Does school type affect cognitive and non-cognitive development in children? Evidence from Australian primary schools

This paper investigates the effects of primary school choices on cognitive and non-cognitive development in children using data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). We militate against the measurement problems that are associated with individual unobserved heterogeneity by exploiting the richness of LSAC data and applying contemporary econometric approaches. We find that sending children to Catholic or other independent primary schools has no significant effect on their cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes. The literature now has evidence from three different continents that the returns to attending Catholic primary schools are no different than public schools.

Interrogating policy contradictions in literacy reforms about persuasive texts

Objectives Our overarching objective is to demonstrate the political contradictions about about how persuasive texts should be taught in the middle years of schooling, analysing two contradictory Australian wide educational reforms. We consider the complexities of power and access to literacy for students in relation to these reforms about the privileged genre of persuasion. Our work is framed by our appreciation of literacy as a social justice issue, and the notion of students’ pedagogic rights (Bernstein, 2000). Specifically, we introduce and analyse the knowledge and skills about persuasive text sanctioned by the Australian high-stakes test, the National Assessment Program for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), for students in the middle years of schooling (ACARA, 2013). We compare this to the contemporary emphasis on multimodal persuasive texts sanctioned by the recently released Australian Curriculum English (ACARA, 2014). We conclude our analysis by identifying biases in the structure of particular knowledges and the inherent threats to democracy.

The life of data: Evolving national testing

To this point, the collection has provided research-based, empirical accounts of the various and multiple effects of the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) in Australian schooling as a specific example of the global phenomenon of national testing. In this chapter, we want to develop a more theoretical analysis of national testing systems, globalising education policy and the promise of national testing as adaptive, online tests. These future moves claim to provide faster feedback and more useful diagnostic help for teachers. There is a utopian testing dream that one day adaptive, online tests will be responsive in real time providing an integrated personalised testing, pedagogy and intervention for each student. The moves towards these next generation assessments are well advanced, including the work of Pearson’s NextGen Learning and Assessment research group, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) move into assessing affective skills and the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s (ACARA) decision to phase in NAPLAN as an online, adaptive test from 2017...

National testing from an Australian perspective

Introduction This book examines a pressing educational issue: the global phenomenon of national testing in schooling and its vernacular development in Australia. The Australian National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), introduced in 2008, involves annual census testing of students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 in nearly all Australian schools. In a variety of ways, NAPLAN affects the lives of Australia’s 3.5 million school students and their families, as well as more than 350,000 school staff and many other stakeholders in education. This book is organised in relation to a simple question: What are the effects of national testing for systems, schools and individuals? Of course, this simple question requires complex answers. The chapters in this edited collection consider issues relating to national testing policy, the construction of the test, usages of the testing data and various effects of testing in systems, schools and classrooms. Each chapter examines an aspect of national testing in Australia using evidence drawn from research. The final chapter by the editors of this collection provides a broader reflection on this phenomenon and situates developments in testing globally...

Local experiences, global similarities: Teacher perceptions of the impacts of national testing

Since 2008, Australian schoolchildren in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 have sat a series of tests each May designed to assess their attainment of basic skills in literacy and numeracy. These tests are known as the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). In 2010, individual school NAPLAN data were first published on the MySchool website which enables comparisons to be made between individual schools and statistically like schools across Australia. NAPLAN represents the increased centrality of the federal government in education, particularly in regards to education policy. One effect of this has been a recast emphasis of education as an economic, rather than democratic, good. As Reid (2009) suggests, this recasting of education within national productivity agendas mobilises commonsense discourses of accountability and transparency. These are common articles of faith for many involved in education administration and bureaucracy; more and better data, and holding people to account for that data, must improve education...

The logics of good teaching in an audit culture: A Deleuzian analysis

This article examines the attempted reform of education within an emerging audit culture in Australia that has led to the implementation of a high-stakes testing regime known as NAPLAN. NAPLAN represents a machine of auditing, which creates and accounts for data that are used to measure, amongst other things, good teaching. In particular, we address the logics of a policy intervention that aims to improve the quality of education through returning ‘good teaching’. Using Deleuze’s concepts of series, events, copies and simulacra, we suggest that an attempt to return past commonsense logics of ‘good teaching’ as a result of NAPLAN is not possible. In an audit culture as exemplified by NAPLAN, ‘good teaching’ is being reconceptualized through those practices and becomes unrecognizable. Whilst policy claims to improved equity and quality are admirable, this article suggests that the simulacral change to logics of good teaching may actualize something very different.

