From:
To:
Alana Saunders
Cc:
Eldon Paki; Kevin Hoar; Catherine Edser
Subject:
Re: Statistics for cutscore meeting
Date:
Thursday, 23 May 2024 5:28:24 PM
Hi Alana
15 July might be okay for a data analysis but it won't be until 21 July for all digital
marking to be complete. Given 64,000 students are enrolled we should have a dataset of
about 25,000 by then.
Given the size of the dataset we get a pretty good idea of how the assessment is tracking
after the first week. The distributions don't appear to change much after that.
If Eldon is pressed for time he could run the Winstep analysis in the week of 15 July. If
you can produce the usual spreadsheet of complete results before our meeting on 26 July
we should have confidence in the data.
How does that sound?
Regards
On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 5:14 PM Alana Saunders <[email address]>
wrote:
Hi
Can I clarify what dates you would be wanting information from us? We have data extraction
scheduled for the week of 15 July. Would this be too soon?
I’ll continue to produce the generic spreadsheet I have produced in the past (unless you don’t
need it). Eldon does the winsteps stuff and currently we don’t have that scheduled so I will
need to touch base with him. He will be on leave from 22 July which might make things
difficult.
If you let us know when you’d need data, Eldon and I can touch base on Monday when he is
back from his current leave and figure out what to do. Don’t let me deter you if you need data
closer to the 26th – we’ll find a way to make something work.
Thanks,
Alana
From:
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 10:45 AM
To: Eldon Paki <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>; Alana
Saunders <[email address]>
Subject: Statistics for cutscore meeting
Hi Eldon and Alana
It was nice to catch up at our virtual meeting.
This is a "heads up" about stats we will need to set the Numeracy cutscore for Term 2
CAA, 2024.
Kevin,
and I have a Zoom meeting set for 10am Friday 26 July to discuss the
setting. Marking should be near-complete by Monday 22 July.
Last year you provided a Winstep analysis for the Numeracy items that gave a Rasch
scale logit and percentage correct for each item. That was extremely helpful to us in
setting and justifying the placement of the cutscore.
Are you able to provide this again?
If you can please schedule that in.
Thanks and regards
***********************************************************************
ENTRY
TOTAL
TOTAL
JMLE
MODEL
INFIT
OUTFIT
NUMBER
SCORE
COUNT MEASURE
S.E.
MNSQ
ZSTD
MNSQ
ZSTD
23
6505
51966
2.60
0.01
0.91
-9.90
0.79
-9.40
5
9884
51966
1.98
0.01
1.07
9.90
1.11
6.26
17
12324
51966
1.62
0.01
0.96
-6.92
0.84
-9.90
22
12565
51966
1.58
0.01
0.94
-9.60
1.16
9.90
21
13222
51966
1.50
0.01
1.00
0.00
1.00
-0.34
6
15674
51966
1.18
0.01
1.13
9.90
1.28
9.90
30
15710
51966
1.18
0.01
0.78
-9.90
0.64
-9.90
9
16912
51966
1.04
0.01
0.97
-5.22
0.93
-6.83
20
21957
51966
0.47
0.01
1.06
9.90
1.03
3.90
15
23152
51966
0.34
0.01
0.79
-9.90
0.70
-9.90
7
23666
51966
0.29
0.01
0.96
-9.90
0.92
-9.90
2
24730
51966
0.17
0.01
0.87
-9.90
0.82
-9.90
3
25516
51966
0.09
0.01
1.04
9.20
1.04
4.98
8
26131
51966
0.03
0.01
1.18
9.90
1.25
9.90
28
26197
51966
0.02
0.01
1.06
9.90
1.10
9.90
1
26669
51966
-0.03
0.01
1.17
9.90
1.31
9.90
27
26749
51966
-0.04
0.01
0.92
-9.90
0.88
-9.90
29
27393
51966
-0.11
0.01
1.08
9.90
1.12
9.90
16
27683
51966
-0.14
0.01
0.85
-9.90
0.79
-9.90
19
28156
51966
-0.19
0.01
1.10
9.90
1.16
9.90
13
29607
51966
-0.34
0.01
0.91
-9.90
0.86
-9.90
25
30999
51966
-0.50
0.01
0.93
-9.90
0.86
-9.90
11
31306
51966
-0.53
0.01
1.13
9.90
1.18
9.90
14
33977
51966
-0.83
0.01
0.83
-9.90
0.76
-9.90
24
34429
51966
-0.88
0.01
1.01
1.59
1.04
3.37
26
35313
51966
-0.99
0.01
1.05
8.55
1.18
9.90
4
42676
51966
-2.02
0.01
1.14
9.90
1.48
9.90
12
43809
51966
-2.22
0.01
1.00
0.16
1.09
4.34
18
45112
51966
-2.48
0.01
1.07
7.37
1.20
8.15
10
46510
51966
-2.80
0.02
1.05
4.40
1.15
5.46
PTMEASUR-AL
EXACT MATCH
CORR.
EXP.
OBS%
EXP%
ITEM
0.43
0.38
89.2
88.4
Q4e
0.38
0.43
82.1
83.2
Q1e
0.48
0.45
80.6
80.1
Q3e
0.47
0.45
81.4
79.8
Q4d
0.46
0.46
79.0
79.1
Q4c
0.40
0.48
73.3
76.7
Q1f
0.61
0.48
82.3
76.7
Q5f
0.50
0.48
76.7
75.7
Q2c
0.47
0.50
70.3
73.0
Q4b
0.63
0.51
80.4
72.6
Q3c
0.54
0.51
73.9
72.5
Q2a
0.59
0.51
77.0
72.4
Q1b
0.49
0.51
70.5
72.4
Q1c
0.40
0.51
65.8
72.3
Q2b
0.47
0.51
70.2
72.4
Q5d
0.40
0.51
66.6
72.4
Q1a
0.56
0.51
75.0
72.4
Q5c
0.46
0.51
69.7
72.5
Q5e
0.60
0.51
77.8
72.5
Q3d
0.45
0.51
69.7
72.6
Q4a
0.56
0.51
75.8
73.0
Q3a
0.55
0.51
75.7
73.6
Q5a
0.43
0.51
69.4
73.7
Q2e
0.60
0.50
80.7
75.3
Q3b
0.49
0.50
75.6
75.6
Q4f
0.45
0.49
75.9
76.4
Q5b
0.34
0.44
82.7
84.4
Q1d
0.41
0.42
86.6
86.1
Q2f
0.36
0.40
87.7
88.0
Q3f
0.34
0.38
90.3
90.3
Q2d
From:
Eldon Paki
To:
Cc:
Kevin Hoar; Alana Saunders
Subject:
2024 Numeracy Session 1 - Output for Cut Score Setting Process
Date:
Friday, 19 July 2024 2:25:19 PM
Attachments:
13-500WS.xlsx
13-500WS.txt
2024 Session01 Score to Measure v01.xlsx
Hi
Attached are the diagnostics based on the data extraction earlier today.
