Hepcat
09-04-2006, 11:19
Ok now that I have an internet connection again, I will tell of the biggest stuff up of the New Zealand government since the Influenza Epidemic.
NCEA - National Certificate of Educational Achievement
That is New Zealand's newly enacted education system, completely concieved from scratch so the first few years were really just an experement, regardless of the number of students credentials that had been ruined. I thought I would attempt to explain it to some of the people here to get their views on the system. If you have any questions I should be able to answer them.
I, fortunately, wasn't at High School for the first few hectic years where the teachers where just as lost about the system as the students. The object of the new system was to get more people passing, and to make it less obvious who excelled and who didn't. When you get your results for a second you believe you have passed everything, until you notice that there are some missing.
Yes that is right, they don't tell you about the papers you have failed! This is a positive system that doesn't believe in any bad results. It is alright for the lower level students but often the smarter students are held back.
There are 3 levels of achievement in NCEA with very creative names:
Level 1: This is in your 3rd year at high school and is piss easy. They dumbed it down a lot so that anybody can pass it.
Level 2: This is during your 4th year (even if you fail to achieve level 1) and anything you pass in this year can be used to pass Level 1 if you didn't the year before. It hasn't changed much from the initial system so there is a huge leap between level 1 & level 2.
Level 3: This is during your final year and is the next step up from level 2.
The whole system isn't anything conventional, it uses CREDITS. You need a certain amount of credits to pass each level and you can get them from external exams (which are end of year exams that are sent off to Wellington to be marked) or from internal assessments which are things you do in class and are marked by your teacher.
You don't get a percentage mark, oh no, that is far too critical for the students and encourages rivalries, you get Not Achieved (NA) (fail), Achieved (A) (pass), Merit (M) (pass) or Excellence (E) (pass).
What is the difference I hear you ask. In an assessment or exam there are Achievement Merit and Excellence questions. If you get a certain number of Achievement questions right then you pass and get all the credits for that paper. If you get a certain amount of merit and achieved then you get merit, if you get a certain amount of achieved merit and excellence then you get excellence.
Now here is the stupid part, if I didn't get enough merit yet got enough excellence and achieved questions then I get Achieved, the same as the person who didn't even try and answer the merit or excellence, so on paper we are of equal ability, because the new system doesn't promote percentages :wall:.
I did Cambridge International Exams to get something more than NCEA so that I can get a qualifications which actually carries some weight OUTSIDE of New Zealand (though NCEA has very little credibility within New Zealand). The media take great glee in portraying the system as flawed and corrupt.
There was a huge scandal last year when the Cambridge (in New Zealand) High School was cheating the system and claimed a 100% pass rate with NCEA.
Then there is the grade point average which has inflamed all the Maths teachers. They average out your mark (of NA, A, M or E) depending on all the assessments that you have DONE and then claim that this has some meaning. It means that if I did 5 assessments and got E E E M M then I would have a grade point average of M, yet the person who did 1 paper and just didn't do the others and got E would have a grade point average of E.
DOES THIS MEAN THAT THEY ARE SMARTER THAN ME?!?!?!?!
The New Zealand education system is in a big mess right now and I am stuck with it. It is all part of their plot to modernise everything. Sorry about the length but that is a very brief explanation about it, I will gladly answer any questions. I say that they should have used a more orthodox system and WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE MARKING LINGO, WHAT IS WRONG WITH PERCENTAGES!!!
NCEA - National Certificate of Educational Achievement
That is New Zealand's newly enacted education system, completely concieved from scratch so the first few years were really just an experement, regardless of the number of students credentials that had been ruined. I thought I would attempt to explain it to some of the people here to get their views on the system. If you have any questions I should be able to answer them.
I, fortunately, wasn't at High School for the first few hectic years where the teachers where just as lost about the system as the students. The object of the new system was to get more people passing, and to make it less obvious who excelled and who didn't. When you get your results for a second you believe you have passed everything, until you notice that there are some missing.
Yes that is right, they don't tell you about the papers you have failed! This is a positive system that doesn't believe in any bad results. It is alright for the lower level students but often the smarter students are held back.
There are 3 levels of achievement in NCEA with very creative names:
Level 1: This is in your 3rd year at high school and is piss easy. They dumbed it down a lot so that anybody can pass it.
Level 2: This is during your 4th year (even if you fail to achieve level 1) and anything you pass in this year can be used to pass Level 1 if you didn't the year before. It hasn't changed much from the initial system so there is a huge leap between level 1 & level 2.
Level 3: This is during your final year and is the next step up from level 2.
The whole system isn't anything conventional, it uses CREDITS. You need a certain amount of credits to pass each level and you can get them from external exams (which are end of year exams that are sent off to Wellington to be marked) or from internal assessments which are things you do in class and are marked by your teacher.
You don't get a percentage mark, oh no, that is far too critical for the students and encourages rivalries, you get Not Achieved (NA) (fail), Achieved (A) (pass), Merit (M) (pass) or Excellence (E) (pass).
What is the difference I hear you ask. In an assessment or exam there are Achievement Merit and Excellence questions. If you get a certain number of Achievement questions right then you pass and get all the credits for that paper. If you get a certain amount of merit and achieved then you get merit, if you get a certain amount of achieved merit and excellence then you get excellence.
Now here is the stupid part, if I didn't get enough merit yet got enough excellence and achieved questions then I get Achieved, the same as the person who didn't even try and answer the merit or excellence, so on paper we are of equal ability, because the new system doesn't promote percentages :wall:.
I did Cambridge International Exams to get something more than NCEA so that I can get a qualifications which actually carries some weight OUTSIDE of New Zealand (though NCEA has very little credibility within New Zealand). The media take great glee in portraying the system as flawed and corrupt.
There was a huge scandal last year when the Cambridge (in New Zealand) High School was cheating the system and claimed a 100% pass rate with NCEA.
Then there is the grade point average which has inflamed all the Maths teachers. They average out your mark (of NA, A, M or E) depending on all the assessments that you have DONE and then claim that this has some meaning. It means that if I did 5 assessments and got E E E M M then I would have a grade point average of M, yet the person who did 1 paper and just didn't do the others and got E would have a grade point average of E.
DOES THIS MEAN THAT THEY ARE SMARTER THAN ME?!?!?!?!
The New Zealand education system is in a big mess right now and I am stuck with it. It is all part of their plot to modernise everything. Sorry about the length but that is a very brief explanation about it, I will gladly answer any questions. I say that they should have used a more orthodox system and WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE MARKING LINGO, WHAT IS WRONG WITH PERCENTAGES!!!