The NZ Herald reports on how students view the NCEA;
* "When you know you will pass anyway, why study? And after you have 80 credits there is no motivation to do better."
* "No need to try hard, no motivation to work hard. Can slack off for most of the year and still pass."
* "Higher achievers get the same amount of credits as the basic achievers - no incentive to gain higher marks."
* "I can look as good as someone who gets 100 per cent as long as I pass."
* "It encourages people to be average."
With two children who will go through this system this report is a real worry. One of them thrives on recognition - the other is more of a cruiser. It seems ridiculous that the NCEA system offers me more confidence that the second one will be all right but the first could struggle to stay motivated.
RANZ Update
2 hours ago
10 comments:
To be fair you probably need to hope that the former has another competitive soul in the same classes that keeps them on their toes.
The competition of striving to beat another person you can see is often better motivation than aiming for intangible marks.
That was the issue I found in my 7th form year - the "competition" had moved away so I just slacked off because I knew I'd get Dux anyway. The prospect of Bursary marks just wasnt the same motivation.
Indeed Lindsay you have reason to worry.
My two eldest (both girls) are going thru this system now.
What really made me spit was the second one was decided not to do Physics or Chemistry because these subjects are hard to gain acheivement in and even harder to gain excellence in.
She chose to cruise
And now to tell the truth its hard to motivate this one into even going to school since she is bored out of her skull.
She easily met acheived on her NCEA level ones last year and in fact had 5 excellences. She is cruising this year and almost certainly will get her "acheiveds" with little effort.
But the process will not have been a good life lesson for her, rather a lesson on how to take the easy way. And in the process her love of learning has died.
The whole thing is a dog's breakfast designed to stop people failing but crushing academic excellence in the process.
Andrei, By way of reassurance I was a "cruiser" at college. Bored, restless, truant. Didn't get Sixth Form certificate because I hadn't completed the syllabus. Crammed at the last minute to get four mediocre UE subject passes. For some it might go hand-in-hand with being a teenager. I know it's a real worry for you but her attitude is almost certainly temporary. Fortunately in the real world there is a correlation between effort and achievement.
I'm not that worried, Lindsay, the daughter in question has a remarkable talent for getting what she wants.
I am disappointed though that Science, one of her top subjects has fallen by the wayside and in a way she was discouraged to continue with it, in part because it would require more effort on her part than subjects such as design and fabrics? do with probably less short term reward.
This is even more extraordinary given the blather we hear from the gender warriors about women not going into the sciences.
Still what can a poor father do but his best and continue to support and encourage whatever a child undertakes.
What I saw on a recent course, was that us older chaps stay on and worked away at a closed-book assessment, while the younger ones just answered the easy stuff and walked out.
Why try- you can do it open book next time!
I've heard similar things said about earlier examination systems. NCEA is infinitely preferable to the School Certificate approach which ensures 50% fail regardless of how motivated, informed or capable they are. The NCEA needs to be improved, sure, but tell me when high school students have ever said anything positive about examinations?
backin15 - School Cert and Bursary both used scaling, but not necessarily to the point which 50% fail.
Either way your argument is about the fairness of scaling - not the fairness of exams or the actual assessment methodology.
iiq; you've no idea what you're talking about huh? School C and UB were designed for an entirely different labour market; where kids that didn't get School C went and got apprenticeships and the others went on to UB and university. Scaling applied before School C, in 3rd and 4th form, ask anyone who taught in those days.
backin15;
I'm really not sure what your point was in your final post;
When it was designed is actually irrelevant, if an old design operates better than a new one - it is still better.
That scaling was also performed on internal assesments as well as the 5th / 7th form external assesments is still a query around scaling - not the exam methodology.
The interesting point that I found while the whole revamp was being put in place was actually the question around who thought 6th form was a good idea? Generally that was thought of to be the worst form (from 3rd through 7th) for:
Learning outcomes for students
Destroying student motivation
Lack of measurable results
and yet it is the closest to what we are now subjecting our kids to for the entirety of their schooling career.
Sorry, I suppose I should at least post some statistics to back up the student motivation claim since they exist:
http://www.socialreport.msd.govt.nz/2001/knowledge-skills/knowledge-skills.shtml
Note that in terms of % of school leavers ~19.5% leave after bursary, but ~46.5% left after 6th form certificate. Nice attrition rate.
Post a Comment