Note:
The analysis used 51,966 student responses which makes me reasonably confident
that the analysis has captured over 90 percent of the respondents
13-500WS.xlsx lists the items in order from the highest JMLE MEASURE to the lowest
That is, from the most difficult item to the least difficult (i.e. easiest) item
Q4e was the most difficult with JMLE MEASURE = 2.60
In contrast, Q2d was the least difficult (easiest) with JMLE MEASURE = -2.80
13-500WS.txt
This output is directly from Winsteps just in case you need it and was used to
create 13-500WS.xlsx above
2024 Session01 Score to Measure v01.xlsx lists in order from the lowest SCORE to
the highest SCORE.
Think that’s about it from me.
Hokey Cokey??
Eldon
TABLE 13.1 32406 lit_num data 2024_T2 V3.csv ZOU500WS.TXT Jul 19 2024 12:18
INPUT: 51966 PERSON 30 ITEM REPORTED: 51966 PERSON 30 ITEM 2 CATS WINSTEPS 5.2.5.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERSON: REAL SEP.: 2.59 REL.: .87 ... ITEM: REAL SEP.: 108.75 REL.: 1.00
ITEM STATISTICS: MEASURE ORDER
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|ENTRY TOTAL TOTAL JMLE MODEL| INFIT | OUTFIT |PTMEASUR-AL|EXACT MATCH| |
|NUMBER SCORE COUNT MEASURE S.E. |MNSQ ZSTD|MNSQ ZSTD|CORR. EXP.| OBS% EXP%| ITEM |
|------------------------------------+----------+----------+-----------+-----------+------|
| 23 6505 51966 2.60 .01| .91 -9.90| .79 -9.40| .43 .38| 89.2 88.4| Q4e |
| 5 9884 51966 1.98 .01|1.07 9.90|1.11 6.26| .38 .43| 82.1 83.2| Q1e |
| 17 12324 51966 1.62 .01| .96 -6.92| .84 -9.90| .48 .45| 80.6 80.1| Q3e |
| 22 12565 51966 1.58 .01| .94 -9.60|1.16 9.90| .47 .45| 81.4 79.8| Q4d |
| 21 13222 51966 1.50 .01|1.00 .00|1.00 -.34| .46 .46| 79.0 79.1| Q4c |
| 6 15674 51966 1.18 .01|1.13 9.90|1.28 9.90| .40 .48| 73.3 76.7| Q1f |
| 30 15710 51966 1.18 .01| .78 -9.90| .64 -9.90| .61 .48| 82.3 76.7| Q5f |
| 9 16912 51966 1.04 .01| .97 -5.22| .93 -6.83| .50 .48| 76.7 75.7| Q2c |
| 20 21957 51966 .47 .01|1.06 9.90|1.03 3.90| .47 .50| 70.3 73.0| Q4b |
| 15 23152 51966 .34 .01| .79 -9.90| .70 -9.90| .63 .51| 80.4 72.6| Q3c |
| 7 23666 51966 .29 .01| .96 -9.90| .92 -9.90| .54 .51| 73.9 72.5| Q2a |
| 2 24730 51966 .17 .01| .87 -9.90| .82 -9.90| .59 .51| 77.0 72.4| Q1b |
| 3 25516 51966 .09 .01|1.04 9.20|1.04 4.98| .49 .51| 70.5 72.4| Q1c |
| 8 26131 51966 .03 .01|1.18 9.90|1.25 9.90| .40 .51| 65.8 72.3| Q2b |
| 28 26197 51966 .02 .01|1.06 9.90|1.10 9.90| .47 .51| 70.2 72.4| Q5d |
| 1 26669 51966 -.03 .01|1.17 9.90|1.31 9.90| .40 .51| 66.6 72.4| Q1a |
| 27 26749 51966 -.04 .01| .92 -9.90| .88 -9.90| .56 .51| 75.0 72.4| Q5c |
| 29 27393 51966 -.11 .01|1.08 9.90|1.12 9.90| .46 .51| 69.7 72.5| Q5e |
| 16 27683 51966 -.14 .01| .85 -9.90| .79 -9.90| .60 .51| 77.8 72.5| Q3d |
| 19 28156 51966 -.19 .01|1.10 9.90|1.16 9.90| .45 .51| 69.7 72.6| Q4a |
| 13 29607 51966 -.34 .01| .91 -9.90| .86 -9.90| .56 .51| 75.8 73.0| Q3a |
| 25 30999 51966 -.50 .01| .93 -9.90| .86 -9.90| .55 .51| 75.7 73.6| Q5a |
| 11 31306 51966 -.53 .01|1.13 9.90|1.18 9.90| .43 .51| 69.4 73.7| Q2e |
| 14 33977 51966 -.83 .01| .83 -9.90| .76 -9.90| .60 .50| 80.7 75.3| Q3b |
| 24 34429 51966 -.88 .01|1.01 1.59|1.04 3.37| .49 .50| 75.6 75.6| Q4f |
| 26 35313 51966 -.99 .01|1.05 8.55|1.18 9.90| .45 .49| 75.9 76.4| Q5b |
| 4 42676 51966 -2.02 .01|1.14 9.90|1.48 9.90| .34 .44| 82.7 84.4| Q1d |
| 12 43809 51966 -2.22 .01|1.00 .16|1.09 4.34| .41 .42| 86.6 86.1| Q2f |
| 18 45112 51966 -2.48 .01|1.07 7.37|1.20 8.15| .36 .40| 87.7 88.0| Q3f |
| 10 46510 51966 -2.80 .02|1.05 4.40|1.15 5.46| .34 .38| 90.3 90.3| Q2d |
|------------------------------------+----------+----------+-----------+-----------+------|
| MEAN 26151.1 51966 .00 .01|1.00 .32|1.02 .66| | 77.1 76.9| |
| P.SD 10289.1 .0 1.27 .00| .11 8.87| .20 8.73| | 6.5 5.5| |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE 13.3 32406 lit_num data 2024_T2 V3.csv ZOU500WS.TXT Jul 19 2024 12:18
INPUT: 51966 PERSON 30 ITEM REPORTED: 51966 PERSON 30 ITEM 2 CATS WINSTEPS 5.2.5.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM CATEGORY/OPTION/DISTRACTOR FREQUENCIES: MEASURE ORDER
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
file:///C/Users/KateM/OneDrive - Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa/Desktop/OIA Numeracy/Q 4/Q 4 docs/13-500WS.txt[13/10/2024 12:33:11 PM]
|ENTRY DATA SCORE | DATA | ABILITY S.E. INFT OUTF PTMA | |
|NUMBER CODE VALUE | COUNT % | MEAN P.SD MEAN MNSQ MNSQ CORR.| ITEM |
