Advertisement

The Australian Educational Researcher

, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp 315–342 | Cite as

Student experiences of NAPLAN: sharing insights from two school sites

  • Katharine Swain
  • Donna Pendergast
  • Joy Cumming
Article

Abstract

This paper provides insight into middle school students’ perceptions and reactions to their participation in the Australian National Assessment ProgramLiteracy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). A case study was conducted over 10 months at two Queensland schools with different approaches to NAPLAN implementation. Student voice was elicited via focus groups and 35 students provided drawings and words describing their experience in four stages: preparing, sitting, completing and receiving their results. Thematic content analysis of the textual data and trait and holistic coding of the visual data revealed five themes and suggests that the approach adopted by the school may impact on students’ NAPLAN experiences. This study privileges student voice and enables access to student experiences as they participate in a testing regime which is now a feature of the Australian school assessment landscape.

Keywords

Education Middle schooling High-stakes assessment National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) Student voice 

References

  1. Association, National Middle School. (2003). This we believe: Successful schools for young adolescents. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.Google Scholar
  2. Athanasou, J. A. (2010). NAPLAN and MySchool survey. Independent Education Union of Australia.Google Scholar
  3. Athanasou, J. A., & Lamprianou, I. (2005). Children’s responses to interest items. Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 22(1), 22–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 258–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2008). Annual report 20082009. Retrieved from http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/ACARA_AnnualReport_08-09.pdf.
  6. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2010). National Assessment Program: Why do students do NAPLAN tests? Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.au/information/faqs/naplan—general.html.
  7. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2013). National Assessment program. Retrieved from http://www.acara.edu.au/assessment/assessment.html.
  8. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2017). Critical and creative thinking in the learning areas. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/.
  9. Bahr, N. (2005). The middle years learner. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  10. Baird, J., Hopfenbeck, T., Newton, P., Stobart, G., & Steen-Utheim, A. (2014). State of the field review: Assessment and learning. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for Education (Case No. 13/4697). Retrieved from http://taloe.up.pt/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/FINALMASTER2July14Bairdetal2014AssessmentandLearning.pdf.
  11. Barratt, R. (1998). Shaping middle schooling in Australia: A report of the National Middle Schooling Project. Canberra: Australian Curriculum Studies Association.Google Scholar
  12. Belcastro, L., & Boon, H. (2012). Student motivation for NAPLAN tests. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 22(2), 1.Google Scholar
  13. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). To appear educational assessment, evaluation and accountability. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 1(1).Google Scholar
  15. Carrington, V. (2002). Education and training reforms for the future. A White Paper. Retrieved from http://www.education.qld.gov.au.
  16. Chadbourne, R., & Pendergast, D. (2005). The philosophy of middle schooling. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  17. Clark, A., & Percy-Smith, B. (2006). Beyond consultation: Participatory practices in everyday spaces. Children. Youth Environments, 16(2), 1–9.Google Scholar
  18. Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: “Student voice” in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Creswell, J. (2007). Educational research: Planning conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educational Press.Google Scholar
  20. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Crosswell, L., Bahr, N., Pendergast, D., & Newhouse-Maiden, L. (2010). Developing resilience. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (2nd ed., pp. 101–118). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  22. Cumming, J. J., Kimber, K., & Wyatt-Smith, C. M. (2011). Historic Australian conceptualisations of English, literacy and multimodality in policy and curriculum and conflicts with educational accountability. English in Australia, 46(3), 42–55.Google Scholar
  23. Dulfer, N., Polesel, J., & Rice, S. (2013). Senate inquiry into the effectiveness of the National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). For the Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Committee. Retrieved from http://www.whitlam.org/data/assets/pdf_file/0007/482272/NAPLANinquirysubmiss.
  24. Fielding, M. (2004). “New wave” student voice and the renewal of civic society. London Review of Education, 2(3), 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fitzgerald, L. (2015). Consequences of high-stake testing. Education Masters, 306. Retrieved from http://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/education_ETD_masters/306.
  26. Garrick, B., & Keogh, J. (2010). Differentiated learners. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (2nd ed., pp. 68–85). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  27. Gonzalez, T. E., Hernandez-Saca, D. I., & ArtilesA, J. (2016). In search of voice: Theory and methods on K-12 student voice research in the US, 1990–2010. Educational Review.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1231661.Google Scholar
