Since NAPLAN was introduced in 2008, it has been a high stakes testing arena. The high stakes status is created through the publication of the test results on the MySchool website, allowing schools to be ranked. This high stakes status has created a culture where schools are competing for funding, student enrolments and many teachers feel that they should 'teach to the test'. There an ample amount of international research that suggests that high stakes testing is not effective and can also have negative impacts on students mental health. Students that come from a cultural and linguistically diverse (CALD) background are often at a disadvantage to 'perform well' as they are learning English as a second language. There have been reports that students from a CALD background were asked to stay home on the day of the test which can strengthen stigma and isolation.

Thank heaven there is at least a test the teachers can't manipulate, to avoid exposure of their incompetence.

What we need is a return to a full externally set & marked exam to sort university entrance. At least then Uni would not have to spend months on remedial math & physics before even starting courses.

The current system gives us kids who submitted good assignments, which could have been done by anyone, can reproduce none of it at schools end, but have great OP results.

Also about time kids were given a bit of stress at school exams. They are going to have much more difficulty in the real world, after being wrapped in cotton wool at school.

Teachers claim they want to produce rounded people, & turn out uneducated wimps.

Rest assured, Hasbeen that NAPLAN provides heaps of stress for students, starting at grade three and continuing every two years thereafter.

Of course, before the actual stress of the exam, months are spent preparing the kiddies for (and adding to) their stress by "teaching to test" - so that the school can get a good mark and more funding.

So we have the worst of all worlds - stressed out kids, stressed out teachers - a system that pours information into children, pretty much hotch-potch with little continuity with their lives or experience.

You are right though, that standardised testing has very little to do with the "real world".

Don't blame the teachers - blame the system.

The lack of regular independent testing is necessary to prevent kids reaching high school that can't read. The issue about "stressed kids" is also a furphy, as most schools don't prep kids, and even if they did, the tests are only once every 2 years, and at least prepares them for the HSC.

Considering that Naplan is based on the curriculum, teaching to the Naplan test ensures that at least they cover the basics, and some exam technique to boot.

The only teachers that seem to complain about Naplan are those trying to hide their incompetence under a bushel.

SM,

You have got to be joking...they "do" "prep" students for NAPLAN - in fact there's a whole developed publishing industry now to cater for the "NAPLAN experience" - both inside and outside of school.

http://www.pascalpress.com.au/NAPLAN-Tests-Basic-Skills-renamed-s/415.htm

Are you telling me that individual teachers would not be aware whether or not certain children under their watch can read or not?

Teachers are aware of weaknesses...yet the idea of NAPLAN is to pitch schools against each other.

Standardised testing has been rejected by those in the US who championed it in the first place - as it became obvious that it wasn't implemented to improve educational outcomes, but merely to denigrate teachers and close down schools.

Here's former US assistant education secretary, Diane Ravitch of the subject:

http://www.npr.org/2011/04/28/135142895/ravitch-standardized-testing-undermines-teaching

Poirot - you make an excellent point regarding the US who are now trying to back track from the No Child Left Behind Act 2001 which was based upon standardised testing based on emerging evidence of its epic failure.

This begs the question - Why is Australia heading down the standardised testing path given the evidence of its failure in the US and UK? Do our kids not deserve a fair and equitable education experience that goes beyond reducing their ability to a simple test score?

The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (2008) was developed by Education Ministers and states that a goal for Education is to create 'Confident and Creative Individuals' - I am left to wonder how reducing a curriculum to basic literacy and numeracy exams that involve kids colouring in a bubble on a multiple choice test helps to develop 'Confident and Creative Individuals'... NAPLAN is changing Australia's education culture. We need to promote a holistic curriculum and encourage collaboration, not competition

I am also of the opinion that standardised education reform is the death sentence of creativity in our children.
Sir Ken Robinson is a leading author and spokesman on the subject of education and creativity and I encourage anyone with some spare time to watch some of the YouTube links below of his talks;

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wX78iKhInsc

No Poirot, we are not telling you "that individual teachers would not be aware whether or not certain children under their watch can read or not?" What we are telling you that a lot of teachers don't give a damn whether the kids can or not.

We also telling you that they will care a damn sight more, when test results show the parents exactly how bad they are, & how poorly they are serving their kids. That is why teachers, or their union fight any testing from outside.

BecM let me assure you we don't send our kids to school to be taught by any damn fool who thinks creativity can be taught. We'll look after that thanks.