Performance pay for Australian teachers: A critical policy historiography

In May 2011, the Australian Federal Education Minister announced there would be a unique, innovative and new policy of performance pay for teachers, Rewards for Great Teachers (Garrett, 2011a). In response, this paper uses critical policy historiography to argue that the unintended consequences of performance pay for teachers makes it unlikely it will deliver improved quality or efficiency in Australian schools. What is new, in the Australian context, is that performance pay is one of a raft of education policies being driven by the federal government within a system that constitutionally and historically has placed the responsibility for schooling with the states and territories. Since 2008, a key platform of the Australian federal Labor government has been a commitment to an Education Revolution that would promote quality, equity and accountability in Australian schools. This commitment has resulted in new national initiatives impacting on Australian schools including a high-stakes testing regime 14 National Assessment Program 13 Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) 14a mandated national curriculum (the Australian Curriculum), professional standards for teachers and teacher accreditation 14Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) 14and the idea of rewarding excellent teachers through performance pay (Garrett, 2011b). These reforms demonstrate the increased influence of the federal government in education policy processes and the growth of a 1Ccoercive federalism 1D that pits the state and federal governments against each other (Harris-Hart, 2010). Central to these initiatives is the measuring, or auditing, of educational practices and relationships. While this shift in education policy hegemony from state to federal governments has been occurring in Australia at least since the 1970s, it has escalated and been transformed in more recent times with a greater emphasis on national human capital agendas which link education and training to Australia 19s international economic competitiveness (Lingard & Sellar, in press). This paper uses historically informed critical analysis to critique claims about the effects of such policies. We argue that performance pay has a detailed and complex historical trajectory both internationally and within Australian states. Using Gale 19s (2001) critical policy historiography, we illuminate some of the effects that performance pay policies have had on education internationally and in particular within Australia. This critical historical lens also provides opportunities to highlight how teachers have, in the past, tactically engaged with such policies.

Who pays for standardised testing? A cost-benefit study of mandated testing in three Queensland secondary schools

This paper reports on an Australian study that explored the costs and benefits of the National Assessment Programme, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) testing, both tangible and intangible, of Year 9 students in three Queensland schools. The study commenced with a review of pertinent studies and other related material about standardised testing in Australia, the USA and UK. Information about NAPLAN testing and reporting, and the pedagogical impacts of standardised testing were identified, however little about administrative costs to schools was found. A social constructivist perspective and a multiple case study approach were used to explore the actions of school managers and teachers in three Brisbane secondary schools. The study found that the costs of NAPLAN testing to schools fell into two categories: preparation of students for the testing; and administration of the tests. Whilst many of the costs could not be quantified, they were substantial and varied according to the education sector in which the school operated. The benefits to schools of NAPLAN testing were found to be limited. The findings have implications for governments, curriculum authorities and schools, leading to the conclusion that, from a school perspective, the benefits of NAPLAN testing do not justify the costs.

Ethical leadership in a time of increasing accountability

Australia, like many other countries, has embraced national testing as part of wider reforms and increased accountability in schooling. Results for standardised testing programs, such as NAPLAN, are widely published yet form only one part of accountability for educators. We argue that accountability also has moral, ethical and professional dimensions. In this paper we offer a discussion of background to our study of ethical leadership in a time of data driven or contractual accountability. Based on Starratt’s (1996) model, we define ethical leadership as a social, relational practice concerned with the moral purpose of education (Angus, 2006). Our central thesis is that given increasing accountabilities, school leaders need to consider approaches to ethical leadership to improve quality and equity in education and achieve equitable outcomes for all students. The paper concludes with key implications for school leaders.

Curriculum reform in testing and accountability contexts

Recent international educational developments have important implications for the skills and understandings in curriculum and assessment that teachers develop, both in pre-service and in practice. Global developments in curriculum and assessment reform require teachers to utilise a network of knowledges and develop a repertoire of assessment skills and understandings. In a context of testing, accountability and auditing, data analysis skills are increasingly required to examine pedagogic practices for the development of intervention teaching and learning strategies to improve learning outcomes for all students (Marsh, 2009). However, too often the data are used predominantly for accountability purposes that serve at national levels as a catalyst for measurement, comparison and allocation of funding (Lingard and Sellar, 2013). With increased accountability demands brought about by global competitiveness and programs for international measurement of educational attainment, there has also emerged an increase in the use of testing, which in some countries has become the dominant form of assessment. For example in Australia, national testing of students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 began in 2008 under the National Australia Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). The results from this program for each school are published on the My School website (www.myschool.edu.au), increasing the competitive nature of the testing and intensifying the demands on teachers and schools. In particular, there has been a shift in the enacted curriculum in Australia to a focus on literacy and numeracy because the curriculum is tested.