  28. Haney, W., Russell, M., & Bebell, D. (2004). Drawing on education: Using drawings to document schooling and support change. Harvard Educational Review, 74(3), 241–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hardy, I. (2013). Testing that counts: Contesting national literacy assessment policy in complex schooling settings. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 36(2), 67–78.Google Scholar
  30. Hargreaves, A. (2013). Push, pull and nudge: The future of teaching and education change. In X. Zhu & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Preparing teachers for the 21st century.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36970-4_13.Google Scholar
  31. Howell, A. (2015). Exploring children’s lived experiences of NAPLAN. In B. Lingard, G. Thompson, & S. Sellar (Eds.), National testing in schools: An Australian assessment (pp. 164–180). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Howell, A. (2016). Exploring children’s lived experiences of NAPLAN: Beyond the cacophony of adult debate (Unpublished doctoral thesis). The University of Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
  33. Howell, A. (2017). Because then you could never ever get a job!: Children’s constructions of NAPLAN as high-stakes. Journal of Education Policy, 32, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lewis, S., & Hardy, I. (2015). Funding, reputation and targets: The discursive logics of high-stakes testing. Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(2), 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lingard, R. (2005). Socially just pedagogies in changing times. International Studies of Sociology of Education, 15(2), 165–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lingard, R., Thompson, G., & Sellar, S. (2016). National testing from an Australian perspective. In R. Lingard, G. Thompson, & S. Sellar (Eds.), National testing in schools: An Australian assessment (pp. 1–17). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Lobascher, S. (2011). What are the potential impacts of high stakes testing on literacy education in Australia? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 34(2), 9–19.Google Scholar
  38. Macbeath, J. (2004). Putting the self back into self-evaluation. Improving Schools, 7(1), 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mannion, G. (2007). Going spatial, going relational: Why ‘listening to children’ and children’s participation needs framing. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28(3), 405–420.Google Scholar
  40. Middle Years of Schooling Association (MYSA). (2008). MYSA Position Paper: Middle Schooling: People, practices and places. Brisbane, QLD: MYSA.Google Scholar
  41. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (MCEETYA). (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. Retrieved from www.mceetya.edu.au/mceetya/melbourne_declaration,25979.html.
  42. Mockler, N., & Groundwater-Smith, S. (2014). Engaging with student voice in research, education and community: Beyond legitimation and guardianship. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. Parnis, A. J., & Petocz, P. (2016). Secondary school students’ attitudes towards numeracy: An Australian investigation based on the National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). Australian Educational Researcher, 43, 551–566.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-016-0218-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pearce, T. C., & Wood, B. E. (2016). Education for transformation: An evaluative framework to guide student voice work in schools. Critical Studies in Education.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213500691.Google Scholar
  45. Pendergast, D., & Bahr, N. (Eds.). (2005). Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  46. Polesel, J., Dulfer, N., & Turnbull, M. (2012). The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families: Literature Review. Sydney, NSW: The Whitlam Institute.Google Scholar
  47. Rogers, S. L., Barblett, L., & Robinson, K. (2016). Investigating the impact of NAPLAN on student, parent and teacher emotional distress in independent schools. Australian Educational Researcher, 43, 327–343.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-016-0203-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Swain, K. (2014). Middle years students’ perceptions and reactions to NAPLAN: The student voice (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Griffith University, Queensland.Google Scholar
  49. Swain, K., & Pendergast, D. (2013). Competing interests? NAPLAN and middle schooling assessment practices. Middle Years of Schooling Association, 13(1), 5.Google Scholar
  50. Thompson, G., & Harbaugh, A. G. (2013). A preliminary analysis of teacher perceptions of the effects of NAPLAN on pedagogy and curriculum. The Australian Educational Researcher, 40, 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thomson, P., & Gunter, H. (2006). From consulting pupils to pupils as researchers: A situated case narrative. British Educational Research Journal, 32(6), 839–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. van Manen, M. (1997). Research lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). NY: Suny Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wyatt-Smith, C., Cumming, J., Elkins, J., & Colbert, P. (2010). Redesigning assessment. In D. Pendergast & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years (2nd ed., pp. 319–344). Sydney, NSW: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  54. Wyn, J., Turnbull, M., & Grimshaw, L. (2014). The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families. A qualitative study. Sydney, NSW: Whitlam Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Australian Association for Research in Education, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katharine Swain
    • 1
  • Donna Pendergast
    • 2
  • Joy Cumming
    • 3
  1. 1.Flinders University of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Griffith UniversityNathanAustralia
  3. 3.Australian Catholic UniversityBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations