Godzone falling in the international education ratings

[avgas]

That's true, but if you had/have shit parents a good teacher makes all the difference.

I'm glad I learnt quickly how to spot the good ones or the ones that were wasting my time.

Nah was a good life lesson.
I learnt "Yes Sir, No Sir, 3 Bags full Sir" well before I had my first job.

Sometimes you just have to suck up the shit and take it for a while. That's life.

Bad Boss, Bad Teacher......same shit different day - but if its only temporary and you can see the other side, who cares?

[avgas]

it really only matters that as long as you pass parents/MoE some form of mark that makes more sense than the last one

It's all relative. I have a wad of "Merit" certificates from school which are effectively toilet paper right now. Fucking useless.

But back then - those little doodacky's were my gateway to dad letting me get a bike.

I like Pass / Fail - so for all the bad things NCEA has - atleast it is only polarised that way (with fail = not achieved).
ABCDEF.....all fucking useless.

You know where to find students who got straight A's at school and university.......at Starbucks......serving you a Cappuccino.

[mashman]

No. You're putting the cart before the horse. First observe, then evaluate.

Before anything of value whatsoever can be gained from any analisys tool you need clean data. Test the kids. Make the results quantifiable, that means numbers, not opinions.

THEN you can attempt to attribute cause, and from that make changes that might reasonably be expected improve performance.

It's that immediate "Oh noes, we're being blamed as inept" response that sorta automatically causes the profession to be seen as intractable and self-centred. All of the potentially contributing factors you mention need to be introduced during analysis of the un-”corrected” results, not via fudge- factors applied beforehand.

and by fuck was I disappointed to read such pish. Maybe you should go to more of their meetings to find out. My experience was the opposite.[/QUOTE]

Clean data? Who decides the criteria for clean data? and what guarantees do you have that that data is clean? Flaw introduced at square 1?

My immediate reaction to teachers concerns is not, WTF are they crying about... you must know some really negative White fuckers.

[mashman]

It's all relative. I have a wad of "Merit" certificates from school which are effectively toilet paper right now. Fucking useless.

But back then - those little doodacky's were my gateway to dad letting me get a bike.

I like Pass / Fail - so for all the bad things NCEA has - atleast it is only polarised that way (with fail = not achieved).
ABCDEF.....all fucking useless.

You know where to find students who got straight A's at school and university.......at Starbucks......serving you a Cappuccino.

ha ha ha ha haaaaaa... although that's just as well, as you may not get the double decaf soy free fat burger latte mochaccino espresso that you ordered if it's a normal run of the mill dumb cunt at the till. Aye, pass/fail is/was good enough for me.

[BoristheBiter]

and by fuck was I disappointed to read such pish. Maybe you should go to more of their meetings to find out. My experience was the opposite.

Clean data? Who decides the criteria for clean data? and what guarantees do you have that that data is clean? Flaw introduced at square 1?

My immediate reaction to teachers concerns is not, WTF are they crying about... you must know some really negative White fuckers.

No but I know some brown ones, does that count?

[BoristheBiter]

It's all relative. I have a wad of "Merit" certificates from school which are effectively toilet paper right now. Fucking useless.

But back then - those little doodacky's were my gateway to dad letting me get a bike.

I like Pass / Fail - so for all the bad things NCEA has - atleast it is only polarised that way (with fail = not achieved).
ABCDEF.....all fucking useless.

You know where to find students who got straight A's at school and university.......at Starbucks......serving you a Cappuccino.

One of my best mates (at school) was so fucking intelligent he went off and got degrees like i got detention (a lot by the way) and now he cleans planes at AirNZ. saw him the other day and he is as happy as larry.

And most at Starbucks are IT people......free wifi.

[mashman]

No but I know some brown ones, does that count?

Maybe......

[Zedder]

It's all relative. I have a wad of "Merit" certificates from school which are effectively toilet paper right now. Fucking useless.

But back then - those little doodacky's were my gateway to dad letting me get a bike.

