- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Council
- 9 May 2002
Selective Schools Entrance Examination Coaching
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 48 of 52
| Next Item »
Page: 1934
The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [11.04 p.m.]: In recent weeks concerns have been expressed at many levels about selective schools and in particular the extent of student coaching—not coaching on the curriculum, for no-one could object to that, but on how to answer the examination questions in what is often described as examination hot-houses. On 13 June about 15,000 year 6 students will sit for places in the State's 17 selective schools. Let us be clear, entry into any of those schools is highly prized. I know, I am the product of a selective school. It is absolutely vital that the community has confidence in the examination process. This year, to address some of the criticism in relation to coaching and the apparent advantage that it seems to give some children, the Department of Education and Training has placed sample papers on its web site. It is this placement that has encouraged a concerned citizen, a former teacher at a coaching college, to write to me anonymously. Apparently the same person contacted the former shadow Minister in 1988. The allegations are grave. The 1998 letter which was enclosed began:
I wish to inform you of an illegal activity involving a coaching college named Preuni New College, of 29 The Crescent, Homebush obtaining or stealing unavailable selective school test papers set by ACER.
The letter I have recently received draws to my attention that the sample tests published by the New South Wales Department of Education and Training are exactly the same as the 1998 Pre-uni New College test papers. The papers were enclosed and indeed they are identical, identical in question order, in names and numbers. How can that be so? I have pondered all the possibilities. I do not say this lightly, as a commercial reputation is at stake. The system, as I understand it, is that the papers are set externally to the department by the Australian Council for Educational Research [ACER]. Schools are provided with the test but neither they nor their students retain copies and the department only retains one copy on file. How can a test given in 1998 by a coaching college be the same as the sample paper? No past papers are ever meant to be in general circulation.
In 1991 the owner of the Pre-uni New College, James Lee, was quoted in a Sydney Morning Herald article as saying, "We make up our own papers." Even if a sample test was used in a previous year's examination process, how did the college have an exact copy? Papers are not provided to the public. Questions can be many lines in length and I doubt that they could be memorised so accurately. I am aware from newspaper excerpts enclosed with the letters sent to me that a 1997 paper went missing from the Department of Education and Training and was the subject of some investigation. It is time the whole system was the subject of a further investigation. I have today written to the Minister for Education and Training and the Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC]. I call on the whistleblower to come forward to the ICAC, and I call on the ICAC to give that person immunity as it is clear from the correspondence that he or she had an active knowledge of illegal events. The 1998 letter suggested some of the facts that need to be investigated. It said:
The examination cheating (at the college) has been going on for at least five years, teachers involved have been well paid (over $150 per hour) for keeping this illegal activity confidential … At Preuni New College we have actual past/present selective schools test papers, scholarship exam papers and OC test papers.
In the recent letter it is alleged:
that is, Pre-uni—
had been using the same papers over many years including this year and they held other stolen papers.
Selective schools provide gifted students with a privileged opportunity. It is absolutely essential that the system is fair and above question and ensures that the best students, not the best coached students, are selected. It is time for a thorough investigation of the process and the security of the system. The investigation will need to look inside the department as well. My allegations are most serious. I have thought hard before naming the college, but not to do so would put at risk the good reputation of reputable coaching colleges.
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:37:29 : Update this page