|--------------------+------------+---------------------------------------+------|
| 23 0 0 | 45461 87 | -.21 1.31 .01 .9 .9 -.43 |Q4e |
| 1 1 | 6505 13 | 1.68 1.20 .01 .8 .8 .43 | |
| | | | |
| 5 0 0 | 42082 81 | -.24 1.35 .01 1.1 1.1 -.38 |Q1e |
| 1 1 | 9884 19 | 1.16 1.28 .01 1.1 1.1 .38 | |
| | | | |
| 17 0 0 | 39642 76 | -.36 1.30 .01 1.0 1.0 -.48 |Q3e |
| 1 1 | 12324 24 | 1.28 1.15 .01 .9 .8 .48 | |
| | | | |
| 22 0 0 | 39401 76 | -.35 1.27 .01 .9 .9 -.47 |Q4d |
| 1 1 | 12565 24 | 1.24 1.28 .01 .9 1.2 .47 | |
| | | | |
| 21 0 0 | 38744 75 | -.36 1.30 .01 1.0 1.0 -.46 |Q4c |
| 1 1 | 13222 25 | 1.16 1.22 .01 1.0 1.0 .46 | |
| | | | |
| 6 0 0 | 36292 70 | -.35 1.34 .01 1.1 1.2 -.40 |Q1f |
| 1 1 | 15674 30 | .90 1.28 .01 1.2 1.3 .40 | |
| | | | |
| 30 0 0 | 36256 70 | -.55 1.19 .01 .8 .8 -.61 |Q5f |
| 1 1 | 15710 30 | 1.37 1.02 .01 .7 .6 .61 | |
| | | | |
| 9 0 0 | 35054 67 | -.47 1.28 .01 1.0 1.0 -.50 |Q2c |
| 1 1 | 16912 33 | 1.07 1.19 .01 1.0 .9 .50 | |
| | | | |
| 20 0 0 | 30009 58 | -.55 1.32 .01 1.1 1.1 -.47 |Q4b |
| 1 1 | 21957 42 | .83 1.21 .01 1.0 1.0 .47 | |
| | | | |
| 15 0 0 | 28814 55 | -.79 1.17 .01 .8 .8 -.63 |Q3c |
| 1 1 | 23152 45 | 1.05 1.05 .01 .8 .7 .63 | |
| | | | |
| 7 0 0 | 28300 54 | -.68 1.25 .01 1.0 .9 -.54 |Q2a |
| 1 1 | 23666 46 | .88 1.18 .01 1.0 .9 .54 | |
| | | | |
| 2 0 0 | 27236 52 | -.78 1.19 .01 .9 .8 -.59 |Q1b |
| 1 1 | 24730 48 | .92 1.14 .01 .9 .8 .59 | |
| | | | |
| 3 0 0 | 26450 51 | -.66 1.32 .01 1.1 1.1 -.49 |Q1c |
| 1 1 | 25516 49 | .75 1.20 .01 1.0 1.0 .49 | |
| | | | |
| 8 0 0 | 25835 50 | -.55 1.36 .01 1.2 1.3 -.40 |Q2b |
| 1 1 | 26131 50 | .61 1.28 .01 1.2 1.2 .40 | |
| | | | |
| 28 0 0 | 25769 50 | -.65 1.28 .01 1.0 1.1 -.47 |Q5d |
| 1 1 | 26197 50 | .71 1.26 .01 1.1 1.1 .47 | |
| | | | |
| 1 0 0 | 25297 49 | -.56 1.33 .01 1.2 1.2 -.40 |Q1a |
| 1 1 | 26669 51 | .59 1.32 .01 1.2 1.4 .40 | |
| | | | |
| 27 0 0 | 25217 49 | -.80 1.26 .01 1.0 .9 -.56 |Q5c |
| 1 1 | 26749 51 | .81 1.13 .01 .9 .8 .56 | |
| | | | |
file:///C/Users/KateM/OneDrive - Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa/Desktop/OIA Numeracy/Q 4/Q 4 docs/13-500WS.txt[13/10/2024 12:33:11 PM]
| 29 0 0 | 24573 47 | -.67 1.35 .01 1.1 1.2 -.46 |Q5e |
| 1 1 | 27393 53 | .66 1.21 .01 1.0 1.0 .46 | |
| | | | |
| 16 0 0 | 24283 47 | -.89 1.19 .01 .9 .8 -.60 |Q3d |
| 1 1 | 27683 53 | .84 1.12 .01 .8 .8 .60 | |
| | | | |
| 19 0 0 | 23810 46 | -.68 1.37 .01 1.1 1.3 -.45 |Q4a |
| 1 1 | 28156 54 | .63 1.22 .01 1.0 1.0 .45 | |
| | | | |
| 13 0 0 | 22359 43 | -.90 1.22 .01 .9 .9 -.56 |Q3a |
| 1 1 | 29607 57 | .74 1.18 .01 .9 .9 .56 | |
| | | | |
| 25 0 0 | 20967 40 | -.94 1.20 .01 .9 .8 -.55 |Q5a |
| 1 1 | 30999 60 | .69 1.20 .01 .9 .9 .55 | |
| | | | |
| 11 0 0 | 20660 40 | -.73 1.25 .01 1.1 1.1 -.43 |Q2e |
| 1 1 | 31306 60 | .54 1.34 .01 1.2 1.3 .43 | |
| | | | |
| 14 0 0 | 17989 35 | -1.15 1.17 .01 .8 .7 -.60 |Q3b |
| 1 1 | 33977 65 | .66 1.15 .01 .8 .8 .60 | |
| | | | |
| 24 0 0 | 17537 34 | -.96 1.30 .01 1.0 1.1 -.49 |Q4f |
| 1 1 | 34429 66 | .53 1.24 .01 1.0 1.0 .49 | |
| | | | |
| 26 0 0 | 16653 32 | -.92 1.39 .01 1.1 1.3 -.45 |Q5b |
| 1 1 | 35313 68 | .48 1.23 .01 1.0 1.0 .45 | |
| | | | |
| 4 0 0 | 9290 18 | -1.01 1.47 .02 1.3 1.6 -.34 |Q1d |
| 1 1 | 42676 82 | .26 1.33 .01 1.1 1.1 .34 | |
| | | | |
| 12 0 0 | 8157 16 | -1.35 1.40 .02 1.0 1.1 -.41 |Q2f |
| 1 1 | 43809 84 | .29 1.30 .01 1.0 1.0 .41 | |
| | | | |
| 18 0 0 | 6854 13 | -1.28 1.42 .02 1.2 1.2 -.36 |Q3f |
| 1 1 | 45112 87 | .23 1.34 .01 1.1 1.1 .36 | |
| | | | |
| 10 0 0 | 5456 10 | -1.40 1.45 .02 1.1 1.2 -.34 |Q2d |
| 1 1 | 46510 90 | .20 1.34 .01 1.0 1.0 .34 | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
file:///C/Users/KateM/OneDrive - Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa/Desktop/OIA Numeracy/Q 4/Q 4 docs/13-500WS.txt[13/10/2024 12:33:11 PM]
From:
Alana Saunders
To:
Kevin Hoar
Subject:
RE: Numeracy May 2024 assessment year group numbers.
Date:
Friday, 26 July 2024 1:42:14 PM
Attachments:
image003.png
PRS-5656 Numeracy assessments by year level v0.1.xlsx
Hi Kevin,
Full data is attached.
[PRS-5656 Numeracy assessments by year level v0.1.xlsx]
Thanks,
Alana
From: Russell Hazeldine <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 11:51 AM
To: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Cc: Alana Saunders <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Numeracy May 2024 assessment year group numbers.
