2016 NAPLAN WASH-UP

2016 NAPLAN WASH-UP

 

 

The wild and wacky flames of NAPLAN testing are again ignited in schools across Australia this week and punters will need to don the asbestos-coated gloves to protect themselves from the embers and spot fires that will follow. In 2016, one really has to question the efficacy of this assessment ‘event’. 

From what started, way back in 1989, as a ‘tool’ for NSW schools to identify both weaknesses and strengths in their literacy and numeracy programs, the NAPLAN tests have now morphed into a high-stakes yearly ritual that has far more cons than pros. 

Apologists for the testing loudly herald that it only captures a ‘snapshot’ of each school on a particular day in a particular week during a particular phase of the moon etc. etc. etc. The ‘snapshot’ allusion is so bloody prevalent that I once considered opening a photo development store (pre-digital) because I reckon I would have made a fortune from schools developing their negatives come September of each year. 

By any measure, NAPLAN testing has advanced to much more importance than those apologists suggest. The introduction of the ‘My School’ website and the subsequent construction of league tables of schools throughout the nation attest to that alone! Many parents now consult the league tables when selecting a school for their children and this can have a direct effect on a school’s enrolments and its associated staffing levels.  

Educational authorities routinely and publicly bemoan the existence of these media-generated league tables yet provide their school education directors (i.e. inspectors) with the exact same information- in only a slightly different form- when a principal's performance is being assessed and reviewed.

But league tables aside, there is much more to deride regarding NAPLAN. The effects that it can have on individual schools, in particular, are disturbing. 

For instance, each school’s annual report must contain a large amount of information relating to their results in NAPLAN irrespective of what their general directions and performance indicators might be. Yes, on occasions, the two worlds are aligned but often they collide and it can certainly seem like two domains are being addressed rather than the all-important central theme. 

The notion of a student’s achievement ‘growth’ as he/ she moves through the NAPLAN ‘events’ from year to year is problematic…….and this is especially so with high performing students. ‘Growth’ figures are often underestimated because the tests aren’t equipped to accurately measure high performers’ abilities or development. As sure as night follows day, a school receives the NAPLAN ‘analysis’ that they aren’t catering for, or extending, this group of students enough so it becomes a teaching and learning issue at the school level. 

An increasing number of primary schools have established ‘enrichment’ classes as a response to this and such classes also serve as a valuable marketing strategy to maintain or attract enrolments. Fair enough you might think but the existence of these classes then forces other classes within the school to be larger and to wrangle lower performing students into ‘cooler’-type compounds. Great stuff. 

The information that schools receive via NAPLAN testing is often superfluous. In most cases, a teacher can peg the ability levels of students within his/ her class to a high degree of accuracy and NAPLAN scores only reinforce this professional assessment. Sure, there are the odd student bounders who unexpectedly travel up or down the achievement scales but such students are more the exception than the rule.

Moreover, the school summaries that accompany the students’ result sheets are really only pertinent to that particular year and that cohort of students. As a planning resource that might inform future teaching and learning programs, they are severely limited…..and, if followed to the letter, limiting!

Of course, an entire industry of after school tutorial centres, weekend ‘learning’ establishments and ‘educational’ publishing houses has spawned and flourished since 1989 and these institutions target students and families with NAPLAN-like tuition. Current annual turnovers are now measured in the billions of dollars here in Oz and literally involve tens of thousands of students.

With the recent state political focus on Local schools, local decisions and the national push for greater school autonomy, the NAPLAN testing program will assume an even greater high-stakes position in the coming years and its associated non-educational flotsam and jetsam may well become an ugly operating reality.