NCEA criticisms unfair and counterproductive

13 December 2005

NCEA criticisms unfair and counterproductive

The current criticism of NCEA marking processes is destructive and ill-founded according to Don McLeod, chair of the Secondary Principals Council of New Zealand (SPCNZ).

“The Secondary Principals’ Council is of the view that NZQA is in fact doing exactly what it was asked to do to avoid a repeat of the 2004 problems,” he said.

“After last year's exams various enquiries and reviews required that there be stringent checking processes this year before the final submission of marks.

“This was to avoid a repetition of the wide variability in results that almost everyone found unacceptable last year.

“To criticise NZQA now for carrying out those checking procedures is totally unfair.”

McLeod said that NZSPC believed that the system had integrity, that the required improvements were being made, and that students and the public could have faith in 2005 outcomes.

“While there will always be ways in which the developing systems can be improved, it is totally inappropriate to raise concerns at this time when the exams are barely finished, and the checking processes are still being applied.

“We would be incredibly angry if 2006 results showed that no action had been taken, and clearly that is not the case.

“Let's get off NZQA's back, stop making political capital from a problem that doesn't exist, and let NZQA get on with the job they must do to ensure fair and credible results for the students of 2005.”

ENDS

© Scoop Media