It's Only Fair to Assume the Worst

New Zealand's Long Slide Down the Global Educational League Tables

The failing government education system never ceases to underwhelm.  In a Level III history exam the word "trivial" was used.  It was embedded in a quotation from Shakespeare.  Some students protested the injustice of being confronted with a word they did not know.

Some authorities agreed with the students' complaint.  "Trivial" is a far from trivial word.  It is polysyllabic for one thing.  How on earth could Level III students be expected to know the meaning of such a word?  But Level III is the highest level of educational achievement in our government education system.   It is hardly a trivial matter that 15, 16, and 17 year old students did not have "trivial" stored away in their vocabulary.

Year 13 students are worried they might fail their history exam because they didn't know what the word "trivial" meant.   The senior students have launched a petition asking for the essay to be marked based on students' own definition of the "unfamiliar" word. It has so far received more than 2000 signatures.

Students sitting the NZQA Level 3 History causes and consequences paper on Wednesday were confronted with the word in a quote from Julius Caesar: "Events of importance are the result of trivial causes."  Students were asked to analyse the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with Caesar, with reference to the causes and consequences of a historical event.  [Stuff]

But the educational establishment rushed to the defence of the apparent functional illiteracy of the 16 year olds.
 

Chairman of the New Zealand History Teachers' Association, Graeme Ball . . . called the exam a "little bit of a snafu" on the part of NZQA, and said the language used in questions should be "accessible to all".

The exam was not testing comprehension, so it was "unfair" to make that part of the assessment, he said.  But should Year 13 students know the word "trivial"?  It was "debatable", he said. "I don't think we can make assumptions about what students should and shouldn't know at that level," he said. [Emphasis, ours.]

One wonders at the probity of the Chairman of the NZ History Teachers' Association.  What gives him the right to make assumptions about what words his hearers/readers would know.  He says that language used should be "accessible" to all.  But "accessible" is a polysyllabic monster.  It is unfair for him to use  such a word in communicating with the public of New Zealand, let alone Level III sixteen and seventeen year olds.  He has no right to make assumptions about what adults would understand.  And then there is another polysyllabic affront--"assumptions".   How dare such effrontery be found in the pages of a newspaper.  The words used in such a publication should be accessible to all.

We are reliably informed that NZQA will be doing a radical rewrite of all its examination materials from this point on.  It has determined that words in its examination papers henceforth will be restricted to not more than two syllables.  Or, if longer words must be used they are to be defined in words of not more than twos syllables in brackets immediately following.