I like Pass / Fail - so for all the bad things NCEA has - atleast it is only polarised that way (with fail = not achieved).
ABCDEF.....all fucking useless.

You know where to find students who got straight A's at school and university.......at Starbucks......serving you a Cappuccino.

Heh, the University of Otago started a research project in 2011 to find out what happened to 14,000 graduates.

The first of 3 results will be out next year iirc.

[Ocean1]

Clean data? Who decides the criteria for clean data? and what guarantees do you have that that data is clean?

Someone who understands what answers are required to quantify students educational attainments. Explicitly nobody who thinks the results need to be adjusted to compensate for anything whatsoever.

There. You've got it covered. It ain't difficult, ask questions requiring answers students should have learned from work covered by their syllabus. Not all of it, but enough to represent exam results with 95% confidence.

My immediate reaction to teachers concerns is not, WTF are they crying about... you must know some really negative White fuckers.

Nor mine. Until they demonstrate that they don't understand the need for measuring any process.

And you're possibly the most negative white fucker I've ever had the misfortune to come across.

[mashman]

Someone who understands what answers are required to quantify students educational attainments. Explicitly nobody who thinks the results need to be adjusted to compensate for anything whatsoever.

There. You've got it covered. It ain't difficult, ask questions requiring answers students should have learned from work covered by their syllabus. Not all of it, but enough to represent exam results with 95% confidence.

Nor mine. Until they demonstrate that they don't understand the need for measuring any process.

And you're possibly the most negative white fucker I've ever had the misfortune to come across.

I was more pointing towards, the formula being used is "flawed", side of things. GIGO.

I agree in regards to maffs, even if that does have its own accepted "issues" i.e. margin for error... but Reading and Writing at 95%? I ain't convinced.

Measuring process? Doesn't it depend on whether you're cleaning your data without the outlying data that crashes the program or at the very least really slows it down due to the billions of extra calculations required to compute the result and error margin. Why are we measuring again?

Oh irony, I love thee more than most... your seeing me as negative is all down to how you translate me. Am I passing the buck and blaming someone else

[Ocean1]

I was more pointing towards, the formula being used is "flawed", side of things. GIGO.

Where do you see a formula in here?:

ask questions requiring answers students should have learned from work covered by their syllabus.

I agree in regards to maffs, even if that does have its own accepted "issues" i.e. margin for error... but Reading and Writing at 95%?

95% isn't the expected result. It's the measure of how reliable the exam results are.

And it's entirely possible to construct comprehension tests from which quantifiable data can reliably be taken.

[mashman]

Where do you see a formula in here?

And it's entirely possible to construct comprehension tests from which quantifiable data can reliably be taken.

there.

95% isn't the expected result. It's the measure of how reliable the exam results are.

I understand and meant that very thing.

[Ocean1]

there.

That's not a formula, it's just a simple statement. There's no need to "interpret" answers to fit some template, it certainly wasn't required of non-absolute subject exams I sat, and I had no reason to argue with the results.

I understand and meant that very thing.

You simply make the sample (No of questions) large enough to compensate for discrepancies in marking.

[mashman]

That's not a formula, it's just a simple statement. There's no need to "interpret" answers to fit some template, it certainly wasn't required of non-absolute subject exams I sat, and I had no reason to argue with the results.

You simply make the sample (No of questions) large enough to compensate for discrepancies in marking.

There's always a formula. If there were no template, then everyone would get 100%

Why not just dump the exams entirely. What do they prove to anyone?

[Ocean1]

There's always a formula. If there were no template, then everyone would get 100%

Wrong. The answers to a set of questions isn't a formula. The marking of those answers doesn't require a formula. The only people requiring a formula are those wanting to alter the results to something other than an accurate assessment of a students knowledge.

Why not just dump the exams entirely. What do they prove to anyone?

Why not drive your car with your eyes closed?

And they prove how much of the syllabus a student has learned. At least well constructed exams do. Pretty obvious really.