Hubbard’s has been involved with preparing students to sit External exams in Queensland since 1952. Hubbard’s used to be a private company. Since 2001, it has been an accredited non-state school  just like a Grammar School or your local independent school.  I have been associated with Hubbard’s since 1988  have been Principal of Hubbard’s since 1997. Hubbard’s is a non-denominational school that caters for students seeking an alternative option to finish their secondary education. Most students turn 16 or 17 while at Hubbard’s. The next most populous group would be 18 year olds. Older students are welcome too and invariably there are some who turn 19, 20, 22, 22 amongst the student body and often there are a couple of older students too. The majority of the students have very firm beliefs about their incompatibility with the internal-assessment system used throughout Queensland and/or with attending school in the normal pattern of five days per week from 9am  to 3.30pm. Some arrive from overseas early in their Year 12 year and want to finish school that year.  Some just do not like the complexity of the internal system and embrace the transparency of the External arrangements.  Whatever their reasons, they seek an alternative option. Students who join Hubbard’s at 16 i.e  in their Year 11, usually study just three subjects. They sit exams in those subjects on October/ November of that year and receive a Statement of Results for that subject. So they start and finish the two years of assessment in the one calendar year. The exams are tough and test the whole Year 11 and 12 syllabus. University lecturers can be assured that someone who passes these exams, knows their work well and their knowledge is current. Then students  usually do two other subjects in the following year i.e their Year 12

For more details see www.hubbards.qld.edu.au

And  http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/588.html   There are three years of past exam papers for most non-language subjects in http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/2427.html . The standard is high. They satisfy the demands of tertiary entry well.

In the letter from Peter Luxton, Acting Director QSA, sent to me earlier this year informing me of the discontinuance of the External senior system, except for languages, he mentioned ‘extensive research’ and that current providers of Senior external classes agreed with its  abolition  and were keen to take up internal assessment.  Attached are the minutes of ‘the extensive research’ meeting. (Just one!!). There were a few other questions asked, with a hidden agenda, over a few emails.  It is impossible to understand how these minutes can confirm what Mr Luxton wrote.

For a well-informed chronology of the development / deterioration of science syllabus/assessment in schools, please read attachment 3: Statement from an experienced science teacher and lecturer.  Makes great reading!!

On the 4 points, a few thoughts.

1.     A review – fine – I am a bit concerned at the OP – each school is pulling kids that are not doing well so the OP cohort is getting smaller and smaller. In addition, many/most schools are spending a lot of time and $$ in QCS Test practice.

2.      Long assessment/assignment pieces – YES reduce the length – particularly the EEI’s in Science.

3.     Marks – I am happy to use marks  and still do. The standards grids are OK in some areas/subjects but a number of us fought for years to be allowed to use marks in Maths. The example of a poor criteria sheet – I think you will always find poor examples of same just like you will find poor examples of tests, even these with marks.

4.     External exams – I am afraid I have to disagree with you on this one. I did external exams for both Junior and Senior and have taught external exams. I think students from smaller schools and in particular those “west of the Great Divide” would be disadvantaged with same through lack of experienced teachers.  The current system might have its faults but External exams will not be the solution. If same were a percentage of the final mark, there is no prize for guessing what would soon become the defacto “true grade”.

One of the advantages of the current system (with Maths and Science students) is that students can use all sorts of technology in the teaching and learning situation AND also the assessment domain. External Exams preclude this eg I am currently doing projectile motion in Yr 12 Maths C and using Logger Pro as a means of collecting live data and same is used in the assessment process. I tend to keep assignments at about 25% of total marks which seems to work fine.

QSA have prepared an excellent rich task for Year 9 Mathematics.  It’s this year’s QCAT task.  But the assessment method that QSA proposes for it seems onerous and subjective.  I don’t know how they can think it’s “world’s best practice”.  It’s called a “GTMJ” (Guide to making judgments).  A traditional marks system would be very suitable for the task, being easy to follow, allowing good differentiation between students with similar performance levels, and providing perfect feedback to students about their work.  The descriptor paragraphs in the GTMJ leave me wondering: how can anyone be sure that this is the best descriptor to assess this particular standard?  It’s all someone’s opinion, and is often hard to agree with.  The process of applying the standards, even if you agree that they’re all appropriate, is very subjective, vague, and approximate.  This is the style of assessment that QSA want us to use in all types of tasks and in all year levels including Primary, and I do not want my own children (or anyone else’s) to go through this.  It’s just imprecise and unnecessary, and it does the standard of Mathematics education in our state a disservice.