Good afternoon Kevin – Alana’s data below has been reviewed successfully
Cheers
Russell
From: Alana Saunders <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 10:49 AM
To: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Cc: Russell Hazeldine <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Numeracy May 2024 assessment year group numbers.
Hi Kevin,
I can give you an unreviewed amount.
Year 10: 29,455
Other: 25,088
Total: 54,543
Proportion Year 10: 54%
Russell is reviewing these numbers at the moment so I’ll let you know if anything changes.
Thanks,
Alana
From: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 10:45 AM
To: Alana Saunders <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Numeracy May 2024 assessment year group numbers.
Hi Alana.
We are actually meeting with Charles at the moment.
Could you please find out the number (or %) of year 10s versus the total.
The other levels can come later.
Thanks so much.
Cheers.
Kevin
Kevin Hoar | National Assessment Facilitator
External Assessment Team
Assessment Division | Wāhanga Aromatawai
New Zealand Qualifications Authority | Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa
(
@
[email address]
:
www.nzqa.govt.nz
125 The Terrace, PO Box 160, Wellington,
*
6140
He rerekē tatou katoa – awhi i te oranga ki te katoa
We are all different – embrace life to the fullest
From: Alana Saunders <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, 26 July 2024 10:11
To: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Numeracy May 2024 assessment year group numbers.
Hi Kevin,
It wouldn’t be too hard. How quickly do you need this? I assume before you meet with
Charles today? I’ll need to shuffle some things around but that’s fine.
Alana
From: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 10:09 AM
To: Alana Saunders <[email address]>
Subject: Numeracy May 2024 assessment year group numbers.
Hi Alana.
Is it possible / easy to get the numbers who sat the latest Numeracy assessment based
on year levels - i.e. year 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, tertiary numbers.
Thanks so much.
Cheers.
Kevin
Kevin Hoar | National Assessment Facilitator
External Assessment Team
Assessment Division | Wāhanga Aromatawai
New Zealand Qualifications Authority | Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa
(
@
[email address]
:
www.nzqa.govt.nz
125 The Terrace, PO Box 160, Wellington,
*
6140
He rerekē tatou katoa – awhi i te oranga ki te katoa
We are all different – embrace life to the fullest
Time Period Secondary/Tertiary
Year Level Participating Students
2024-T2
Secondary
1
2024-T2
Secondary
7
4
2024-T2
Secondary
8
12
2024-T2
Secondary
9
1,498
2024-T2
Secondary
10
29,455
2024-T2
Secondary
11
19,900
2024-T2
Secondary
12
2,573
2024-T2
Secondary
13
1,079
2024-T2
Secondary
14
18
2024-T2
Secondary
15
3
PRS-5656 Numeracy assessments by year level
Psychometrics, Reporting and Statistics, Data & Data Analysis, NZQA
Request:
Is it possible / easy to get the numbers who sat the latest Numeracy assessment
based on year levels - i.e. year 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, tertiary numbers.
Requestor:Kevin Hoar
Includes: Students that appear in Assessment Master for the 2024 Term 2 Numeracy Session.
A breakdown for MoE Year Level and a Secondary/Tertiary flag.
Excludes: Held Learners
Slave NSNs
Withdrawn Entries
Withdrawn Enrolments
Notes:
This information is live and as at 10:30am on 26/07/2024.
At this time, we don't know which students have voided so they are included in the counts.
Run Information:
Run on 26/07/2024, in PDSQL07 using assessment_master_marks and eqa dbo tables.
From:
Kevin Hoar
To:
Alana Saunders; Susan Henry
Subject:
Re: Lit-num quality assurance checks
Date:
Thursday, 1 August 2024 12:55:56 PM
Attachments:
image001.png
Second time around - stupid Office 365!
For Numeracy:
1. 791 (assuming we are talking about the number marked on Google Drive).
2. None that I am aware of, but who knows....
3. Cut is 16. Outcome cuts are 5, 5, 2.
4. 30 question items - 5 questions/context, each with 6 items/question parts.
5. Nothing I can think of.
Cheers.
Kevin
From: Alana Saunders <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2024 10:25
To: Susan Henry <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: Lit-num quality assurance checks
Hello Sue and Kevin,
Apologies for being away the past few days. I am back on board and about to start quality
assurance checks. I have some questions that would help with this if you wouldn’t mind
providing some information. For yours Sue, it would help if these could be split into week 1
and week 2.
1. Approximately how many students responded on paper?
2. Are there currently any students yet to have responses loaded?
3. What are the cut scores?
4. Only for Kevin – How many questions were there in the numeracy paper? I just want
to check the database has the right number showing.
5. Is there anything else we should be aware of when doing checks?
Thanks,
Alana Saunders (she/her)
Statistical Analyst | Kaitātari Tauanga
Psychometrics, Reporting and Statistics | Te Tauanga Hinengaro, Pūrongo, me te
Tatauranga
New Zealand Qualifications Authority | Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
(
(
(
o Associated with Outcome 2
• The most difficult item was Q4e
o The dot farthest to the right
o Associated with Outcome 1.
5
Figure 1. Distribution of student scores, and location of item difficulties. The vertical dashed line is at the student score equal to 16. Font colouring
corresponds to the items associated outcome: Blue = Outcome 1, Green = Outcome 2, and Red = Outcome 3.
6
From:
Kevin Hoar
To:
v
Subject:
Eldon"s report on the first assessment round for 2024.
Date:
Monday, 2 September 2024 8:58:26 AM
Attachments:
Outlook-fwxqejmf.png
2024 Numeracy Term 2 Report from Eldon v01.docx
Hi
To be honest, things are heating up here regarding Lit/Num.
Attached is Eldon's report for the Term 2 Numeracy assessment for your edification.
Hopefully, there is information in this report that would inform the development of the
2025 assessments.
Cheers.
Kevin
Kevin Hoar | National Assessment Facilitator
Co-Requisite Team
Assessment Division | Wāhanga Aromatawai
New Zealand Qualifications Authority | Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa
(
@
[email address]
:
www.nzqa.govt.nz
*
125 The Terrace, PO Box 160, Wellington, 6140
He rerekē tatou katoa – awhi i te oranga ki te katoa We are all different – embrace life to the fullest
From:
Eldon Paki
To:
Cc:
Kevin Hoar; Alana Saunders
Subject:
RE: FW: FW: Rasch
Date:
Thursday, 18 July 2024 3:53:17 PM
Hi
The stuff I provide to inform the cut score setting process that’s outputted from the
Winsteps software will need to be based on the data in the database as at tomorrow
morning when Alana does the data extraction and forwards it to me to do my magic with
Winsteps.
Recall that I’m on leave next week and I’m the only one in NZQA with their Winsteps
“Driver’s License” so I need to do my thing before COB tomorrow.
I’m hoping that over 90 percent will be complete by extraction time tomorrow morning.
Once I do my Winsteps thing and various cross-checks, I’ll be able to forward the stuff
through to you sometime tomorrow afternoon.
