Right: a hard sell; Education Minister Peter Garrett has been "at the sharp end" of the so-called education revolution, hosting meetings, doing countless interviews explaining what the government is planning for the national schools system.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments supporting NAPLAN testing
1. The NAPLAN tests need not restrict the curriculum
The federal Education Minister, Peter Garrett, has stressed that NAPLAN is not intended to require any additional preparation beyond the instruction in literacy and numeracy that would normally be given students. Thus, the minister has argued, the testing should put no excessive strain on the curriculum, forcing out areas that are not assessed by NAPLAN.
Mr Garrett has stated, 'They [teachers] shouldn't be teaching to the test, they should be teaching students just as they always do.'
Following on from this claim, Mr Garrett has also argued that the survey conducted by the University of Melbourne is of "extremely limited value", indicating only that some teachers did not understand how and why NAPLAN was being delivered.
It has also been noted that the degree of preparation done prior to the NAPLAN testing appears reasonable and is not a distortion of most schools' curriculum offerings.
Dr David Gurr, a senior lecturer in education at the University of Melbourne, has stated, 'I think it would be unfair to put a kid into a test situation where they're unfamiliar with the type of questions being asked and so forth.
The real question is how much preparation is needed, and one of the things we're seeing in the results is that probably for a lot of schools the amount of preparation is really about where it's expected to be.'
Further, there are those who believe that placing a particular emphasis on literacy and numeracy is of value.
Susie O'Brien in an opinion piece published in The Herald Sun on November 27, 2012, wrote, 'Educators keep telling us that children shouldn't spend their time on endless NAPLAN preparation at the expense of "rich and important areas such as history, geography, physical education and music".
Yes, those are important topics for kids to learn. But I'd argue that being able to read, comprehend a piece of writing, express yourself clearly and have a good mastery of basic maths is even more important.'
2. NAPLAN tests provide useful information for governments, parents and schools
The federal government has indicated that test results provide information that enables them to direct resources to the schools which most need them. The government has also indicated that NAPLAN data is valuable to schools themselves as it indicates the areas of deficiency to which they need to direct their attention.
School Education Minister, Peter Garrett, has claimed that the results of the University of Melbourne survey did not reflect the feedback he consistently receives.
Mr Garrett has stated, 'Principals and teachers tell me that NAPLAN has proven a really valuable tool to help track student performance and direct attention and resources where they are needed.'
The same view has been expressed by the executive director of Catholic Schools in the Sydney archdiocese, Dr Dan White, who has argued, 'The reality is that formal assessment - whether that NAPLAN or any school-based assessment - is an essential part of gathering information about how a student is learning.'
In an opinion piece published on November 29, 2012, in The Adelaide Advertiser, David Penberthy stated, 'The idea of the NAPLAN tests is to have a standardised baseline measure so that students across the nation can be measured against their peers, factoring in issues of economic disadvantage. It is the first time that parents have been able to get a clear overall sense of how their child is performing - a good thing.'
Many parents have directly claimed that the NAPLAN tests give them valuable information about their children's academic performance and about the competence of their children's teachers. Susie O'Brien in an opinion piece published in The Herald Sun on November 27, 2012, wrote, 'As a parent, I want to know how my kids are shaping up against others in their class, in their school and across the country. I also want to know their teachers are doing a good job and I think NAPLAN helps us keep track of that.'
3. NAPLAN makes schools accountable for the quality of their instruction
There are those who argue that NAPLAN demonstrates the effectiveness of the instruction being offered in particular schools. This is seen as valuable as it enables those schools not at an acceptable level to focus on those areas where they are under-performing. NAPLAN also makes governments and parents aware of the effectiveness of the instruction being offered in particular schools.
Susie O'Brien, in an opinion piece published in The Herald Sun on November 27, 2012, wrote, 'As a parent, I want to know if my child or my child's school are not up to scratch. We shouldn't be allowing schools to shy away from bad performances.'
The same point has been made by Wendy Tuohy, another columnist for The Herald Sun, in her blog published on November 26, 2012.
Ms Tuohy has stated, ''If it is "evil" to introduce testing as young as grade three, and put pressure on our education system to deliver certain benchmarks in children's achievements-within a generous band of results-then I think it is a necessary evil.'
4. Stress can be valuable for students
In regard to the stress that it has been claimed NAPLAN testing places upon students, there are some who have claimed that children need to be able to cope with a degree of stress.
