 |
||||
|
 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Profiles of Expected Performance - forecasts, not targets |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Qualifications Authority ensures that marking of NCEA exams is consistent and the marking process is robust. One of the tools to help us do that is Profiles of Expected Performance (PEP). These are a forecast of the spread of results for each standard based on a combination of historical data, and the informed professional judgement of examiners, markers and NZQA staff. Deputy Chief Executive Qualifications Bali Haque says, "They are not targets and they are not used to ensure exam results fit a required pattern. Nor are they scaling – when scaling was used, it was after papers had been marked to ensure the spread of results fit a pre-determined target, taking no account of individual student response." PEPs enable NZQA to compare the results of each day's marking with a forecast and decide where an anomaly may be occurring – and then investigate why the results are differing from the forecast. "If a possible anomaly is identified, marking can be paused to allow us to investigate why the results aren't as we expected." There are a number of reasons why a forecast, based on historical data, may differ from the actual results:
In these sort of cases there would be no action taken and marking would resume. PEPs also allow us to identify where the assessment schedule is not accurately reflecting the achievement of candidates. In these cases, an adjustment can be made to the schedule. If necessary, papers already marked will be re-marked to reflect the requirements of the new schedule. Bali says, "PEPs are not new, they were used during last year's exams, with the re-marking of just 17 standards, about 5% of the total." The PEPs, against the standards to which they apply, are on the website: www.ncea.govt.nz |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 HOME |
 TOP |
 NEXT |
Page updated: 19 December 2006