I’m also hoping that the material I forward (that informs the cut score setting process)
captures most of the student volume and will be representative of the uncaptured student
volume at the time of the data extraction.
Any worries then let me know.
Hokey Cokey??
Eldon
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2024 8:58 AM
To: Eldon Paki <[email address]>; Alana Saunders <[email address]>;
Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: Re: FW: FW: Rasch
Hello Eldon and Alana
I hope all is well with you.
Our Numeracy marking team aims to be complete by Sunday 21 July. It is likely that
most of the schools are complete by now but we have no easy way to check with AM.
Kevin and I will meet with
to discuss cut-scores on Friday 26 July. So the
time frame is short.
Is it worthwhile having a quick catchup today or tomorrow to discuss what is needed
and things at your end?
Please let me know.
Regards
On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 11:27 AM Eldon Paki <[email address]> wrote:
Hi
Many thanks for the response.
Okay, this may help to show that the R measure will be fine - refer to attached.
The stuff in columns A-E are taken straight from 13-109WS.txt.
The values in column F (column highlighted in pale-yellow) are the estimated measures
when I deploy the Rasch model
using R software.
As a comparison, the values in column G (column highlighted in pale-green) are the
actual measures (i.e. the actual Logits – as seen by the formulae in column G). Observe
that the measures from the R software (column F) are closer, on average, to the actual
measures (column G) than the JMLE measures from Winsteps (column D).
Hokey Cokey??
Eldon
From:
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 6:05 PM
To: Eldon Paki <[email address]>
Subject: Re: FW: Rasch
Hi Eldon
It looks like the R measures will be fine.
We essentially use the Rasch scale to order the items by difficulty then do a
'bookmarking'. We judge at which items we are uncomfortable if the student gets
them wrong, and relate the associated logits score to guide our cut-score setting.
That approach is based on our claim that the student provides sufficient evidence
of numeracy.
That process combines with other methods to set the final cut-score and
sufficiency scores by outcome.
I am happy to catch up next week. Monday and Tuesday mornings are relatively
free.
Regards
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 3:46 PM Eldon Paki <[email address]> wrote:
Hi Vince,
Regarding the attached output from Winsteps back in Dec last year – for financial
reasons, moving forward, Management do not wish to renew our Winsteps
license.
If the Winsteps license is not renewed I won’t be able to provide the two
attached pieces of output.
Questions:
Do you actually need these two outputs for the cut score decision-making
process?
Will an alternative to these outputs be acceptable?
I’ve discovered that
for the cut score decision-making process (i)
doesn’t actually use the csv file, (ii) but uses the following parts of the txt file:
ENTRY NUMBER
TOTAL SCORE
TOTAL COUNT
JMLE MEASURE
PTMEASUR-AL
CORR.
Due of the cost-cutting environment, I’ve attempted to move away from
Winsteps software to R software and have found …. you win some, you lose
some.
Anyhow, using R:
Producing the outputted csv file is simply impossible
I’ll be able to output the following parts of the txt file
ENTRY NUMBER
TOTAL SCORE
TOTAL COUNT
MEASURE
It won’t be the JMLE measure that Winsteps computes but will
be the MLE measure that R computes
The Winsteps JMLE measure and the R MLE measure
have the same orders of magnitude.
It may be easier to video-chat about these matters. If so, can you give me a
couple of time-windows (in case of timeslot clashes)? I can’t see it lasting longer
than half an hour (I reckon it can be done in about 15-20 mins). Oops, just had a
conversation with Kevin and he said you’re a Zoom person while we’re Microsoft
Teams people.
Anyway, let me know via a response to the questions above, or with a couple of
time-windows to set up the online meeting.
Hokey Cokey??
Eldon
From: Eldon Paki
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2023 11:48 AM
To: Cc: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>; Alana Saunders
<[email address]>
Subject: RE: Rasch
Hi
Attached are the Numeracy equivalent files of those I churned out for
related to Literature-Reading.
As mentioned yesterday the input dataset was the “unaffected” students.
One other caveat related to the input dataset – any non-responses (i.e. students
not attempting the item) have been coded as “incorrect answer” (rather than
legitimately as a non-response).
Regarding the csv file:
For my purposes I pay attention to columns A and B
The Scores (in this assessment out of 30) and associated (JMLE)
Measure
JMLE = Joint Maximum Likelihood Estimate.
Regarding the txt file:
Regarding the 1st table only in the file
It orders the JMLE Measures for each item in decreasing order
That is, from the most difficult item to the least difficult item.
Here’s a thought I’ve had which I may include in the analysis as a
recommendation providing things stack up. I’ve got a suspicion that
psychometrically the assessment may be double-testing a few mathematical
skills, which if true means we could test those said skills just the once and
therefore shorten the assessment by a “block” of items, like removing the block
of items from Q5 (say), and shortening the assessment to 25 items (say).
I’ll be available until 4:00 pm today. If you want to yarn over the phone then my
work number (I’m here at work until about 4:30 pm – 5:00 pm-ish) is
It’ll pay to phone through on your cell of
(if I don’t recognise the
number I usually don’t pickup).
Any worries then let me know.
Hokey Cokey??
Eldon
From:
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 2:33 PM
To: Eldon Paki <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Rasch
Hi Eldon
That will be brilliant.
Thanks
On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 2:10 PM Eldon Paki <[email address]> wrote:
Hi
I’ll conduct the analysis using the dataset with the “unaffected” students.
I’ll assume you’re referencing the output that Charles got me to I churned out
for the Reading CAA, so will produce the Numeracy equivalent output.
I’ll ping it through to you some time tomorrow morning.
Hokey Cokey??
Eldon
From: Vince Wright <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 1:51 PM
To: Eldon Paki <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar
<[email address]>
Subject: Rasch
Kia ora Eldon
I hope all is well.
tells me that you produced a Rasch analysis for the items in the
lastest Reading CAA (Term 4, 2023).
Is it possible for you to produce a similar scale for the Numeracy items?
That would be very helpful to us.
Thanks and regards
*******************************************************************
*************
This email may contain legally privileged information and is intended only for the
addressee. It is not necessarily the official view or
communication of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. If you are not the
intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or
information in it. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender
immediately. NZQA does not accept any liability for changes made to this email or
attachments after sending by NZQA.
All emails have been scanned for viruses and content by MailMarshal.
NZQA reserves the right to monitor all email communications through its network.
*******************************************************************
*************
--
*********************************************************************
***********
This email may contain legally privileged information and is intended only for the
addressee. It is not necessarily the official view or
communication of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. If you are not the
intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or
information in it. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender
immediately. NZQA does not accept any liability for changes made to this email or
attachments after sending by NZQA.
All emails have been scanned for viruses and content by MailMarshal.
NZQA reserves the right to monitor all email communications through its network.
*********************************************************************
***********
***********************************************************************
*********
This email may contain legally privileged information and is intended only for the
addressee. It is not necessarily the official view or
communication of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. If you are not the intended
recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or
information in it. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender
immediately. NZQA does not accept any liability for changes made to this email or
attachments after sending by NZQA.
All emails have been scanned for viruses and content by MailMarshal.
