ERO warned that it might be time to scrap the first year of the national school qualification altogether. Photo: 123RF
The Education Review Office (ERO) has panned the revised version of NCEA Level 1 that was introduced only this year.
In a report published on Tuesday it called for another overhaul and warned that it might be time to scrap the first year of the national school qualification altogether.
Level 1 was not fair or reliable and that its recommendations for change were critically important, the report said.
Govt needs to consider dropping NCEA level one: ERO
"NCEA Level 1 difficulty varies between subjects and schools, which means that students have different amounts of work and different chances of achieving. Three-quarters of school leaders told us that credit values are not a reliable indicator of how much work is required. Last year, students were almost twice as likely to achieve an excellence grade on an internal assessment than an external assessment," ERO head of assessment Ruth Shinoda said.
"NCEA Level 1 is not working and needs substantial reform. We need to first consider NCEA levels 1, 2 and 3 together and decide if we want assessment across all three years - most other countries do not have that. We then need to decide if we drop NCEA Level 1 entirely, make it a foundational qualification, or make it more challenging to better prepare students for Levels 2 and 3," she said.
"If we keep NCEA Level 1, we need to reduce flexibility so there is more consistency, and students don't miss out on key knowledge, and reduce variability so different subjects and assessments are an equal amount of work and difficulty. We also need to make sure that students keep studying for the full year."
The future of Level 1 has been debated for some time.
It is the sole qualification for a minority of school leavers, about 11 percent last year, and while some schools see it as a method of crowd control others say their students need it as practice for the more important NCEA level 2.
More than a quarter of schools, mostly in high socio-economic areas, would not offer level 1 next year preferring to concentrate on levels 2 and 3, the report said
This year the qualification changed so that each subject had only four achievement standards, each worth five credits rather than the usual three credits, with the aim of ensuring greater breadth in student learning and less cherry-picking of easy standards.
In each subject, two of the achievement standards were externally assessed and two internally assessed.
Students had to achieve 60 credits and a further 20 in literacy and numeracy (the literacy and numeracy co-requisite) in order to receive the Level 1 qualification.
Earlier this year some principals told RNZ the new standards were too large and difficult for some students.
Students who might have achieved their credits through several smaller standards were now not achieving any at all, they said.
But other principals said fewer, larger standards allowed more time for teaching with less spent on assessment.
A stepping-stone qualification
The ERO report said students and families mostly valued Level 1 as a stepping stone to Level 2 and employers valued other skills and attributes over Level 1.
In some subjects many teachers did not believe Level 1 standards prepared students for Level 2, the report said.
Level 1 did not motivate most students, did not stretch the most academically able, and did not have clear vocational pathways for those aiming for careers in the trades, it said.
The report said in some subjects many teachers did not believe Level 1 standards prepared students for Level 2. Photo: Supplied
The report called for immediate changes including ditching submitted reports as a form of assessment because of the high risk of cheating, and ensuring achievement standards were of equal difficulty.
It also said the use of specific English and maths standards as an alternative to new online literacy and numeracy tests should be extended.
In the longer term, the report recommended the government decide what Level 1 was for.
It should either drop it entirely, target it as a foundational qualification, or make it more challenging to better prepare students for NCEA Level 2, it said.
Other changes should reduce flexibility in the system and variability between credits, retain fewer, larger standards but put more weight on assessments later in the year.
The review office also recommended strengthening vocational options and developing better vocational pathways.
The government should also reduce flexibility in other levels of the NCEA qualification and decide on the model for all three levels, the report said.
"To improve the quality and credibility of NCEA, it is critically important to act on these findings and recommendations," it said.
'Students are leaving because they're not achieving success'
The report was based on survey responses from 1435 teachers, 254 school leaders, 2376 Year 11 students, 1675 family of Year 11 students, and 102 employers.
ERO also conducted interviews and focus groups with teachers and students.
The report included comments from the interviewees.
"Some of our students leave school and NCEA Level 1 is their only qualification. So, if we take NCEA Level 1 away, that could be problematic for some of them," a teacher said.
"Eighty percent of our students stay until the end of Year 13. By the time they got to the end of their journey, they are well over-assessed," a school principal said.
"It's Level 2 that matters. I had a friend that left with Level 1. And it's been such a struggle for her to get to where she wants to do next," a student told the review office.
"We used to do three standards in Maths, which we covered in a term and a half, and they were worth 10 credits. Now, we took these three standards and collapsed them into one standard which is worth five credits," a maths teacher said of the revised level 1 standards.
"Our kids will be motivated if they're achieving. If they're not achieving, they will 100 percent switch off and we will never get them through. And there will be some kids now that won't get through because they just haven't experienced any success of any kind in any of their classes," a school principal said.
"I think NCEA Level 1 is a good push for our students [who] are very capable but a bit lazy," another principal said.
"Students are leaving because they're not achieving success," said another.
"NCEA Level 1 has been like hell for me. Many of my friends are saying, 'If I don't pass I will drop out of school', or stressing about failing and repeating due to the new NCEA Level system," one student told the report's authors.
"My son has achieved the numeracy and reading co-requisite but not the writing one as yet. This is hugely stressful for him and has caused him to hate English as a subject, causing more issues for his learning/achieving," a parent said.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.