The fact that the NCCA has no real control over the examination system is regarded as a weakness in some quarters and a strength in others.
According to its chief executive, Albert O Ceallaigh, the decision to separate the curricular and exam functions was wise. "If you want objectivity and independence and confidence in the the public examination system, there's a lot to be said for the Department of Education and Science continuing to exercise that function." UCC's Professor Aine Hyland takes another view. "I would prefer to see the NCCA take a stronger role in assessment so that it would be more closely aligned with the curriculum. The difficulty is that so much of assessment takes place in an end-of-year exam, which is a function of the Department of Education. "Whoever sets the exams can indirectly control what's happening in schools. In practice, the inspectors have close links with the NCCA but in a worst-case scenario, it could go badly wrong." The fact that one of the NCCA's objectives under the terms of the Education Act is to advise the Minister on assessment procedures leaves the way open for it to play a greater role, Hyland says.
Dr Ed Walsh is also critical of the decision to separate curriculum and exam functions. Our current exam system, he says, is "a liability". He is critical, too, of the inspectorate's role in exams. "Individual whimsy is applied to how difficult exams should be and how the curriculum should be developed. The differences in grades awarded from year to year and across disciplines is statistically impossible, he argues. "There should be only the slightest shift in the results coming out of the exam system. The great perversion of the Irish education system is that students with latent interests and capabilities in certain subject areas are discouraged from taking them because they perceive them as requiring too much work." The system, he says, is to blame for the fact that geography and home economics are perceived as being easier than maths, history and physics. "The exam system could, in a very short time, make huge changes to this."
The ASTI's recent decision to withdraw from the consultative meetings on the Junior Cert is a great blow to the NCCA. In 1992, the council published details of a Junior Cert which would include school-based assessments of oral, practical and project work. In the event, the Junior Cert syllabus went ahead, without the benefit of these new forms of assessment, because of the unwillingness of teachers to participate.
The Junior Certificate - Issues for Discussion, launched in September by Minister Martin, is an attempt to move the process on. The TUI says it is happy to co-operate, but the ASTI has dug in its heels. Unless a way forward is found for the Junior Cert exams, no improvements can be expected at Leaving Cert level, the NCCA says.