NZQA reserves the right to monitor all email communications through its network.
***********************************************************************
*********
From:
Kevin Hoar
To:
Catherine Edser; Hamsa Lilley
Cc:
Susan Henry
Subject:
Re: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
Date:
Thursday, 15 August 2024 3:10:27 PM
Attachments:
Outlook-srrq4t35.png
Hi Catherine.
For
Numeracy:
Personally - I would like to invoke the 'no candidate is disadvantaged by a systems
issue' situation and suggest that all 35 A to N results
stay as A.
I think taking down even one result from A to N will result in further "please explain"
work being done further down the line.
Cheers.
Kevin
Kevin Hoar | National Assessment Facilitator
External Assessment Team
Assessment Division | Wāhanga Aromatawai
New Zealand Qualifications Authority | Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa
(
@
[email address]
:
www.nzqa.govt.nz
*
125 The Terrace, PO Box 160, Wellington, 6140
He rerekē tatou katoa – awhi i te oranga ki te katoa We are all different – embrace life to the fullest
From: Catherine Edser <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 15 August 2024 14:54
To: Hamsa Lilley <[email address]>
Cc: Susan Henry <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
Looking at candidates whose result changed from A à N
Literacy Writing
4 candidates did not have a change to the total score (so the changes balanced
out in total but dropped them below the cut score for at least one outcome).
100 candidates had a reduction to their total score; 1 was -6, 1 was -5, 6 were
-4, 6 were -3, 26 were -2, and 60 were -1.
Numeracy
1 candiate did not have a change to the total score (so the changes balanced out
in total but dropped them below the cut score for at least one outcome).
34 candidates had a reduction to their total score; 10 were -2 and 24 were -1.
Cheers,
Catherine.
From: Hamsa Lilley <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 2:22 PM
To: Catherine Edser <[email address]>
Cc: Susan Henry <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
Ok thank you.
From: Catherine Edser <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 2:21 PM
To: Hamsa Lilley <[email address]>
Cc: Susan Henry <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
If we process the scores as they are, it’s definitely
will have their feedback reports
altered.
I ran the new and old scores through the thresholds (after Kevin helped me) for each
level of evidence for each standard and outcome and it
will change where the tick
goes.
Doing this allowed me to remove/ignore cases where processing the new scores will
cause the underlying number to change, but not move the tick in the feedback report
(so the candidates/schools will not see ANY difference regardless of what we do).
I’m very happy for Kevin/Sue to spot-check a few to ensure I’ve done this correctly but
yes, as far as I can see … it’s will.
Cheers,
Catherine.
From: Hamsa Lilley <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 2:19 PM
To: Catherine Edser <[email address]>
Cc: Susan Henry <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
And one more thing – Sue (Kevin if required but I think it is mostly writing), can you look at
Catherine’s s/s – what I want to understand is the accuracy of the Not Achieved reports
where the student actually did a lot better than the report says they had.
Thanks, Hamsa
From: Catherine Edser <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 2:12 PM
To: Hamsa Lilley <[email address]>
Cc: Susan Henry <[email address]>; Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
Hi Hamsa (and FYI Sue/Kevin),
Here’s the spreadsheet what I have been working away on.
Summary for meeting:
There are 405 assessments that have a material or unknown change in their
result.
By type of change:
Upgrades = 260
Literacy Writing = 176
Numeracy = 77
Te Reo Matatini Te Reo Torohū = 6
Te Reo Matatini Reo Whakaputa = 1
Downgrades = 139
Literacy Writing = 104
Numeracy = 35
Unknown = 6
Literacy Writing = 5
Numeracy = 1
By Standard:
Literacy Writing = 285
Numeracy = 113
Te Reo Matatini Te Reo Torohū = 6
Te Reo Matatini Reo Whakaputa = 1
There are 1,141 assessments where there is no material change to their result
Of these, 1,081 assessments (for 1,079 learners) are Not Achieved.
Of these, 725 learners will have their feedback report(s) altered.
So, in total if all results were transferred as is 1,130 learners would be affected.
Cheers,
Catherine.
-----Original Appointment-----
From: Hamsa Lilley <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 11:36 AM
To: Hamsa Lilley; Catherine Edser; Sue Chalmers; Amanda Picken; Gavin Middleton; Keri-Anne
Stephens; Linda Glogau
Cc: Sheryl Ching; Natasha Ropata
Subject: Quick check in and confirmation of next steps with the lit num results issue
When: Thursday, 15 August 2024 3:00 PM-3:30 PM (UTC+12:00) Auckland, Wellington.
Where: Microsoft Teams Meeting
Kia ora koutou
We are working through next steps today. At this meeting we will confirm the approach, the
results change process and comms to schools process.
Hamsa
________________________________________________________________________________
Microsoft Teams Need help?
Join the meeting now
Meeting ID: 443 110 743 576
Passcode: PJsWJX
For organizers: Meeting options
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Kevin Hoar
To:
Subject:
Re: The data you requested from Alana and Catherine.
Date:
Wednesday, 21 August 2024 6:14:01 PM
Attachments:
Outlook-rqxeihp1.png
Hi
Totally agree! It was the Year 11 and 12s who brought the overall pass rate stats down.
Cheers
Kevin
Get Outlook for Android
From:
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 5:11:01 PM
To: Kevin Hoar <[email address]>
Subject: Re: The data you requested from Alana and Catherine.
Hi Kevin
It really does confirm what we suspected.about Year 11s who possibly sat previously. The data for
low SES is awful.
The success rate of Year 10s is about the same as last year.
Let's hope for a balance of deciles in the next round.
Cheers
On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 4:45 PM Kevin Hoar <[email address]> wrote:
Hi
.
I received the following information about success rates for different year levels for the first
Numeracy assessment event this year.
Sorry it has taken so long.
Cheers.
Kevin
Assuming this has not already been resolved, here’s the information Vince was asking for:
By Year Level:
Standard
Year Participating
Achieved
Achievement
Level students
students
rate
Numeracy
7
4
0
0.0%
8
11
4
36.4%
9
1,500
753
50.2%
10
29,750
16,893
56.8%
11
20,406
6,277
30.8%
12
2,648
861
32.5%
13
1,119
469
41.9%
14
21
12
57.1%
15
3
2
66.7%
By SES (I can probably go back to previous years, but this is what I have immediately to
hand; if that’s enough, great, if not, let us know ):
Socio-economic
Barriers to
Participating
Achieved
Achievement
Achievement
students
students
rate
Standard
(EQI Group)
Numeracy
Fewer (High
12,805
7,948
62.1%
decile)
Moderate (Mid
31,596
13,521
42.8%
decile)
More (Low
7,938
1,567
19.7%
decile)
Unassigned
3,136
2,244
71.6%
Feel free to pass this on to him, with whatever notes / caveats you would like to add.
Kevin Hoar | National Assessment Facilitator
External Assessment Team
Assessment Division | Wāhanga Aromatawai
New Zealand Qualifications Authority | Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa
(
@
[email address]
:
www.nzqa.govt.nz
*
125 The Terrace, PO Box 160, Wellington, 6140
He rerekē tatou katoa – awhi i te oranga ki te katoa We are all different – embrace life to the fullest
********************************************************************************
This email may contain legally privileged information and is intended only for the addressee. It is
not necessarily the official view or
communication of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. If you are not the intended recipient
you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or
SCORE MEASURE
S.E.
