Auck College Of Ed: Stop undermining NCEA

Stop undermining NCEA

Political attacks on NCEA have gone too far, says Dr John Langley, Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Auckland, responding to Bill English’s recent statements and his latest volley at Cambridge High School.

“Bill English is one of an increasingly desperate rearguard stuck on one track about NCEA while the rest of the world moves on. Now he would somehow like us all to think that what has happened in Cambridge High School is typical of what is going on all over the country, because of an apparent ‘multitude of problems’ NCEA has”, says Dr Langley.

“He accuses Trevor Mallard of trying to prove political points - while naturally not doing any such thing himself! In fact he is doing untold damage to New Zealand’s teachers and schools through lumbering untargeted attacks on the qualification that his own Government supported.

“If he didn’t read it, I draw his attention to the article by a group of six Auckland principals of major secondary schools in the Herald on 2nd of September. The principals presented cogent and factual arguments about the standards of NCEA and its international standing.

“They demonstrated its acceptance overseas – one of the key criticisms often heard about NCEA and the reason some apparently enlightened educators prefer the Cambridge system.

“Under the old system’s nonsense of scaling, our country couldn’t claim any standards of performance for our young people that could be benchmarked against other countries. Now, at last, it can. And some overseas countries seem to be pleased.

“National’s education spokesman likes to make comments such as ‘NCEA assessment is not widely regarded as valid.’ By whom? The wide sector group support for NCEA mentioned in the school principals’ article would tend to indicate very wide endorsement of its validity.

“Again, to compare NCEA with the previous system, the three previous “qualifications” in 5th, 6th and 7th form not only lacked validity and accuracy within themselves, they bore no relation to each other. They were completely separate. There was no assessment relationship between what was done in any one and any other. On that measure alone NCEA is a distinct improvement.

“According to Mr English, students, parents and teachers ‘cannot have confidence in a system with no clear definition of achievement’.”

“Perhaps Mr English doesn’t really understand NCEA,” says Dr Langley.

“What constitutes achievement in each subject has never been clearer than it is under NCEA. The overriding principle of NCEA is that for the first time students, parents and teachers will be able to see exactly what has been achieved. Unless of course Mr English's comment is about questionning teachers' professional judgement.

“It is good that National says it will support any measures that ensure our students receive quality qualifications.

“On that note, I would like to challenge Mr English to heed the plea of the six school principals, who ask for the attacks to stop, and to support the young people for whom the NCEA is already a reality. Imagine how these young people must feel caught up in the political crossfire.

“Debates are definitely worthwhile, but one-track hyperbole only confuses and disheartens our young people and their parents. I wholeheartedly agree with the principals that it's time to look forward, constructively, for the sake of our children’s future.”

© Scoop Media