Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Towards fairer assessment

  • Published:
The Australian Educational Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Drawing on the largest Australian collection and analysis of empirical data on multiple facets of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education in state schools to date, this article critically analyses the systemic push for standardized testing and improved scores, and argues for a greater balance of assessment types by providing alternative, inclusive, participatory approaches to student assessment. The evidence for this article derives from a major evaluation of the Stronger Smarter Learning Communities. The first large-scale picture of what is occurring in classroom assessment and pedagogy for Indigenous students is reported in this evaluation yet the focus in this article remains on the issue of fairness in student assessment. The argument presented calls for “a good balance between formative and summative assessment” (OECD, Synergies for Better Learning An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment, Pointers for Policy Development, 2013) at a time of unrelenting high-stakes, standardized testing in Australia with a dominance of secondary as opposed to primary uses of NAPLAN data by systems, schools and principals. A case for more “intelligent accountability in education” (O’Neill, Oxford Review of Education 39(1):4–16, 2013) together with a framework for analyzing efforts toward social justice in education (Cazden, International Journal of Educational Psychology 1(3):178–198, 2012) and fairer assessment make the case for more alternative assessment practices in recognition of the need for teachers’ pedagogic practice to cater for increased diversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Personalised Learning Plans should not be confused with terms such as ‘Individualised Education Program’ as used in the United States or the Canadian term ‘Individual Education Plan’ which refer to support programs or plans for ‘exceptional pupils’ or students with special needs.

  2. Throughout this paper I will use a capital for the word Indigenous as a mark of respect and as is protocol in academic writing.

  3. Created from research into children's writing vocabularies done at Salisbury Teacher's College in the 1970s. The list is sectioned into the first 50 words which account for 49 % of all words written by Adelaide students in years 3–7; the second 50 accounts for 10 % of all words written; and the next 200 words make up 4 % of all words written. Although it is a writing vocabulary, it does reflect the high frequency words in books and is commonly used as a reading sight vocabulary. (http://www.raisingreaders.com.au/resources/Assessment/salis_vocab.htm).

  4. Goal 3.1 of the NSW Aboriginal Education and Training Strategy 2006–2008 (2006: 6) is to: “Develop Personalised Learning Plans for all Aboriginal school students in partnership with teachers, parents, caregivers and students”.

References

  • Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Porstmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cazden, C. B. (2012). A framework for social justice in education. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 1(3), 178–198. doi:10.4471/ijep.2012.11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (DEEWR). (2008). National report to parliament on Indigenous education and training, 2006. Canberra: Australian Government.

  • Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (DEEWR). (2011). Guide to developing Personalised Learning Plans for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander studentsA professional learning resource. Canberra: DEEWR. http://foi.deewr.gov.au/node/30449 Accessed 25 Apr 2012.

  • Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (DEEWR). (2012). Indigenous overview. http://www.deewr.gov.au/indigenous/Pages/Overview.aspx Accessed 23 Apr 2012.

  • Fraser N. (2000). Rethinking recognition. New Left Review, 3 (May–June) pp. 107-119. http://newleftreview.org/II/3/nancy-fraser-rethinking-recognition Accessed 8 Apr 2013.

  • Fraser N. (2005). Reframing justice in a globalizing world. New Left Review, 36 (November–December) pp. 1-19. http://newleftreview.org/II/36/nancy-fraser-reframing-justice-in-a-globalizing-world Accessed 23 Apr 2013.

  • Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gipps, C., & Stobart, G. (2009). Fairness in assessment. In C. Wyatt-Smith & J. J. Cumming (Eds.), Educational assessment in the 21st century: Connecting theory and practice (pp. 105–118). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon Commission (2013). ‘A public policy statement, The Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment in Education’. www.gordoncommission.org. Accessed 4 May 2013.

  • Hipwell, P., & Klenowski, V. (2011). A case for addressing the literacy demands of student assessment. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 34(2), 127–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Indigenous Education Leadership Institute. (2009). Project Implementation Plan: Stronger Smarter Learning Communities. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koretz, D. (2008). Measuring up: What educational testing really tells us. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Murphy, P., Hall, K., McCormick, R., & Drury, R. (2008). Curriculum, learning and society: investigating practice. Study Guide: Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • New South Wales Aboriginal Education and Consultative Group Inc (NSWAECG) and New South Wales Department of Education and Training (NSWDET). (2006). The New South Wales Aboriginal Education Training Strategy 2006–2008 A Direct Response to the Aboriginal Education Review. Darlinghurst, NSW: New South Wales Department of Education. https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/strat_direction/strat_plans/yr2007/aetlongstrategy.pdf Accessed 28 Nov 2012.

  • O’Neill, O. (2013). Intelligent accountability in education. Oxford Review of Education, 39(1), 4–16. doi:10.1080/03054985.2013.764761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2013) ‘Synergies for Better Learning An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment, Pointers for Policy Development’. http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/synergies-for-better-learning.htm Accessed 12 Apr 2013.

  • Pryor, J., & Croussard, B. (2008). A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 1–20. doi:10.1080/03054980701476386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, M. (1997). Improving ratings: audit in the British university system. European Review, 5, 305–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teese, R., & Polesel, J. (2003). Undemocratic schooling: Equity and quality in mass secondary education in Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article is based on research and evaluation, which was funded by Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations and conducted by a team of colleagues. The views represented in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views of DEEWR, the Stronger Smarter Institute and the Stronger Smarter Learning Communities Project nor the authors of the Formative and Summative Evaluations of the Stronger Smarter Learning Communities Project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Val Klenowski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klenowski, V. Towards fairer assessment. Aust. Educ. Res. 41, 445–470 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0132-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0132-x

Keywords

Navigation