INFO
NORMED
S.E.
FREQUENCY
%
0
-5.42
1.86
0.29
122
129
123
0.2
1
-4.13
1.06
0.89
211
73
296
0.6
2
-3.32
0.79
1.62
268
54
513
1.0
3
-2.80
0.67
2.24
304
46
845
1.6
4
-2.40
0.60
2.78
331
42
1217
2.3
5
-2.07
0.55
3.26
354
38
1425
2.7
6
-1.78
0.52
3.71
374
36
1775
3.4
7
-1.53
0.49
4.11
392
34
1893
3.6
8
-1.30
0.47
4.48
408
33
2003
3.9
9
-1.08
0.46
4.80
423
32
2089
4.0
10
-0.88
0.44
5.08
437
31
2242
4.3
11
-0.69
0.43
5.31
450
30
2409
4.6
12
-0.50
0.43
5.50
463
30
2464
4.7
13
-0.32
0.42
5.64
476
29
2401
4.6
14
-0.15
0.42
5.73
488
29
2546
4.9
15
0.03
0.42
5.77
500
29
2580
5.0
16
0.20
0.42
5.76
512
29
2581
5.0
17
0.38
0.42
5.70
524
29
2577
5.0
18
0.55
0.42
5.59
536
29
2501
4.8
19
0.73
0.43
5.43
549
30
2425
4.7
20
0.92
0.44
5.23
562
30
2352
4.5
21
1.12
0.45
4.98
575
31
2228
4.3
22
1.32
0.46
4.68
590
32
2170
4.2
23
1.55
0.48
4.34
605
33
1986
3.8
24
1.79
0.50
3.94
622
35
1821
3.5
25
2.06
0.54
3.48
640
37
1534
3.0
26
2.37
0.58
2.96
662
40
1208
2.3
27
2.74
0.65
2.37
688
45
838
1.6
28
3.24
0.77
1.70
722
53
529
1.0
29
4.02
1.04
0.92
777
72
281
0.5
30
5.29
1.85
0.29
865
128
114
0.2
CUM.FREQ.
%
PERCENTILE
1
2
3
4
5
123
0.2
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
419
0.8
1
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.11
0.00
932
1.8
1
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.21
0.00
1777
3.4
3
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.31
0.01
2994
5.8
5
0.09
0.07
0.08
0.40
0.01
4419
8.5
7
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.49
0.02
6194
11.9
10
0.15
0.12
0.13
0.56
0.02
8087
15.6
14
0.18
0.15
0.17
0.62
0.03
10090
19.4
17
0.22
0.19
0.20
0.67
0.04
12179
23.4
21
0.26
0.22
0.24
0.72
0.04
14421
27.8
26
0.30
0.26
0.28
0.76
0.05
16830
32.4
30
0.34
0.30
0.32
0.79
0.06
19294
37.1
35
0.38
0.34
0.36
0.82
0.08
21695
41.7
39
0.43
0.38
0.40
0.84
0.09
24241
46.6
44
0.47
0.42
0.44
0.87
0.11
26821
51.6
49
0.51
0.46
0.48
0.89
0.12
29402
56.6
54
0.56
0.51
0.53
0.90
0.14
31979
61.5
59
0.60
0.55
0.57
0.92
0.17
34480
66.4
64
0.64
0.59
0.61
0.93
0.19
36905
71.0
69
0.68
0.64
0.66
0.94
0.22
39257
75.5
73
0.72
0.68
0.70
0.95
0.26
41485
79.8
78
0.76
0.72
0.74
0.96
0.30
43655
84.0
82
0.80
0.76
0.77
0.97
0.34
45641
87.8
86
0.83
0.80
0.81
0.97
0.39
47462
91.3
90
0.86
0.83
0.85
0.98
0.45
48996
94.3
93
0.89
0.87
0.88
0.98
0.52
50204
96.6
95
0.92
0.90
0.91
0.99
0.60
51042
98.2
97
0.94
0.93
0.93
0.99
0.68
51571
99.2
99
0.96
0.96
0.96
0.99
0.78
51852
99.8
99
0.98
0.98
0.98
1.00
0.89
51966
100.0
99
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.21
0.03
0.13
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.37
0.06
0.25
0.05
0.08
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.02
0.50
0.09
0.36
0.08
0.12
0.03
0.06
0.08
0.03
0.60
0.13
0.45
0.11
0.17
0.04
0.09
0.11
0.04
0.67
0.18
0.54
0.15
0.22
0.05
0.11
0.14
0.06
0.73
0.22
0.61
0.19
0.28
0.06
0.14
0.17
0.07
0.78
0.27
0.67
0.23
0.33
0.08
0.17
0.21
0.09
0.82
0.32
0.72
0.28
0.39
0.09
0.20
0.25
0.11
0.85
0.37
0.76
0.32
0.44
0.11
0.24
0.29
0.13
0.87
0.41
0.79
0.37
0.49
0.13
0.27
0.33
0.15
0.89
0.46
0.82
0.42
0.54
0.16
0.31
0.37
0.18
0.91
0.51
0.85
0.46
0.58
0.18
0.35
0.41
0.20
0.92
0.55
0.87
0.51
0.62
0.21
0.39
0.46
0.23
0.93
0.59
0.89
0.55
0.67
0.24
0.44
0.50
0.27
0.94
0.64
0.90
0.59
0.70
0.27
0.48
0.54
0.30
0.95
0.68
0.92
0.63
0.74
0.31
0.52
0.59
0.34
0.96
0.71
0.93
0.67
0.77
0.35
0.57
0.63
0.38
0.97
0.75
0.94
0.71
0.80
0.39
0.61
0.67
0.43
0.97
0.78
0.95
0.75
0.83
0.43
0.65
0.71
0.47
0.98
0.81
0.96
0.78
0.85
0.48
0.70
0.75
0.52
0.98
0.84
0.97
0.81
0.88
0.54
0.74
0.79
0.57
0.98
0.86
0.97
0.84
0.90
0.59
0.78
0.82
0.62
0.99
0.89
0.98
0.87
0.92
0.65
0.82
0.85
0.68
0.99
0.91
0.98
0.89
0.93
0.71
0.85
0.88
0.74
0.99
0.93
0.99
0.92
0.95
0.77
0.89
0.91
0.79
0.99
0.95
0.99
0.94
0.96
0.83
0.92
0.94
0.85
1.00
0.96
0.99
0.96
0.97
0.89
0.95
0.96
0.90
1.00
0.98
1.00
0.97
0.98
0.94
0.98
0.98
0.95
1.00
0.99
1.00
0.99
0.99
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.16
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.30
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.04
0.07
0.01
0.42
0.07
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.06
0.09
0.02
0.52
0.10
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.08
0.13
0.02
0.60
0.13
0.07
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.11
0.16
0.03
0.67
0.17
0.09
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.13
0.20
0.04
0.72
0.21
0.12
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.16
0.24
0.05
0.77
0.25
0.15
0.06
0.05
0.02
0.19
0.28
0.06
0.80
0.29
0.17
0.07
0.07
0.02
0.23
0.32
0.08
0.83
0.33
0.21
0.09
0.08
0.03
0.26
0.37
0.09
0.86
0.38
0.24
0.10
0.09
0.04
0.30
0.41
0.11
0.88
0.42
0.27
0.12
0.11
0.04
0.34
0.45
0.13
0.90
0.47
0.31
0.14
0.13
0.05
0.38
0.50
0.15
0.91
0.51
0.35
0.16
0.15
0.06
0.42
0.54
0.17
0.92
0.55
0.39
0.19
0.17
0.07
0.46
0.58
0.20
0.94
0.60
0.43
0.22
0.20
0.08
0.51
0.63
0.22
0.95
0.64
0.48
0.25
0.23
0.10
0.55
0.67
0.26
0.95
0.68
0.52
0.28
0.26
0.11
0.60
0.71
0.29
0.96
0.72
0.57
0.32
0.30
0.13
0.64
0.74
0.33
0.97
0.75
0.61
0.36
0.34
0.16
0.68
0.78
0.38
0.97
0.79
0.66
0.41
0.39
0.18
0.73
0.81
0.43
0.98
0.82
0.70
0.46
0.44
0.22
0.77
0.84
0.48
0.98
0.85
0.75
0.51
0.49
0.26
0.81
0.87
0.54
0.99
0.88
0.79
0.57
0.55
0.31
0.85
0.90
0.61
0.99
0.90
0.83
0.64
0.62
0.37
0.88
0.92
0.68
0.99
0.93
0.87
0.71
0.69
0.44
0.92
0.95
0.76
0.99
0.95
