English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:630;Page:2685] 
5.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What evidence has he received that supports his official’s statements that the NCEA process ensures “results are consistent and fair”? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 The National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) national statistics released 3 weeks ago demonstrated the fairness and consistency of NCEA results in 2005. They show that over 70 percent of the results of the 335 external standards were within expected ranges. Where they fell outside those expected ranges the marking schedules were checked to ensure fairness and consistency and in a small number of standards exams were re-marked to ensure no student was treated anything other than fairly. 
Hon Bill English 
: Is the Minister aware that the evidence he has described is not regarded by assessment experts as giving any reliable assessment of the fairness of the exam; and can he tell us whether the New Zealand Qualifications Authority has any evidence that uses internationally standard measures of fairness and reliability and measurement of error? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Because the member never provides names of anybody I assume he may be referring to Warwick Elley who said that 40 out of 140 standards in 10 subjects had variable failure results. I just want to assure the member that the New Zealand Qualifications Authority disagrees with Professor Elley and will be publishing a response to him in the next few weeks. In relation to whether we can talk about issues that the member often raises around I think a view that NCEA ought to be norm referenced no we do not have that kind of reliability. But we do rely of course on the fact that we have a very professional group of teachers who are setting and examining these results and as we are able to develop over time the body of information that we get from the national statistics—which were released just 3 weeks ago—we will get a very reliable picture of NCEA. 
Moana Mackey 
: What else did the NCEA 2005 exam statistics show? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The national statistics show that more students than ever are gaining qualifications: 72.5 percent of students achieved the level 1 literacy standard which is up from 69 percent in 2004; 78.8 percent achieved the level 1 numeracy standard which is up from 75.7 percent in 2004; the percentage of year 11 students on the school roll achieving level 1 NCEA went up from 52.5 percent; to 56.4 percent. The number of Maori and Pacific Island students leaving school without qualifications has fallen by 10 percent in the last 2 years and of course the New Zealand Qualifications Authority put in place improved processes to ensure consistency and fairness so that we had an exam season without drama except for the drama brought up by Bill English. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: What is the nature of the research currently being undertaken by the Ministry of Education into the motivational effects of NCEA on students and when will the results of this research be made public? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: We do have to look at the issue of how students view NCEA and research has already been released around this which is largely just the views expressed to researchers by students. A more reliable picture will build up in July this year when research that is being undertaken by the Ministry of Education will be released on student motivation and that will be used by us as we go forward and look at what students are choosing to do. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why has the New Zealand Qualifications Authority decided that results in NCEA can fluctuate by up to 10 percent per year whereas every other test applied to New Zealand children whether by New Zealand agencies or overseas ones has a variation of a maximum 2 to 3 percent per year and can he explain to the House why the authority’s standards are so completely different from those used by every other testing regime? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: One of the things about the history of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority’s work with NCEA is of course too much variability. But one pleasing thing this year is that we have seen much less variation so that every assessment expert whom we have had available to us including people like John Hattie who has been part of the ministerial reference group has said that this year the variation is fine. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister explain a geography standard on country development where 1250 students passed the standard out of 5000 who sat it but if those students had sat the standard last year another 1000 would have passed and how fair is that to those 1000 students? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Accepting the point I made before that one of the admitted problems of NCEA historically has been its variation—which this year pleasingly has been brought within bounds that people accept is fine—I tell the member that one of the things he has to remember is that this— 
Hon Bill English 
: That is wrong. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
:—would the member be quiet for just a tick—is a standards-based system. Standards are set each year and the standards this year were set in a way that people regard is fine and the variation is fine. 
Allan Peachey 
: What evidence-based explanation can the Minister of Education give the House to explain why in the 2005 NCEA assessments failure rates fell outside the New Zealand Qualifications Authority’s expected levels in 47 of the standards? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The member may not have been listening to my answer to the original question from Bill English when I pointed out to Mr English that for 70 percent of the 335 standards things have gone exactly as we would have expected. For some of the standards the marking schedule was checked to make sure of fairness and consistency and in some cases exams were re-marked so that we got fairness and consistency. 
Allan Peachey 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. My question asked for an explanation not for an excuse. Please can I have an explanation. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister addressed the question quite fully. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister explain why in two geometry standards also taken by thousands of students there were 2000 more failures in each of these standards this year compared with last year when international testing of similar tasks shows no change in the achievement of students in geometry and why NCEA allows thousands more students to fail when international testing shows the students are just as able this year as they were last year? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Of course this is one of the things one cannot do—the member is once again preferring his norm-referenced approach to exams over a standards-based approach and wants me to compare a standards-based system with a norm-referenced one overseas. But accepting that and accepting that the member prefers norm referencing to a standards-based system and a comparison cannot made can he also accept that I have explained that in the recent history of NCEA there has been variation in the setting of the standards but this year we have made a major step forward in that way. Can I also point out to the member that one of the real strengths of this system is its transparency. Students in this country even get their exam script back so that if they do not think it is fair they can go back and have it looked at again—as many of them have done.