Darr said schools needed other options for assessing literacy and numeracy and meeting the requirements should not be a prerequisite for receiving an NCEA qualification.

Literacy and numeracy could be a separate qualification, or they could be included in the NCEA certificates in the same manner that standards from other subjects were included.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HappyPig@lemmy.nz 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The main issue NCEA was trying to solve was that these exams severely hindered certain students. Many students have all these skills and can demonstrate them, just not in a test environment. Standardized tests lead to an emphasis on teaching the test and how to pass instead of the actual skills. As an example my son has ADHD is very bright and an excellent reader, but it will be probably years of work to get him to successfully sit an exam or test. Whereas other forms of assessment could easily pass him right now. He has many skills, how important is it that he's able to sit quietly and write answers on a sheet within a time period?

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 3 points 11 months ago

I think tests simulate a lot of work environments; big project - months or years of work, has a specific deadline. Annual shuts on industrial sites, consulting type jobs.

But it isn't great for lots of students.

NCEA style internal assessment simulates a more regular type of work; show up - do good work most days and you'll be fine. Office job style.

But it isn't great for lots of students.

It is difficult to cater to all, when we use methods that favour specific people.