Transcript National External Moderation Reports

New Zealand Diploma in Business
National External Moderation
Reports
Tertiary Assessment & Moderation
National External Moderation Report
• Summary comments
• Section A – Submission of Material
• Section B – Assessment Materials
• Section C – Assessor Decisions
Summary Comments
• Moderation results:


The submission met the national standard or
The submission did not meet the national standard.
• An overview of the content of the
moderation report
• Recommendations
Summary Comments Cont
Example 1
The national standard has not been met.


Topics 1 and 3 are under assessed while
topics 2 and 4 are over assessed
(see Section B3).
Some marking schedules were missing.
Recommendations:
Suggest combining test 1 and test 2 into one,
resulting in three assessments instead of four.
A.
Submission of Material
List of specific materials not submitted for
moderation.
Example 2
 Suggested solution and marking schedule
for Assignment one not provided.
 Suggested
solution and marking schedule
for Assessment two Q 1a and 1b not
provided.
B1. Are all the learning outcomes
assessed?
 All
learning outcomes have to be
assessed to meet the national standard.
 Assessment
criteria provide the minimum
evidence required for achieving learning
outcomes.
 Example
3
B1. Cont
Example 3
Learning outcome three was not sufficiently
assessed:
 Key
assessment criteria 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5
were not assessed.
Example 4
B2. Do the assessment activities assess the
learning outcomes at an appropriate
level as specified in the prescription?
100 level prescriptions require assessment of
students’ knowledge and comprehension of
material.
Example 5
The assessment activities are not at the required level.
Some of the calculation type questions need to be
replaced with ‘explain’ and ‘compare and contrast’
questions to meet the prescription requirements.
B2 Cont.
200 level prescriptions require assessment of
students’ ability to analyse, evaluate and apply
processes and procedures.
Example 6
The assignment/case studies are merely a collection
of calculation exercises. Student samples should
provide evidence that the student is able to
satisfactorily answer questions that require
independent thinking.
B3. Are the prescription’s weightings
adhered to?
Example 7
Learning outcome three has been weighted
higher (14%) than required in the prescription
(7 to 12 %), and learning outcome four has
been weighted too low (19%) compared with
the required 25 to 35 per cent.
B4. Are the assessment conditions and
instructions clear and appropriate?
Example 8
No marking criteria were given to
students in Part B of assignment 1 and
for assignment 2.
Failure to indicate the mark allocations to
students could create confusion as to
degree of work required.
B6. Do the marking schedules allow for
a range of appropriate student
responses?
Example 9
Both exam marking guides have predetermined answers which do not appear to
allow for a range of responses.
Solutions were overly prescriptive.
B7. Is the way in which marks are
awarded sufficiently detailed to
enable consistent marking?
Example 10
For Assignments 3, 4 and Final Exam, the
marking schemes do not provide detailed
allocation of marks.
The marks that are assigned for each section
of the essays do not allow for objective
evaluation. For example, both essays allocate
40 marks to the discussion but there is no
guidance on how to allocate these marks.
B8. Are the marking schedules consistent
with the requirements of the prescription
and assessment materials?
Example 11
Not for exam:
exam: Q5 – marking schedule does
not cover implications as per instructions to
students.
 Final
 Final
exam Q8 – no answer is given.
B9. Was the candidates’ work marked
consistently according to the
marking schedule?
Example 12
Marking is neither correct nor consistent:
 Upper quartile student has two figures incorrect and
has been given 7 out of 8.

Median student has all the correct figures (albeit
not as per the marking schedule and layout is not
exact) and has been given 4 out of 8.

Lower quartile student has most of the figures
correct, layout is not exact and is incomplete and
has been given 1 out of 8.
Moderation results
• Clarify
• Appeal
details available at:
http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/qualifications/
tertqual/dipbus/appeals.html