent test, mostly before NCEA though, marks are given for the process, and marks for the answer. Using a calculator isn't a maths process that deserves marks. What year are you qazwsxokmijn? I'm in Year 13 and I totally agree with you. But after years on NCEA I've grown used to it, and that's bad! I did Cambridge A-level maths last year (because I did Year 12 maths a year early) and it made me realise how much better I would have learned if they never introduced NCEA. Yr13. And compared to what I'd be taught back in my country, I'd be in year 10. |
qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 549377 | 2007-05-13 23:19:00 | The same people would still be in charge of writing the exams and deciding things like what sort of calculators are acceptable etc, so I don't know that would achieve anything. NCEA is very simple to understand, and is actually very similar to how university is structured (I can't comment on school C etc because I don't know the details). Each subject is broken down into three levels (level 1,2,3 vs stage 1,2,3), each subject has a small amount of internal assessment (assuming we are talking traditional subjects like English, Calculus, History, Chemistry etc) and an end of year exam (similar to having assignments and essays and an exam at university) and your final grade for each subject is a letter (A,M,E vs A+, A, A-, B+ ... C-). Pretty similar, although with many flaws that need to be addressed such as not listing failed grades, using AME for every single aspect of each assessment instead of just the final grade, and not having the equivalents of +'s and -'s (ie. just three possible grades). If they could fix all that up, then there would be very few flaws left. Most of the other issues would happen regardless of whether it was NCEA or not (ie. NZQA would still be deciding to do stupid things like allow text message language in essays).:2cents: Your suggestions for improving NCEA are great --- but they go completely against the idea of NCEA. I think that the founder(s) of NCEA don't want people to be able to say, ever, that one student got a better Merit than another. They want to say that both students got Merit, therefore both students fulfill the Merit criteria for being able to do what they were assessed on, and should be equally employable. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 549378 | 2007-05-14 01:15:00 | Yes School C did. Maths, for example, was 100% internally assessed at my school for School C. The key difference doesn't lie with the distribution of internal and external assessments, it's more about the breakdown of the subjects into multiple standards. School C maths at my school was 100% an external exam, held at the end of the year. |
robbyp (2751) | ||
| 549379 | 2007-05-14 02:08:00 | School C maths at my school was 100% an external exam, held at the end of the year. Cool. |
roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 549380 | 2007-05-14 05:40:00 | When I finish a year at uni, I get a report with 8 different grades on it - one for each paper I took. When I finished a year at school, I get a report with almost 50 separate grades on it, for only 6 subjects. Now I don't know about you, but in my eyes this is far from similar.That doesn't make it dissimilar though. It just means there are more marks, so it takes a little longer to read, but it isn't totally different (in terms of the concept of splitting a subject into different pieces and not having the final grade based just on an exam). The final results print out is a bit of a mess. The solution is to keep your interim results notices and then you have everything set out very clearly. I'm by no means suggesting NCEA is perfect, all I'm saying is that it isn't quite as bad as many people make out. :) |
maccrazy (6741) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||