Reconceptualising inclusion as participation: Neoliberal buck-passing or strategic by-passing?

This paper investigates increases in the identification of special educational needs in the New South Wales (NSW) government school system over the last two decades, which are then discussed with senior public servants working within the NSW Department of Education and Communities (DEC). Participant narratives indicate deep structural barriers to inclusion that are perpetuated by the discourses and practices of regular and special education. Despite policies that speak of ‘working together’ for ‘every student’ and ‘every school’, students who experience difficulty in schools and with learning often remain peripheral to the main game, even though their number is said to be increasing. There is, however, some positive progress being made. Findings suggest that key policy figures within the NSW DEC are keenly aware of the barriers and have adopted alternative strategies to drive inclusion via a new discourse of ‘participation’ which is underpinned by the linking of student assessment and the resourcing of schools.

Written numeracy assessment in the early years: The challenges of pronouns and noun groups

We examine the challenges of pronouns and noun groups in the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s (ACARA) Year 3 National Assessment Program - Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) Numeracy Example Test (ACARA, 2015a). Framed by discourses of Literacy as a General Capability (ACARA, 2015b) in the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics (ACARA, 2015c), the pronouns and noun groups used in the Example Test are mapped onto the Australian Curriculum: English Content Descriptions (ACARA, 2015d). The findings are that some of the pronouns and noun groups used in the Example Test are more complex than what Year 3 children are expected to achieve in the Australian Curriculum: English. We thus stress the need for early years teachers of mathematics to account for the unique mathematical register of written mathematics problems so that young children are not only prepared for high-stakes written numeracy assessments, but are also enabled as a numerically literate citizen.

Student understandings of numeracy problems: Semantic alignment and analogical reasoning

Despite compulsory mathematics throughout primary and junior secondary schooling, many schools across Australia continue in their struggle to achieve satisfactory numeracy levels. Numeracy is not a distinct subject in school curriculum, and in fact appears as a general capability in the Australian Curriculum, wherein all teachers across all curriculum areas are responsible for numeracy. This general capability approach confuses what numeracy should look like, especially when compared to the structure of numeracy as defined on standardised national tests. In seeking to define numeracy, schools tend to look at past NAPLAN papers, and in doing so, we do not find examples drawn from the various aspects of school curriculum. What we find are more traditional forms of mathematical worded problems.

Media accounts of school performance: Reinforcing dominant practices of accountability

Media reportage often act as interpretations of accountability policies thereby making the news media a part of the policy enactment process. Within such a process, their role is that of policy reinforcement rather than policy construction or contestation. This paper draws on the experiences of school leaders in regional Queensland, Australia, and their perceptions of the media frames that are used to report on accountability using school performance. The notion of accountability is theorised in terms of media understandings of ‘holding power to account’, and forms the theoretical framework for this study. The methodological considerations both contextualise aspects of the schools involved in the study, and outline how ‘framing theory’ was used to analyse the data. The paper draws on a number of participant experiences and newspaper accounts of schools to identify the frames that are used by the press when reporting on school performance. Three frames referring to school performance are discussed in this paper: those that rank performance such as league tables; frames that decontextualise performance isolating it from school circumstances and levels of funding; and frames that residualise government schools.

The problem of simplification: Think-tanks, recipes, equity and ‘Turning around low-performing schools’

Non-government actors such as think-tanks are playing an important role in Australian policy work. As governments increasingly outsource policy work previously done by education departments and academics to these new policy actors, more think-tanks have emerged that represent a wide range of political views and ideological positions. This paper looks at the emergence of the Grattan Institute as one significant player in Australian education policy with a particular emphasis on Grattan’s report ‘Turning around low-performing schools’. Grattan exemplifies many of the facets of Barber’s ‘deliverology’, as they produce reports designed to be easily digested, simply actioned and provide reassurance that there is an answer, often through focusing on ‘what works’ recipes. ‘Turning around low-performing schools’ is a perfect example of this deliverology. However, a close analysis of the Report suggests that it contains four major problems which seriously impact its usefulness for schools and policymakers: it ignores data that may be more important in explaining the turn-around of schools, the Report is overly reliant on NAPLAN data, there are reasons to be suspicious about the evidence assembled, and finally the Report falls into a classic trap of logic—the post hoc fallacy.