Page 3196 - Week 10 - Thursday, 18 October 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(2) Has a NSW Scaling Committee Table (Table) played a role in the UAI determination process, as described in sections 5.4.1 (page 51) and 5.4.3.3 (page 52) of the Manual;
(3) Why does the Manual not include a copy of the Table;
(4) Is the Table available for inspection anywhere on the BSSS or Department of Education and Training (DET) websites;
(5) Did the Table used in 2006 differ from that used in 2005; if so, (a) what were the differences and (b) how did they affect UAIs;
(6) Can the Tables used to determine UAIs in 2006, 2005 and other past years be placed on the BSSS and/or DET websites so that affected students, parents and other members of the public may inspect them;
(7) Given that “the UAI is a ranking of a student relative to the full age cohort ie relative to the set of students who would be in the group if all students stayed on and completed Year 12”, the Manual, section 5.4.3.3 (page 52), why are notional aggregates (a) only calculated for ACT senior secondary system students (references to ACT senior secondary system students exclude students from Canberra Grammar School) who complete Year 12 and at least one T subject, as stated in section 5.4.1 on page 51, (b) not calculated for ACT senior secondary system students who do not complete a T subject but do complete Year 12, given that such students are part of the full age cohort that UAIs are supposed to rank and (c) not calculated for ACT senior secondary system students who do not complete Year 12 but do complete at least one T subject, given that such students are clearly part of the full age cohort that UAIs are supposed to rank;
(8) How does the ACT UAI calculation process take into account those students who complete Year 10, and are hence part of the full age cohort which UAIs are supposed to rank, as reflected in the NSW UAI determination process, but who do not complete Year 12 and at least one T subject;
(9) Is it a reasonable expectation that the accuracy and fairness of ACT UAIs would improve if notional aggregates were calculated for students who left school after completing Year 10 but did not complete Year 12 two years after they completed Year 10, including those who do not begin Year 11 at all, and those who leave part way through Years 11 or 12;
(10) For each of the past five years, how many students (a) in the ACT senior secondary system were assigned notional aggregates as part of the UAI determination process, (b) in the ACT senior secondary system completed Year 12 but did not complete any T subjects and did not have a notional aggregate calculated for them, (c) were enrolled in Year 12 for at least part of the year, completed at least one T subject during their time within the ACT senior secondary system, but did not complete Year 12 and did not have a notional aggregate calculated for them and (d) who received UAIs were repeating students who had been enrolled in Year 12 in a previous year;
(11) For each of the five years 2001 to 2005, how many students enrolled in February in Year 11 in the ACT senior secondary system, did not complete (a) Year 11 within the ACT senior secondary system that year and (b) Year 12 within the ACT senior secondary system the following year;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .