Over the past number of years, I have been looking at the Scholarship numbers and percentage and have been asking myself a question, why does Technology Scholarship seem to be always below the 3% that other scholarship subjects are.
Here is the Technology Scholarship data for the past 7 years.
If you are wondering why I am pulling this data together it is to start the challenge and fight for the last part of the Digital Technologies curriculum puzzle,
It is since the changes in 2014 when the strands of Technology came into being. Before that, it was just the Generic Technologies standards. Since the strands of Technology came in, including Digital Technologies that is why the number increased from 1500 to now almost 4000 students.
But have things gotten better with this...
The numbers say it all. From being 3% of the cohort to get Scholarship, we are now getting 1.5 to 1.7%.
Funnily enough the NZQA scholarship results website states
"The Technical Overview Group Assessment applies discretion in the setting of cut scores: The 3 percent criterion is applied with discretion of plus or minus 5 students. Cut scores are set such that all students at or above the cut score have demonstrated performance at the Scholarship standard.*Note: There are reasons why the percentage of the Level 3 cohort achieving Scholarship is significantly higher for Latin than for other subjects:
- Latin has a very small Level 3 cohort. The large proportion of the cohort awarded Scholarship reflects this.
- Up to five candidates in addition to 3% of the Level 3 cohort can receive Scholarship in each subject. Because Latin is undertaken by a very small number of candidates and has a very small Level 3 cohort, this discretionary flexibility resulted in a high percentage of the Level 3 cohort receiving awards."
But hang on, do I read correctly, "The 3 percent criterion is applied with the discretion of plus or minus 5 students."
We have a 1.73% this year, no mention of why Technology has a lower percentage, even going back to previous years results, no mention of why it is lower than 3% criterion.
So I went back to 2016 in the data.
It seems that 173 students entered scholarship, 54 were awarded Scholarship and 10 were awarded Outstanding.
64 students were awarded scholarship. here is hoping my maths is right.
64 / 3898 *100 = 1.64%
Now to get the 3% cut off, 117 students would need to be awarded scholarship. That would mean that out of the 173 students did scholarship 56 would not be awarded.
So maybe it is because there are not enough numbers entered.
However, I started checking out other areas of scholarship,
going with the same data from 2016
I looked at Photography
Ok, so they had an extra 101 entries above what Technology had, but they made 2.96% of the 3% criterion.
How for the past 4 years have we gotten less than 2%. Surely there is something wrong with the current system.
My question is, who sets the Technology Scholarship Assessment Specification, is it NZQA or is it the Ministry of Education. If it hasn't been meeting the requirements for 4 years now, what can be done to support the lifting of achievement for our students?
Is there PLD provided, to be able to support teachers/students to be able to reach the 3% criterion?
Why is there not a mention on the scholarship results webpage why Technology Scholarships do not meet the 3% criterion? Being able to provide a reason?
Is there a possibility of providing what schools have obtained scholarships in technology for the past 4 years?
UPDATE:
Who sets the Technology Scholarship Assessment Specification?
The NZ Scholarship Technology Scholarship Assessment Specification is set annually by NZQA, in consultation with the Panel Leader.
If it hasn’t been meeting the 3% criterion requirement for 4 years now, what can be done to support the lifting of achievement for our students?
The annual Scholarship Assessment Reports comprehensively describe the characteristics of successful and unsuccessful scholarship submissions. I have attached a copy of the 2016 Assessment Report available on our website. The 2017 Assessment Report will be available for teachers and students at the beginning of term 2. In addition, where possible, we publish annotated exemplars which teachers and students can use.
All NZ Scholarship resources published on our website can be found at: http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/
Is there PLD provided, to be able to support teachers/students to be able to reach the 3% criterion?
NZQA is not resourced to provide PLD to support teachers and students. PLD is generally organised through school clusters and subject associations.
Why is there no mention on the scholarship results webpage why Technology Scholarships do not meet the 3% criterion? It would help being able to provide a reason?
Why is there no mention on the scholarship results webpage why Technology Scholarships do not meet the 3% criterion? It would help being able to provide a reason?
"The Technical Overview Group Assessment applies discretion in the setting of cut scores: The 3 percent criterion is applied with discretion of plus or minus 5 students. Cut scores are set such that all students at or above the cut score have demonstrated performance at the Scholarship standard."
Candidates entered for New Zealand Scholarship Technology must meet the Scholarship Performance Standard (93601). They are assessed on their ability to demonstrate high-level critical thinking, abstraction and generalisation, and to integrate, synthesise and apply knowledge, skills, understanding and ideas to complex situations. (http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/
Candidates who have met the criteria given below can be considered for Scholarship or Outstanding:
Scholarship Performance Descriptor
The student will demonstrate aspects of high level:
· analysis and critical thinking
· integration, synthesis, and application of highly developed knowledge, skills, and understanding to complex situations
· logical development, precision and clarity of ideas.
Outstanding Performance Descriptor
In addition to the requirements for Scholarship, the student will also demonstrate, in a sustained manner, aspects of:
· perception and insight
· sophisticated integration and abstraction
· independent reflection and extrapolation
· convincing communication.
Technology Scholarships to date have not met the 3% criterion because less than 3% of the entries have demonstrated performance at the Scholarship standard i.e candidates have not gained a minimum score of 13 out of a total of 24 marks available (Scholarship) or a minimum of 19 out of the total marks available (Outstanding).
The decrease in the percentage of candidates who have been awarded Scholarships in Technology since 2013 is consistent with the increase in the cohort numbers.
I have been going through the numbers that NZQA have provided.
While we are a new contender to the Technology Scholarship, I would think after 4 years that there would be better stats to help encourage teachers.
What I am thinking about at the moment is... This goes to show that the current technology scholarship is not meeting the digital technologies area and that a separate scholarship needs to be created to handle this.
I am currently writing a response back.
Out of the 104 entries for digital technologies, only 23% of the students were awarded a scholarship. While I have read through all the material that has been provided, is there going to be guidance from the panel on how this could be improved for digital with such a poor percentage awarded. There seems to be way better opportunity for Textiles and Food to be awarded scholarship,
Sounds like a good one for my Spiral of Inquiry
Getting to know technology scholarship and what this means for students this year. How can I improve in the way that I teach/feedback/feedforward students towards technology scholarship.