See for yourself the inbuilt vagueness and subjectivity in this standards marking process, by viewing these short videoclips on QSA’s website:- http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/14735.html
http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/14736.html
http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/14746.html

As a teacher of 30+ years experience (mainly Senior Maths but now asked to again teach Physics) I remain concerned by the fact that schools continue to offer the same tests and assignments at the same time each year.

Test instruments that have passed through the Panels successfully are highly regarded and rather than risk prejudicing student rankings are used time and again.

This process in turn inadvertently constrains the breadth of topics taught as teachers, who are always short of time, know what topics to focus on to optimize their students results and “appear” to complete their Work Program in good faith.

This situation might only be described as Teaching to the Test. The wider effect is students have narrower breadth of Syllabus coverage.

Some type of External Testing regime, based on current syllabus documents,  would go a long way to remediating this problem.

At Last!…  Please excuse my exuberance but I’ve been waiting years and years for people to come to their senses and protest about the complex, unfair and extremely work- intensive system of education we have in Queensland.  Were it producing high standards, one could possibly accept it, but the truth is, despite the massive demands made on both teachers and students, standards have been steadily dropping over the duration of my teaching here. We now have (as far as I can judge) the most UNPRODUCTIVE  education system in the world.

I graduated from University in the 60’s and have been teaching  French, Spanish and sometimes English, since then to the present day.  I have taught in the UK and Europe, as well as in Queensland and Victorian Schools.  I attempted to retire several years ago, but I have been constantly asked to do short contracts, teaching in various Queensland Independent Schools.  At the school where I am currently teaching, I have experienced teaching the far superior International Baccalaureate course. In this system teachers can actually add up marks (yes, I could hardly believe it) and fairly give an overall score. The final papers are marked externally so the students know that nothing can be manipulated within their school.  It is no wonder the numbers of students enrolled in these I.B. courses are rising every year.

Things have been getting progressively worse in our schools.  Students are choosing more and more the “easier options” of drama, art, media studies etc. which do not require prior learning.  The problem with languages and maths is that they are cumulative subjects  needing to be built on carefully year after year.  They are regarded as “hard” subjects.  The problem we face is that the “hard “ subjects are no longer required for a good exit result.  Nor are they required for University entrance.  Many students drop the “hard” subjects as soon as they can, hoping to migrate to a subject like drama. One of the problems we face in languages is that students coming fresh from Primary school are ill-equipped to deal with anything that smacks of grammar or rigorous learning. To add insult to injury we have to cope with copious QSA requirements devised by people who are far removed from the coal face.

I regret I was not able to attend the meeting on June 16^th.  I do not know how much was achieved but we must all continue to fight this ridiculous system which is needlessly depriving our young of a quality education.

I teach in Brisbane.  I would have loved to come to the meeting but I am caught up in the very thing that the meeting is about, that is the massive workload that the system has imposed on us. Reports are due on Monday and I still have EEIs and ERTs to mark. This is going to take all of my time this weekend, as it has on the previous two weekends. Assessment setting and marking now take a massive amount of time.  For example it takes approximately 45 to 60 minutes to mark an EEI.  Multiply that by 25 and you can see that this is an unacceptable workload, especially for the teachers who have 3 or 4 senior classes. Setting assessment has also become unbelievably time consuming. Previously I could write an exam in about four hours.  I have had to write two this term and each has taken about 16 hours to write. One of these exams was a year 9 exam which should have been very easy to do. Marking has also become time consuming.  Six hours to mark and record a sixty minute year 10 exam. I see a lot of science teachers who are near breaking point.  I am yet to meet one who likes the system.

I would like very much to attend the meeting on June 16^th, however I am currently overwhelmed by the demands of marking senior Chemistry classes assessment (EEIs and criteria based examinations).

I have also been advised by colleagues not to attend on the grounds it may later effect my employment prospects (though I am not sure how much I believe that to be true). I just wanted you and your colleagues to know that if the number of teachers at your meeting is in any way disappointing, it is likely due to one of these reasons. The majority of teachers in my staffroom welcome this discussion, but will probably also be too busy with the demands of criteria based marking.

It is truly, a very ironic shame that many teachers will be absent and miss the opportunity to share their ample opinions on the topic.

Good luck with the discussion.