The question has been criticised by numerous teachers including a head teacher at a top all-boys school, who said it was outside the scope of students’ learning.
The teacher said the question has a “curriculum level 8 Achievement Objective,” so it is outside of the NZ Curriculum Level 7 Achievement Objectives being assessed.
The teacher, who has lodged a formal complaint to the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA), said the question had not only thrown students but those who attempted to answer it had wasted valuable time and had their confidence knocked.
“NZQA can defend their processes as much as they like but this question is clearly beyond the scope of this standard and therefore it can not be asked,” the head teacher said.
“This is not a simple mistake. This is an example of their processes not working at all.”
The teacher said one of the checks undertaken was that an assessment meets the requirements and specifications of the standard at achieved, merit and excellence levels.
“Clearly this process has failed in this instance.”
A petition of complaint to NZQA after the maths exam and a problematic level 2 biology paper has received close to 2000 signatures.
In addition to the petition, Jann Marshall from NZQA said there had been seven formally registered complaints about the level 2 maths exam and two relating to the biology one.
NZQA stated about 38,000 students were entered for Level 2 Mathematics and Statistics, and around 17,000 students were entered for Level 2 Biology.
“Excellence level achievement for biology requires the demonstration of comprehensive understanding and for Maths extended abstract thinking.”
Marshall said questions at the Excellence level “may contain unfamiliar contexts to which students are expected to apply their foundational subject knowledge”.
So what was the issue with the question?
The specific achievement objective for this question is ‘M7-10′ which is to apply differentiation and anti-differentiation techniques to polynomials.
The problem with the question is that the highlighted line of working (highlighted in yellow below) must be differentiated in the next step - but it is not a “polynomial” as one of the exponents is negative.
The differentiation of functions with negative exponents is a curriculum level 8 Achievement Objective so it is outside the scope of the standard.
The teacher's workings highlighted above reveal the scope was outside the level 2 excellence student capabilities. Image supplied
The teacher said NZQA needed to go further than just mark the question correct.
“Students who attempted this question in the first 15 minutes of their exam would have been impacted for the rest of their three-hour exam,” the teacher said.
“Loss of confidence in maths is a really big deal. Students start second guessing themselves leading to more and more mistakes being made.”
The teacher called for NZQA to allow Level 2 Maths students to use their derived grade results if they were higher than their external result.
More than 1500 parents, students and teachers have signed a petition calling for consistency and clear questioning in NCEA exams.
But Jann Marshall from NZQA said derived grades were designed “to support students in situations such as illness, the bereavement of a close family member, or a natural disaster.”
“As we have previously noted, in the very rare instance that the design of a question disadvantages students, marking panels are instructed to calibrate their marking accordingly.”
Thelevel 2 biology exam held on the same day also came under fire from students and teachers for similar reasons.
Bernard Potter, head of science at Diocesan School for Girls in Auckland, said teachers were “unhappy” with parts of the level 2 biology exam comparing the stability of the mRNA molecule to the tRNA molecule.
“Students were flummoxed,” he said. “Some attempted to answer the question, others left it blank. It caused anxiety amongst the students and frustration for the teachers.”
Other teachers agreed and students accused NZQA of being “abstruse” with students trying to decipher what was actually being asked rather than just answering a clear question.
A question about sex-linked genes in cats was described as confusing and poorly written, with students unsure of what was actually being asked.
“The hardest part of every exam is decoding what they really want from you,” one top student said.
“There is a complete lack of clarity with the language that NZQA uses.”
Kirsty Wynn is an Auckland-based journalist with more than 20 years’ experience in New Zealand newsrooms. She has covered everything from crime, social issues, and education, to the property market and consumer affairs.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
