Page 75 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 75
m. šimenc, z. kodelja ■ the realization of the right to education in slovenia
lacking in the strictness in marking was the actual cause for the increase
in the A-student numbers, the elimination of the overall achievement pre-
vents us in establishing whether the strictness of marking has increased
due to that. The only thing we know is that the before mentioned anoma-
ly, which was expressed as an abnormal increase in the A-student numbers
is not visible today because of this elimination. Nevertheless, the question
remains whether this measure uprooted the cause for the then increase in
A-student numbers. It is quite possible that this abnormality now contin-
ues with the marks for individual curriculum subjects. Certain data con-
firm this hypothesis. According to the National Examinations Centre, the
rate of A-students in school years 2008–2010, if calculated only from the
average of final marks for compulsory subjects for ninth class, was approx-
imately five percent lower than before, while the rate of B-students in-
creased by roughly the same percentage. However, more than 25% of pu-
pils were still A-students. If we add B-students, we see that more than
60% of pupils were B- or A-students, while the rate of F- and D-students
remained almost the same as the years previous, namely around eight per-
cent. This distribution of academic success is abnormal.
We can conclude that the elimination of the overall achievement
was not an effective measure, if assessed by its influence on the fairness of
marking, which can be in this case defined as proportionality between the
exhibited knowledge and received mark. The measure might have been ef-
ficient, but this doesn’t mean that it was correct or necessary. If the par-
ents put pressure on the teachers to give better marks, since the overall
achievement decided whether their children could have enrolled at their
general upper secondary school of choice or not, the school authorities
should have stepped in and protected the teachers against these undue
pressures and ensure the conditions which would have enabled the teach-
ers to mark the pupils fairly. They could also ease these pressures by taking
marks gained by the external assessment of knowledge into account for
enrolment. However, they did exactly the opposite. They reduced the na-
tional assessment of knowledge to mere feedback for pupils and teachers,
and which as such has practically no weigh in selective procedures for en-
rolment at secondary schools with limited admittance.10
Private education
The first attempts to regulate the formal situation of private education
in Slovenia were presented in 1995, in the White Paper on Education in
the Republic in Slovenia which introduced starting points for education
10 For more on this, see Kodelja, 2012.
73
lacking in the strictness in marking was the actual cause for the increase
in the A-student numbers, the elimination of the overall achievement pre-
vents us in establishing whether the strictness of marking has increased
due to that. The only thing we know is that the before mentioned anoma-
ly, which was expressed as an abnormal increase in the A-student numbers
is not visible today because of this elimination. Nevertheless, the question
remains whether this measure uprooted the cause for the then increase in
A-student numbers. It is quite possible that this abnormality now contin-
ues with the marks for individual curriculum subjects. Certain data con-
firm this hypothesis. According to the National Examinations Centre, the
rate of A-students in school years 2008–2010, if calculated only from the
average of final marks for compulsory subjects for ninth class, was approx-
imately five percent lower than before, while the rate of B-students in-
creased by roughly the same percentage. However, more than 25% of pu-
pils were still A-students. If we add B-students, we see that more than
60% of pupils were B- or A-students, while the rate of F- and D-students
remained almost the same as the years previous, namely around eight per-
cent. This distribution of academic success is abnormal.
We can conclude that the elimination of the overall achievement
was not an effective measure, if assessed by its influence on the fairness of
marking, which can be in this case defined as proportionality between the
exhibited knowledge and received mark. The measure might have been ef-
ficient, but this doesn’t mean that it was correct or necessary. If the par-
ents put pressure on the teachers to give better marks, since the overall
achievement decided whether their children could have enrolled at their
general upper secondary school of choice or not, the school authorities
should have stepped in and protected the teachers against these undue
pressures and ensure the conditions which would have enabled the teach-
ers to mark the pupils fairly. They could also ease these pressures by taking
marks gained by the external assessment of knowledge into account for
enrolment. However, they did exactly the opposite. They reduced the na-
tional assessment of knowledge to mere feedback for pupils and teachers,
and which as such has practically no weigh in selective procedures for en-
rolment at secondary schools with limited admittance.10
Private education
The first attempts to regulate the formal situation of private education
in Slovenia were presented in 1995, in the White Paper on Education in
the Republic in Slovenia which introduced starting points for education
10 For more on this, see Kodelja, 2012.
73