0.91
0.78
0.76
0.53
0.95
0.97
0.83
1.00
0.97
0.94
0.85
0.84
0.65
0.98
0.98
0.92
1.00
0.99
0.97
0.93
0.92
0.81
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.08
0.06
0.09
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.01
0.13
0.09
0.14
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.02
0.18
0.13
0.20
0.09
0.08
0.09
0.03
0.23
0.17
0.25
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.04
0.29
0.22
0.31
0.15
0.14
0.16
0.05
0.34
0.26
0.37
0.18
0.18
0.19
0.06
0.40
0.31
0.42
0.22
0.21
0.23
0.08
0.45
0.36
0.48
0.26
0.25
0.27
0.09
0.50
0.41
0.53
0.30
0.29
0.32
0.11
0.55
0.45
0.58
0.34
0.33
0.36
0.13
0.59
0.50
0.62
0.39
0.37
0.40
0.16
0.64
0.54
0.66
0.43
0.42
0.45
0.18
0.68
0.59
0.70
0.47
0.46
0.49
0.21
0.71
0.63
0.73
0.52
0.50
0.53
0.24
0.75
0.67
0.77
0.56
0.55
0.58
0.27
0.78
0.71
0.80
0.60
0.59
0.62
0.31
0.81
0.74
0.82
0.64
0.63
0.66
0.35
0.83
0.77
0.85
0.68
0.67
0.70
0.39
0.86
0.80
0.87
0.72
0.71
0.74
0.44
0.88
0.83
0.89
0.76
0.75
0.77
0.48
0.90
0.86
0.91
0.80
0.79
0.81
0.54
0.92
0.89
0.93
0.83
0.82
0.84
0.59
0.94
0.91
0.94
0.86
0.85
0.87
0.65
0.95
0.93
0.95
0.89
0.88
0.90
0.71
0.96
0.95
0.97
0.92
0.91
0.92
0.77
0.97
0.96
0.98
0.94
0.94
0.95
0.83
0.98
0.98
0.99
0.96
0.96
0.97
0.89
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.94
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Numeracy (32406)
Students whose Numeracy was clearly at or above the standard demonstrated strengths in:
•
locating the position of 225 mil ion years ago on a timeline
•
reading a line graph to determine the number of tuatara present, for a given year
•
extending a visual growth pattern (1, 3, 7, 15, …) to find the total number of squares in
the next term
•
locating all the lines of reflection symmetry for a headband design
•
applying the mass of one litre of water to find the mass of an empty water container
•
finding the unit rate charge, given the total cost and amount used
•
establishing which season had the highest rainfall, from a time series graph
•
reading a line graph to determine the dif erence in attendance at
Polyfest, for two given
years
•
using a timetable to compare the duration of two dif erent types of performance
•
calculating how many times heavier the tuatara is than the wētā, given the mass of both
animals
•
modelling how many tuatara wil be born in 10 years, given the frequency of egg laying
and the number of eggs per clutch
•
interpreting the scale on a map to find the location of an offshore island
•
selecting the top view that matches pictures of a sculpture
•
calculating how many amounts of $1000 there are in $2,600,000
•
interpreting a time given in hours and minutes and rounding it to the nearest hour
•
calculating the number of 250 mL glasses that can be fil ed from three 1.5 L bottles
•
using percentages to compare the amount of water in an adult pig with the amount of
water in a piglet
•
locating a probability of 2 on a scale from ‘impossible’ to ‘certain’
5
•
using two visual displays to work out how many performers needed to move to change
from one formation into another
•
organising heights, expressed as decimals, in descending order
•
explaining whether, or not, a dot plot of lengths given in mm, provides evidence for the
presence of young tuatara
•
comparing a cartoon image with normal proportions of human faces, using fractions
•
interpreting a graphic about water usage to decide which measure saves the most water
•
evaluating a claim about future numbers of attendees using evidence from a time series
graph
•
using rate (speed) to evaluate a claim about the average speed of a Rugby-7s player
during a game
•
explaining whether a captain should choose heads or tails for a future coin toss, given a
record of three previous tosses
•
using a data table to explain the correctness, or incorrectness, of a claim about the
percentage of times NZ Sevens teams made Olympic finals.
Students whose Numeracy was below the standard demonstrated that they had difficulty in:
•
selecting mathematical and statistical approaches that did not meet the demands of the
situation
•
interpreting the question correctly
•
understanding the problem, as shown by not providing an answer or stating they did not
know (IDK)
•
calculating or reasoning correctly
•
selecting a correct procedure
•
taking a position in relation to a given situation (usually any position is accepted if it is
justified)
•
justifying their position to a given situation by doing more than just restating the claim.
Marker reflections across the assessment that may support next steps:
•
experiencing a wide range of realistic contexts from everyday life, and connecting the
mathematics and statistics used across a range of contexts
•
placing value within large whole numbers, an example of multiplicative operators
between amounts, which is essential for working with rates and ratios
•
understanding basic units of measurement, especially conversions between units
•
interpreting rates
•
identifying reflective symmetry
•
locating numbers on various scales
•
interpreting dot plots to give meaning
•
understanding and interpretation of diagrammatic literacy
•
interpreting viewpoints given a situation
•
continued support for ākonga about taking a mathematical or statistical position and the
use of evidence to explain their position.
