Authority to look into fluctuations in other NCEA results

The Qualifications Authority will investigate NCEA exam results at levels 1 and 2 where "significant variability" has been found.

Brent Lewis, president of the Auckland Secondary Principals Association, yesterday described news of the review as "death by a thousand cuts".

But authority chief executive Karen Van Rooyen insisted that it was standard practice to check a sample of results each year, and the variability was as expected.

"We are checking to see if any adjustments are required for 2005, but there is nothing special in that, and this kind of work takes place every year," said Ms Van Rooyen.

Investigations are under way into why so few people gained scholarships.

But the NZQA has also come under fire for a "lotto" at levels 1 and 2 - or years 11 and 12, the former fifth and sixth forms.

The review involves 20 of the 233 standards, where the results have varied by more than 20 per cent on last year. It includes accounting, music, biology, science and English at both levels, level 1 drama and chemistry, and level 2 art history and graphics and design.

The largest variable is an information technology exam at level 1, which just a quarter of last year's students passed compared with more than half in 2003.

Ms Van Rooyen said there were a number of possible reasons for the variability, including planned reviews of standards, different exams, and changes in who sat the exams in terms of numbers and their abilities.

"In this case, of the 20 that we are looking at, a number show significant changes in the numbers of students sitting the exams," she said.

"As a result, it's likely that the aggregate ability of the students changed and therefore achievement rates changed."

Mr Lewis said the authority was admitting problems - but slowly so it could claim to be dealing with them.

"Fundamentally, what we are getting is an admission that the variability that everyone is so worried about exists at other levels when they [NZQA] said there was not a problem," said Mr Lewis.

The Avondale College principal also suggested a difference in results of less than 20 per cent would still rank as significantly variable.

The National Party's education spokesman Bill English said in a statement that there was "a huge gap between the NZQA's theoretically perfect NCEA and the real world of parents, students and teachers, where inconsistency in results is seen as unfair and potentially damaging".

Even teachers who generally support the NCEA were losing confidence due to inconsistencies in NCEA standards and assessments, Mr English said.

Testing times

Five reviews are now under way into the school examination system and its controlling body, NZQA (New Zealand Qualifications Authority). They are:

* A review of the Qualifications Authority's performance (State Services Commission, deadline July 31)

* An investigation into the 2004 scholarship exams (State Services Commission, deadline April 29)

* An inquiry to check whether this year's scholarship exams are on track (Education experts, deadline Monday, March 7)

* An NZQA investigation of variable NCEA exam results at levels 1 and 2 .

* An internal NZQA review to determine why Trevor Mallard was not alerted to the scholarship problem sooner.