Sorry “kids”, I don’t always know why you got a low mark or Not Achieved

I sent the following email to a number of my 2017 Level 2 Digital technology students. Pass rates were lower than expected and unfortunately, in some individual cases, I don’t  know why as there is no marking schedule returned to each student… (although the portfolios are albeit with no feedback)

Anyways as a result of this and some lower than expected Level 1 marks quite a few students have become despondent and will not be attempting an external portfolio this year.

——————————————————————

Hi All

I have been in contact with some of you regarding the DT200 external portfolio assessment results. I know some of you are disappointed with your results…

Firstly, the same content was made available to all students – as per previous years, and the assessment criteria have remained the same. 

The pass rates are generally in line with those that NZQA expects from a nationwide perspective ie 25-33% NA, 34-41% A, 18-25% M and 10-15% E. In previous years our pass rates have been over 90%. hence lower pass rates inevitably disappoint.

Unfortunately, you do not get copies of your marking schedule (neither do I), however, your portfolios can be returned to you on request once they are delivered to the school.

I have had a quick look at some of your assessments, and it is clear that a number of you did not Achieve or gained a lower than expected grade for one of the following reasons:

1. You relied too much on exemplars and templates ( WEGC has an exemplar on TKI).Some of your portfolios contained bullet lists for significant chunks of content –  clearly just copied from teacher notes
2. Your portfolio did not read as authentic ie in student voice.
3. Essential parts of the portfolio were not completed ie

  • gave only one description for ethical and legal issues (or gave examples that were not relevant)
  • left out  information on how data is manipulated
  • left out information about  input/output/storage/retrieval or back-up 

4. You did not hand me a draft to look at and provide feedback. 
5. Some of you focussed on your experiences outside of the context of a shared information system, some reused parts of 2016 portfolios
6. You did not complete an analysis of A/M/E criteria using the guidelines provided.This gave you a very good idea of what was missing – if anything…

Having said that I am not an NZQA marker… and a couple of the marks I expected to be at least Achieved, probably better…For now, I suggest that, if you think your result should be better then ask for reconsideration. http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/ncea/ncea-results/reviews-and-reconsiderations/  This costs around $20 and is worth the effort.

Mr. Bruce

By the way… Level 3 results were largely E and M. Everyone that submitted passed.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s