1

(Alice) Rose Dunn Assignment 3 Educ3626

How does the diversity of student background influence teaching and learning?
Considering what we know about student diversity, how can we justify using standardised
testing such as the NAPLAN to give an indication of student performance?

Over the last ten years of education reform, few issues have created more controversy in
the middle years than the NAPLAN and myschool website. Such testing and publication of
results serve to compare, contrast and make generalisations about students based on their
performance in a single, uniform and isolated test. There are numerous studies to suggest
that standardised testing is not a legitimate way of measuring school performance and
there are certainly no claims that student intelligence is accurately represented by the
NAPLAN or any other test of its nature. Since the introduction of annual reporting of school
performance data and its availability online, the standardised measurement of literacy and
numeracy achievement has become high stakes (Cormack & Comber, 2013). Moreover, the
ways in which the NAPLAN data is used to categorise schools is seemingly disjointed from
educational understandings of multiple intelligences and student diversity and difference.
Student diversity by definition encompasses students of different backgrounds,
socioeconomic statuses and levels of engagement with their schooling and this is
acknowledged by ACARA several times in their curriculum design brochure published in
2009 (ACARA, 2009). With this in mind and considering the research, the questions
become; why is it considered appropriate to use a uniform test with many variables to
measure our students skills and how does this give affect middle schooling?

The National Assessment Plan for Literacy and Numeracy is an annual test undertaken by a
selection of students across primary school and into middle school. It tests the skills which
have been deemed to be essential by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority in conjunction with a number of representatives from each state. The test is
conducted over two days under strict exam conditions and comprises a numeracy section
and a literacy section(ACARA, 2011). There are contrasting views from a number of
stakeholders including teachers, parents and the wider community about using such
standardised testing in schools. The main objections seem to be that the statistics offer little
insight into the day to day running of schools and that test scores can easily be skewed by a
number of variables (Cormack & Comber, 2013). For example, some teachers have admitted
2

(Alice) Rose Dunn Assignment 3 Educ3626
to investigating what will be contained in the tests and focussing on teaching that content
for a prolonged period of time to prepare their students(Perso, 2011). Some schools groom
their students for exam conditions by replicating the test several times so there is less
anxiety and pressure on the days when the test is administered. On the other hand, some
students are offered no preparation as their teachers are under the assumption that the
test should be authentic and measure a students inherent essential skills rather than
skewing the results. In terms of curriculum, this type of preoccupation with the NAPLAN
means that other disciplines such as the arts, physical education and ICT are being neglected
in order to conceivably achieve higher test scores. Teachers have become concerned with
what has been commonly referred to as teaching to the test in order to prove their
educational prowess when results are published and perused by parents (Wilson & Hornsby,
2012). This leads to teaching for a result rather than a more humanistic approach of
teaching to empower students and create global citizens. In an article written by Youngjoo
Kim in 2011, the issue of close minded and prepackaged curriculum is explored and Kim
reminds us that;
A teacher's perceptions of teaching and curriculum are important because they situate and
guide that teacher's practice. When educators conceive of teaching as the delivery of a
prepackaged, decontextualized curriculum, they're less likely to see the importance of
providing students with an educational experience steeped in perceptive associations to the
world in which they learn and live.(Kim, 2011)

The NAPLAN test denies the students right to be individual learners but rather groups all
students together and rates them against each other, an idea which is in direct opposition to
ideal teaching practice(Kim, 2011). Another objection repeated several times in news
articles and throughout the education community is the important issue of time constraints
and how some students fail to complete the test in the allocated time, leading to the
statistical assumption that these students are lacking in literacy and numeracy skills when
they are simply struggling to finish in time. In each of the 2010 Years 7 and 9 numeracy tests
students were required to complete 32 test items in 40 minute which equates to an average
of just 75 seconds per question. It was noted that time limitations were an issue in the 2008
Year 9 NAPLAN numeracy tests, but their effect was not examined (Carter, 2012). As with
many of these variables, there is no statistical way to find out if a student has struggled with
time, content or instructions unless someone asks them directly after the test is undertaken.
3

(Alice) Rose Dunn Assignment 3 Educ3626
While the test appears to be failing some students in its structure and administration, it is
interesting to note that ACARA is actually attempting to create a curriculum which does in
fact attempt to rectify some of the issues presented by the NAPLAN results. In the 2009
curriculum design framework, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
authority put forward a number of key considerations in making the curriculum content
accessible to all students and encouraging achievement.
The curriculum must value and build on students prior learning, experiences and goals.
Examples used in the curriculum should reflect the diversity of knowledge, experience and
cultural values of students. Particular consideration should be given to representing groups
that might otherwise be vulnerable to exclusionary pressures in visible and positive ways.
(ACARA, 2009)
Arguably, this view does not correspond with standardised testing and specifically with the
use of the myschool website to compare and contrast students from different schools
(ACARA, 2013b). The myschool website enables parents, teacher and the wider community
to search the profiles of almost ten thousand Australian schools. The website provides
statistical and contextual information about schools including number of students, level of
funding and NAPLAN results across a number of years. It allows parents to compare their
desired school with statistically similar schools across the country and see how they
rank(ACARA, 2013b). This is a consumerist approach to selecting a school where the parents
can choose a school based on their test results over a period of time. This does not reflect
ACARAs desire to represent students who are vulnerable to exclusionary pressures in a
positive way but rather continues to let the opposite occur. Considering this and apart from
the obvious practical and pedagogical limitations of the NAPLAN, there are many other
issues that can affect a students perceived success in standardised testing which are not
included in the ACARA curriculum framework.
In order to understand the discrepancy between standardised testing and the pedagogical
style that teachers are encouraged to adopt(Sternberg & Spear-Swerling, 1996), student
diversity and difference and the way it effects education must be investigated. Many
educational theorists have honed in on the concept of multiple intelligences and higher
order thinking and how these affect student learning styles. It can be argued that there are
some advantages of testing on a mass scale such as; to ascertain where focus should be in
the curriculum, for schools to examine the progress of students through their learning and
4

