For many years we have had our own national secondary education system. It is 95% state operated. It has high credibility. It is often above the OECD average in performance. In some areas we are in the top five countries of the world.

 

We have had our own internationally recognised qualification system for most of those years.

NCEA is an internationally recognised qualification.

 

Cambridge emerged as a qualification promoted by a very few principals who were opposed to the NCEA. Some of them were involved in the development of the NCEA but instead of remaining in the development discussions they left the meetings when they could not get their own way.

 

Since then a great deal has been claimed for the Cambridge exams. So, what is this examination?

 

The Cambridge exam is run by a private sector company connected to Cambridge University. Secondary school students in the UK and the USA do not do these exams. They do their own nationally developed and internationally approved qualifications.

 

The vast majority of students who sit Cambridge exams are not native speakers of English. In fact in some non-English speaking countries the Cambridge has additional appeal because it is an English language based qualification.

 

The Cambridge exams largely support third world countries that have yet to develop coherent national qualification system that are internationally recognised.

 

The examinations are offered at Year 11 (IGCSE), Year 12 (AS) and Year 13 (A Levels). The curriculum for the examination is very clearly specified for each year. It is quite narrow and is very Anglo-centric. While the curriculum specifies quite clearly was is expected to be known and gives reasonable indications of the level of knowledge expected, the exam results are scaled.

 

Scaling of exam marks is often held to be necessary to maintain standards. Actually scaling can do the very opposite. By artificially adjusting marks the actual standards of knowledge and skill being demonstrated by students are hidden behind marks that do not actually reflect the results achieved in the examination.

 

As a challenge to students Cambridge might have some value. But it can never be the New Zealand national qualification. We have one that suits us well. It’s not perfect and it needs some work, but it is a good qualification.  In fact Auckland University will shortly release research that shows that NCEA Level 3 is fives times more accurate in predicting how students will do in their first year at University than any other qualification the University has to deal with.

 

No University that I am aware of is saying that the NCEA is not suitable as an entrance qualification. No University is saying that NCEA does not let them select able students for admission to top academic courses. The problems are being caused by the difficulty of comparing students with NCEA results and students with Cambridge and IB results. The problems do not belong to the New Zealand qualification but to the outside qualifications which some schools only provide to some of their students.

 

NCEA is based on sound principles related to the needs of all of our students for qualifications. It is the more useful for a wider range of students. It is credible in the eyes of employers and the Universities. It is internationally recognised. 

 

Cambridge is not a qualification used by secondary students in the country that develops and maintains it. It is overwhelmingly sat by students in countries that don’t have English as a first language and/or don’t have their own coherent national qualifications.

 

Why should a state school offer some other qualification to its students?

Every state school should be obliged to have its students enter the NCEA. If a school wants to challenge its students by offering additional qualifications that is fine. Kaipara does this from time to time.