We send them to school first & foremost for the "three Rs". Once school has got those to a level where the kids can function in society, we then want them given enough science to enable them to see through things like the Global warming scam, & teachers being able to teach creativity.

We would also like them to develop rational thought process, so unlike some Education Ministers, they can not be sold a pup like 'create Confident and Creative Individuals', rather than literacy. Talk about a cop out to protect the incompetent teacher.

While we allow teachers to get away with hiding their massive failure rate, the kids have no chance. So back to testing thanks, & publishing the results for all to see. Our kids deserve at least that much of testing the teachers.

Hasbeen,

Tell me how spending millions upon millions to tell teachers something they already know and to pitch school against school in the battle for funds is supposed to help those kids who have missed the boat or who come from challenged backgrounds.

Surely money would be better spent on remedial programs for children.

(Albeit, you don't seem to have picked up much, since you revel in relying on junk science and recourse to conspiracy theory for much of your climate rant)

Poirot and BecM,

You need to separate the testing from the purpose for which the results are used. Remember that the Naplan tests were going on long before the website comparison of the results. Using the results to close or punish schools is certainly going to poison the schools against the system, and I believe is the root of the failure of the system in the US.

On the other hand, I feel that it is a little rich to expect teachers to mentally be aware of the full range of the strengths and weaknesses of their pupils. While I would expect them to know if their students could not read, there are likely to be many areas where the pupil is struggling that the teacher is not aware. The Naplan test is worthwhile if for no other reason that it highlights the strengths and weaknesses. A diligent teacher or school will use this at least to get help for the students where they are struggling.

Independent schools get the results that they do precisely because they test the students at least twice a year in each subject. The exam preparation helps reinforce the learning, and the exam results show where the pupil is weak.

Wow, SM - things must have changed so much.

We used to have weekly tests on all the things we'd covered during the week on Friday mornings in primary school.

Fancy that, a "no-fuss" test without all the hoopla and bells and whistles, stress and expense of NAPLAN.

It makes you wonder how they ever turned out literate children - which they did in spades.

I'm sorry mate, but educational history is littered with nouveau psyched up paradigms which fall by the wayside almost as often as they're dreamed up. Usually it's tried and true methods that are re-adopted to try and make up for the follies.

Poirot,

Since you are not averse to testing kids (which many are), and the Hoopla around the Naplan testing only really started when the results were published, my assumption is that Hoopla is drummed up by the teachers union.

My kids are finishing high school and because I move around, have been to several public and private schools. (normally the better ones) and I have yet to see any preparation by teachers for the Naplan tests, nor have I seen any kids stressed not spoken to any parents of stressed kids. While there might be a few, I believe this to be purely anecdotal and blown out of proportion.

If you have any hard evidence I would be most grateful.

SM,

I've read about and heard of children being uncommonly stressed because of NAPLAN testing.

My son doesn't do NAPLAN, but then in a one on one situation, I'm aware of his strengths and weaknesses - and we're not competing with other schools for funding or reputation.

Found this article which is based on a survey of 8,300 teachers - might be helpful.

http://theconversation.com/testing-the-test-naplan-makes-for-stressed-kids-and-a-narrow-curriculum-10965

Poirot,

Other than the 8300 teachers surveyed, there is not a single number. We have "some", "a number" etc, is it 5 or 5000?

My wife was a senior school English teacher until recently, and is yet to hear of any specific examples, and while my "evidence" is only anecdotal, I remain sceptical.

SM,

I think you'll find that weighty series of tests, most of significant duration, are far more challenging and stressful to the age bracket encompassing grade 3 and grade 5 than they would be to a high school student.

The examples I'm familiar with are at primary school level.

Poirot when training show jumpers we have a technique called "old hat".

It really is quite simple, it is basically a familiarisation system.

The first time a horse sees a wall constructed of old car tyres, they are terrified by it. All those holes & gaps, where something horrible might be hiding. Jump that, no way says the sensible horse. Build one in their paddock, & curiosity will have them knock it down a few times, first in fear, then in fun.

Our stallion ended up cantering around the paddock carrying a tyre in his mouth, but then, he is quite a horse.

The same goes for jumping into , or over water, shinny planks, or imitation brick walls, etc. It takes a couple of years for them to consider all the things course builders use as "old hat" & familiar. Ultimately they believe that if you ask them to do it, it must be safe, & do-able for them. That is how you form a partnership with your horse.

