PDA

View Full Version : NCEA - National Certificate of Educational Achievement



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!!!

Ja'chyra
09-04-2006, 15:02
Sounds a bit like PC gone mad once again. Over here we aren't even allowed competition in schools so instead of winners and losers we have winners and second winners.


This is a positive system that doesn't believe in any bad results

Sounds familiar.

It would seem to be though there isn't much point in putting any effort in as you can't fail.

doc_bean
09-04-2006, 15:49
bad idea, people need to learn to deal with failure/losing/disappointment or they won't grow up to be balanced adults.

This whole "everybody is a winner thing" is going out of control...

Hepcat
09-04-2006, 20:47
And I also forgot to mention that if you get a Not Achieved in an assessment then they tell you what you did wrong and you can go and fix it up and pass.

Last year in Level 1 I had so many credits that I didn't even need to sit the end of year exams to pass, but my parents forced me too because they don't understand how it works. This year my class (and me) are extremely lazy just because we don't need to try for anything above an Achieved to get the credits to pass. I know that isn't such a good thing but what do they expect with the way the system works.

Scurvy
09-04-2006, 21:48
the problem the government have in the uk, is that if the results get better they get critisized for making the exmas easier, but if the results get worse thay get critisized for failing to improve education....

I dont quite get the credits system or the explanation of how the grades work, but im guessing it allows everyone to achieve a grade they can claim the whole country is being "educated" - do you think the system would work if it also showed percentages (ie. you get a grade and a %)

macsen rufus
09-05-2006, 15:06
DOES THIS MEAN THAT THEY ARE SMARTER THAN ME?!?!?!?!

OF COURSE!! -- They got more reward for less effort :juggle2:

But seriously, this sounds like one screwed up system. Who is it supposed to help? Seems like employers will be confused, higher education will be confused, even the students will be confused.

Give me straight percentages any day, then if you have to make silly names for it put it in brackets afterwards (eg 80% (Merit), 99% (Smartass), 100% (Cheat!) and not to forget the 30% (Thick as pigs..t)

It's a while since I took my A-levels, but I took it as a very disturbing sign that they had to introduce an "A-star" grade to distinguish from the bog-standard A. It's not so much that standards are slipping, as that they're constantly changing, you can barely compare one year to the next, never mind over a generation. Scurvy has it right though - the govt can't win in this argument, you're either dropping standards or failing to educate whichever way the results go!

Actually I'd prefer results expressed statistically, so it can be said that you are at median, or so many standard deviations above or below it. One look will show that, for instance, only 5% of the population are as bad at maths as little Johnny, or Jemima is in the top 2% of biologists this year. Genius and gormlessness should be equal -- equally exposed, that is!

Duke Malcolm
09-05-2006, 16:32
It's a while since I took my A-levels, but I took it as a very disturbing sign that they had to introduce an "A-star" grade to distinguish from the bog-standard A. It's not so much that standards are slipping, as that they're constantly changing, you can barely compare one year to the next, never mind over a generation. Scurvy has it right though - the govt can't win in this argument, you're either dropping standards or failing to educate whichever way the results go!

Indeed, This whole A-level business is troubling for us Scots, becuause the Medical Schools have all introduced various tests for applicants because so many people were applying with A and A-star at A-level. There is not so much of a problem with the Scottish Advanced Highers.

Scurvy
09-05-2006, 16:38
im doing my A-levels in 2 years time and we'v been told that 2A's and B is enoguh to get into a decent university (thats ignoring AS lvl points etc.)