Assessment Synergies and Tensions in Australia

• In Event: Synergy and Tension Between Large-Scale and Classroom Assessment: International Trends

Abstract

Objective: To draw on policy and research to describe the tensions and synergies between large-scale assessment and classroom teaching, learning, and assessment in Australia.

Perspective and Findings: Currently, Australia has a complex assemblage of nation-wide, state, district and school-level assessments intended to align with a national curriculum and accompanying year-level achievement standards for Foundation to Grade 10 (4-15 years). The National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) is a census test administered in all Australian schools at Years 3, 5, 7, and 9. It is the country’s only large-scale, longitudinal assessment, now in its twelfth year of implementation. NAPLAN involves the application of a 1-10 national achievement scale to classify student performance into bands that represent the national minimum standard for each year level. Historically, NAPLAN has been a pencil and paper test, moving to online administration in 2018, with some difficulties.

Australia also participates in international sample assessments. These include the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). In addition, Australia has 3-yearly sample assessments in civics and citizenship, information and communication technology (ICT) literacy, and science literacy tested on a rolling basis.

Reports on NAPLAN have been used primarily by governments at national and state levels for accountability purposes, while international assessments are used for benchmarking purposes. Referring to PISA, reports of declining comparative performance have received considerable media coverage and policy attention with the Australian Government installing various policy levers to improve international ranking in reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. This move has impacted state education policy priorities and classroom assessment practices and in part, explains why reading has been given far more intense policy attention than writing. This has been the case even though results in writing have continued to decline across the country.

NAPLAN results also routinely receive intense media coverage and policy scrutiny with comparisons made at state and school levels (Author, 2019). There has been reported narrowing of curriculum with target goals for improvement, including for identified target populations; intensified test preparation; and a focus on data for comparative purposes (Author, 2016; Lingard, Thompson, & Sellar, 2016). NAPLAN has been widely reported as impacting on school and teacher decision-making regarding curriculum priorities and implementation practices with some state governments moving to develop teacher and classroom materials at scale. A notable example is Curriculum to Classroom developed in Queensland to model pedagogic practice and assessments including assessment criteria. A review of NAPLAN is underway triggered by increasing recognition of the test’s unintended consequences on teachers, schools, and student learning and well-being. Despite considerable investment in NAPLAN, there is no clear evidence it has yielded improvements in literacy and numeracy.

Significance: Currently, three directions are clear in Australia’s profile of large scale assessments: first, policy interest in learning progressions as part of efforts to evidence student growth and achievement (Gonski, 2018); second, the customisation of learning and assessment enabled through digital technologies; and third, learning analytics for longitudinal tracking at cohort, sub-group and individual levels.

Authors

• Claire M. Wyatt-Smith, Australian Catholic University

• Lenore Adie, Australian Catholic University