Kids aren't much different, except that they can't carry you so far. Most are frightened of the unknown.

That's why exams had no fear for most kids in my day. We had done major exams twice a year for years, by the time we were in senior school. They were old hat. The only ones who had a problem with exams were those who would never be any good in difficult situations, or those who's parents made them apprehensive by demanding too much, or by severely punishing poor results.

People who can't handle any stress are limited in life, by that. Schools should introduce stress in increasing doses to kids through out their school career, to enable them to function out in the big nasty world, when the time comes. No one will be running interference, & eliminating stress for them out there.

I believe the rejection of exams has nothing to do with kids, & everything to do with inferior teachers. They are the ones feeling the stress, & should be, until they lift their game, or get out.

Poirot,

The Naplan tests are done over several days, and consist mostly of multiple choice. The stress can only come if the children are fearful of doing badly. As I said previously my experience (which does not count for much here) is that I have yet to meet the parent of a kid that felt "stress". I only ever heard about "stressed kids" when Naplan began to be published. I spent some time last night scanning a few blogs with regards this topic, and as far as I could see, everyone had heard of this stress, yet no one knew of any one that had.

My suspicion is that of the hundreds of thousands of pupils, that there are only a tiny proportion actually suffering from stress.

There should be no surprise in 'teach to the test' for NAPLAN. This form of national standardized testing has been researched in the USA for many years. There is an extensive series of reports from RAND on what standardized performance assessment of students, teachers and schools does. The research shows that such testing is of limited value and can lead to rigging of the system by individual teachers, schools and whole education sectors: http://www.rand.org/topics/educational-program-evaluation.html

Some standardized testing is useful for quality control, to see how things are going generally. But in my view, the current emphasis on "schools" is a distraction from where education is heading: on-line. There seems to be the idea still current that what students should do is sit silently in straight rows listening to the teacher, absorbing knowledge and then reproducing it on the examination. This is not a very useful, or cost effective, way to do education.

ps: I will be speaking on "MOOCs with Books" at CSIRO in Canberra, 8 July 2013: http://moocs.eventbrite.com.au/

Thanks, Tom.

It surely does seem to be the way with modern "education".

The idea that a child's mind is there to be filled by pouring information in (usually delivered willy-nilly and out of any constructive context).

The next step is to get the kiddies to regurgitate it, especially by ticking boxes - and Voila! - that is supposedly going to give a good idea of the child's capabilities.

I submit that it will give a good idea of the child's ability to passively imbibe detail and then to regurgitate it in a test.

Can't say more than that. It's certainly no guide to whether a child can self-direct their own investigations or creativity.

Has it ever occurred to you Poirot, that a kid has to be able to read & write, & do a bit of arithmetic to get a reasonable score in a NAPLAN, or any other outside written & marked test. Coaching in those basics, required for successfully doing the NAPLAN, may be the only things some teachers ever actually do.

Seems like a good idea as well, to find out what a kid has learnt, rather than take some teachers word that the kids cam do it all.

Has it also ever occurred to you that it is a bit hard to "self-direct their own investigations or creativity", when you can't read, or work out your change for a bus ticket.

Recent tests in QLD have shown that 40% of the population are functionally illiterate, in as much as they can't read & understand instructions, or check their bank statement. Surely even you can understand checking your bank statement is more important than dreaming.

Perhaps you are too far from the problem to understand how badly many kids of quite reasonable intelligence are doing, all hidden by teacher assessment.

Hasbeen,

You'll have to try harder to convince me that teachers aren't already aware of weaknesses amongst the students that they oversee.

You'll have to try harder to convince me that they have to wait for the results of a NAPLAN - standardised test - to be informed of the weaknesses amongst the children they teach.

Then you can tell me what is being done to address the weaknesses in individual children - and how much more could be done if millions weren't wasted grading schools in competition with each other for funding and reputation.

Hasbeen,

It also occurs to me that if a standarised test is being employed to "judge" the performance of individual schools and their teaching staff, that it's in the school's interest to teach to test as much as possible, to paper over cracks in the broader spectrum of a child's education in order to achieve the results required.

I think that state of play provides an increased incentive for schools and teachers to "hide" a truer, less standardised one-size-fits-all, assessment.

Poirot as I said, it would be refreshing if many teachers actually taught something. This is particularly so, when the 3R are necessary for success at the NAPLAN test. If teachers teach to it, most kids are winning.