(Alice) Rose Dunn Assignment 3 Educ3626
to develop strategies to improve literacy and numeracy learning. However, standardised
tests offer few opportunities to display the attributes of higher-order thinking, such as
analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and creativity which are key skills that students require in
their ongoing learning(Sternberg & Spear-Swerling, 1996). All of these skills are encouraged
by the ACARA in their content descriptions and through the general capabilities(ACARA,
2013a). Arguably, higher order thinking is encouraged by extended units and ongoing
formative assessments(Brookhart, 2010). This type of pedagogy and management of
curriculum is practiced in the Australian educational community, however there is no
statistical evidence to show whether students succeed. This is due to the fact that it is not
possible to uniformly test higher order thinking because it varies according to a childs
intelligences, experiences and environments(Brookhart, 2010). This shows yet another
discrepancy between what the education system tests and what ACARA wants students to
achieve during their schooling (ACARA, 2011). Multiple intelligences are another important
aspect of students learning which is difficult to assess in a homogenous way. Howard
Gardner is an important figure in the study of multiple intelligences and points out that
students possess different kinds of minds and therefore learn, remember, perform, and
understand in different ways (Gardner, 2011). In perhaps one of the most relevant quotes
when summarising the value of difference in education, Gardner states;
We are all able to know the world through language, logical-mathematical analysis, spatial
representation, musical thinking, and the use of the body to solve problems or to make
things, an understanding of other individuals, and an understanding of ourselves. Where
individuals differ is in the strength of these intelligences.(2011)

Gardners multiple intelligences can also influence how students perform in standardised
tests in literacy and numeracy. For example students with above average logical and
mathematical reasoning skills will presumably excel in the numeracy test, while those with a
penchant for linguistics might find the literacy test more fitting to their skill set (Krause,
2010). Therefore, the results of a test such as the NAPLAN may also indirectly reveal a
students preferred learning style and lead teachers to adopt a new way of trying to engage
students with differing intelligences by integrating disciplines and allowing them to transfer
their knowledge from one area into others.


5

(Alice) Rose Dunn Assignment 3 Educ3626
It is clear that ACARA has a vested interest in creating a national curriculum that caters to
the needs of all students in Australia. The curriculum design framework attempts to take
into account the diversity of student background and respect this diversity. However, the
testing which students are subject to during the NAPLAN is removed from this vision of
equality and valuing diversity. There are obvious practical variables involved when
undertaking a uniform assessment en masse such as student preparedness for such a test,
teaching styles and multiple intelligences not to mention environment and cultural
background. Since the introduction of the online publication of the NAPLAN results and their
comparisons with other schools, the stakes have been raised. This has resulted in teachers
being preoccupied with teaching to the test and failing to cater to a wide range of subject
areas and higher-order thinking. While ACARA has clearly made steps to try to close the
gaps in education that teachers are presented with, there is still doubt that standardised
testing is gathering adequate, reliable information on student achievement across the
nation in the middle years.












6

(Alice) Rose Dunn Assignment 3 Educ3626
Bibliography:

ACARA. (2009). Australian Curriculum: Curriculum Design Overview.
http://acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Curriculum_Design_Paper_.pdf
ACARA. (2011). NAPLAN: The Tests. Retrieved 27th April, 2013, from
http://www.nap.edu.au/naplan/the-tests.html
ACARA. (2013a). F - 10 English Curriculum General Capabilities. Retrieved September, 2013, from
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/English/General-capabilities
ACARA. (2013b). myschool. from http://www.myschool.edu.au/
Brookhart, S. (2010). General Principles of Assessing Higher-Order Thinking How to Assess Higher-
Order Thinking Skills in Your Classroom. Virginia, US: ASCD.
Carter, M. (2012). Time limitations in NAPLAN numeracy tests. The Australian Mathematics
Teacher, 68(1), 36-40.
Cormack, P., & Comber, B. (2013). High-stakes literacy tests and local effects in a rural school.
Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 36, 78+.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of Mind : The Theory of Multiple Intelligences Retrieved from
http://flinders.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=665795
Kim, Y. (2011). The case against teaching as delivery of the curriculum: although many teachers see
themselves as curriculum deliverers, this view dismisses the role of the individual learner and
contributes to the continuation of social inequities. Phi Delta Kappan, 92, 54+.
Krause, K., Bochner, S., Duchesne, S., McMaugh, A. (2010). Cognitive Explanations of Learning. In
S. B. Kerri-Lee Krause, Sue Duchesne, Anne McMaugh (Ed.), Educational Psychology for
Learning and Teaching (pp. 186 - 200). South Melbourne: Cengage Learning.
Perso, T. (2011). Assessing numeracy and NAPLAN. The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 67(4),
32-35.
Sternberg, R., & Spear-Swerling, L. (1996). Goal 1: Understanding the three ways of good thinking
and the higher order thinking processes underlying them. Teaching for Thinking. Washington
D.C: American Psychological Association.
Wilson, L., & Hornsby, D. (2012). Teaching to the Test. Say No To Naplan. Retrieved November 18,
2013, from
http://sydney.edu.au/education_social_work/news_events/resources/No_NAPLAN.pdf