Reverend Bill Crews, the head of the Exodus Foundation - a not-for-profit organisation which provides assistance to the needy, including underprivileged children, has argued that stress is an inevitable part of life and that students need to learn how to deal with it.
Reverend Crews has stated, 'I find it interesting that they're talking about stress on kids learning to read. There's stress on kids doing the high school certificate and all of these sorts of things anyway, so kids are under a bit of stress and in life there is stress.'
A similar point was made by Herald Sun columnist Wendy Tuohy in her blog on November 26, 2012. Ms Tuohy stated, 'Until we set up the whole of society as a place where people are never judged on pass or fail tests, are never required to demonstrate certain skills in order to progress or achieve what they hope to achieve, then introducing this set of reasonable tests early is beneficial.'
Susie O'Brien, in an opinion piece published in The Herald Sun on November 27, 2012, wrote, 'I know sitting the NAPLAN test can be stressful for kids. But so what? Life is stressful, and they may as well get used to a little bit of pressure.
My son sat the grade 3 NAPLAN this year for the first time. In the weeks leading up to the test he talked about it quite a bit, clearly mindful of its importance. He was nervous but I thought the pressure was good for him and liked the rigour offered by the good old-fashioned exam-style testing.'
It has also been claimed that the extent of the stress that NAPLAN creates for students may be being exaggerated.
Dr David Gurr is a senior lecturer in education at the University of Melbourne. His three children sat NAPLAN tests and he has claimed that none of them was stressed.
Dr Gurr has stated, ' We're not sure to what extent anything reported in the survey is unusual, so when we're looking at people taking tests there's always going to be some people who are stressed by it. So it's not clear from this one that there's actually a high level of stress, in fact I was looking at the results and thinking relatively that they seem to be low.'
5. NAPLAN results can be used for diagnostic purposes
It has been noted that NAPLAN tests provide detailed information on the performance of both individual students and whole cohorts of students. This information can then be used to provide targeted instruction to address areas of weakness.
Susie O'Brien, in an opinion piece published in The Herald Sun on November 27, 2012, wrote, 'As long as the results are used to improve things that need to be done better, there should be no problem.'
It has also been noted that the diagnostic data can be used outside schools to direct assistance to those areas where it is needed. The executive director of Catholic Schools in the Sydney archdiocese, Dr Dan White, has stressed the value of NAPLAN data is helping him determine which schools under his control needed to receive additional funding..
Dr White has claimed that the diagnostic information that NAPLAN provides is 'incredibly useful'.
Dr White has stated, 'Just today, I authorised intervention funding to a school to improve numeracy outcomes for its students.
It was the growth trends in numeracy that we used to make this decision, and this was information we obtained by looking at the school's NAPLAN results.'
It has also been noted that if many schools are not using the diagnostic potential of the NAPLAN tests, the fault lies with these schools rather than with the tests.
Susie O'Brien, writing in The Herald Sun, has further suggested, 'It seems to me that the bigger problem is schools and teachers who say they wouldn't do anything about bad results.
The University of Melbourne study found less than half of the schools surveyed used the NAPLAN results to identify weakness and make improvements to teaching practice. That seems ridiculous.'
6. Those criticising NAPLAN have their own biases
It has been suggested that many of the critics of the NAPLAN testing are speaking from a biased position. This claim has been made with particular reference to the various teacher unions that oppose the testing. Those who are sceptical about teacher union criticisms argue that these bodies are merely objecting to teachers being held accountable for student performance.
In a comment published in The Adelaide Advertiser on November 29, 2012, David Penberthy stated, '... the intention of the teachers who filled in the survey was coloured more by an industrial agenda than a focus on learning for kids and transparency for parents.'
Mr Penberthy went on to argue, 'I am convinced the reason the teachers' union has railed against it is that parents might start asking questions of their members as to why their child is struggling...
The fact it has been resisted by the Australian Education Union and its state union affiliates is in keeping with their long-standing hostility towards data-based measurement of teacher performance.'
It has further been claimed that the University of Melbourne survey results are not representative of the opinions of most teachers.
The federal Education Minister, Peter Garrett, argues that as the 8,300 teachers surveyed volunteered to their views, they are likely to reflect the views of those who for one reason or another are dissatisfied with NAPLAN testing.
Mr Garrett has stated, 'There's a lot of teachers in Australia and this doesn't constitute a large number of them.
It's a self-selecting survey ... and I don't think this survey is helpful.'
Mr Garrett said the survey was of "extremely limited value" that indicated some teachers did not understand how and why NAPLAN was being delivered.