Challenges, Tensions and Possibilities: An Analysis of Assessment Policy and Practice in New Zealand

  • Bronwen CowieEmail author
  • Dawn Penney
Part of the The Enabling Power of Assessment book series (EPAS, volume 3)


This chapter draws on insights from education policy sociology to explore the dynamics between international, national, and institutional arenas of assessment and assessment systems. It interrogates the interactions between curriculum, pedagogy and assessment and explores the enabling constraints at different levels of the assessment system. Attention is drawn to the ways in which tensions offer spaces for creative action in relation to current policies and practices in New Zealand.


Equity Enabling constraints Policy Curriculum Pedagogy Formative assessment Standards Assessment literacy 


  1. Baker, R., & Jones, A. (2005). How can international studies such as TIMSS and the PISA be used to inform practice, policy and future research in science education in New Zealand? International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s sole and the terror of performativity. Journal of Educational Philosophy, 18(2), 215–228.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S., Maguire, M., Braun, A., with Hoskins, K., & Perryman, J. (2012). How schools do policy. Policy enactment in secondary schools. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education. London, UK: Collier Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse (Class, codes and control, Vol. IV). London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braun, A., Maguire, M., & Ball, S. (2010). Policy enactments in the UK secondary school: Examining policy, practice and school positioning. Journal of Education Policy, 25(4), 547–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, G. (2012, November 2–4). National testing: Promises and pitfalls – The NZ perspective. Presentation to International Forum on Achievement Assessment and Evaluation, Shanghai, China.Google Scholar
  9. Clarke, M. (2012). What matters most for student assessment systems: A framework paper. Washington, DC: The World Bank, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.Google Scholar
  10. Cowie, B. (2005). Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cowie, B., & Carr, M. (forthcoming). Assessing a connected person-plus learner. In M. Morton (Ed.), Supporting inclusive education: Learning from narrative assessment. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  12. Cowie, B., & Glynn, T. (2012, November). The role of affordance networks in supporting teachers to become culturally responsive. Paper presented at the second Culturally responsive research and pedagogy conference, Hamilton, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  13. Cowie, B., Hipkins, R., Boyd, S., Bull, A., Keown, P., McGee, C., et al. (2009). Curriculum implementation exploratory studies: Final report. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  14. Cowie, B., Hipkins, R., Keown, P., & Boyd, S. (2011). The shape of curriculum change. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  15. Cowie, B., Jones, A., & Harlow, A. (2006). The digital horizons: Laptops for teachers policy initiative: Impacts and consequences. New Zealand Annual Review of Education, 15, 111–132.Google Scholar
  16. Cowie, B., Moreland, J., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2013). Expanding notions of assessment for learning: Inside science and technology primary classrooms. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cowie, B., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2011). Exploring the value of ‘horizontal’ learning in early years science classrooms. Early Years, 31(3), 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cowie, B., Otrel-Cass, K., Glynn, T., Kara, H., Anderson, M., Doyle, J., …, Te Kiri, C. (2011). Culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment in primary science classrooms: Whakamana tamariki. Summary Report. Wellington, New Zealand: Teaching and Learning Research Initiative.Google Scholar
  19. Crooks, T. (2011). Assessment for learning in the accountability era: New Zealand. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 71–77. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Crooks, T., & Flockton, L. (1993). Some proposals for national monitoring of education outcomes. Unpublished paper. Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago.Google Scholar
  21. Davis, B., Sumara, D., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2000). Engaging minds: Changing teaching in complex times. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  22. Department of Education. (1989). Assessment for better learning: A public discussion document. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  23. Dixon, H., Hawe, E., & Parr, J. (2011). Enacting assessment for learning: The beliefs practice nexus. Assessment in Education, 18(4), 365–379. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2010.526587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Flockton, L. (1999). Connecting theory and practice in national monitoring assessment. Teachers and Curriculum, 3, 23–30.Google Scholar
  25. Gilmore, A. (2002). Large-scale assessment and teachers’ capacity: Learning opportunities for teachers in the National Education Monitoring Project in New Zealand. Assessment in Education, 9(3), 343–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gipps, C., & Murphy, P. (1994). A fair test? Assessment, achievement and equity. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Glynn, T., Cowie, B., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2008). Quality Teaching Research and Development Science Hub (Waikato): Connecting New Zealand teachers of science with their Māori students. Report to Ministry of Education. Hamilton, New Zealand: Wilf Malcolm Institute of Educational Research, University of Waikato.Google Scholar
  28. Glynn, T., Cowie, B., Otrel-Cass, K., & MacFarlane, A. (2010). Culturally responsive pedagogy: Connecting New Zealand teachers of science with their Māori students. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 39, 118–127.Google Scholar
  29. González, N., & Moll, L. (2002). Cruzando el puente: Building bridges to funds of knowledge. Journal of Educational Policy, 16(4), 623–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Harris, L., & Brown, G. (2009a). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers’ implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 101–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harris, L., & Brown, G. (2009b). The complexity of teachers’ conceptions of assessment: Tensions between the needs of schools and students. Assessment in Education, 16(3), 365–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Harris, L., & Brown, G. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers’ implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 101–111. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hay, P. J., & Penney, D. (2013). Assessment in physical education. A socio-cultural perspective. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Hipkins, R. (2008). Assessing key competencies: Why would we? How could we? Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  35. Hipkins, R. (2013). NCEA one decade on: Views and experiences from the 2012 NZCER National Survey of Secondary Schools. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER.Google Scholar
  36. Hipkins, R., & Cowie, B. (2014). Learning to learn, lifewide and lifelong learning: Reflections on the New Zealand experience. In R. Deakin Crick, C. Stringher, & K. Ren (Eds.), Learning to learn: International perspectives from theory and practice. Abingdon, UK: Routlege.Google Scholar
  37. Hipkins, R., Cowie, B., Boyd, S., Keown, P., & McGee, C. (2011). Curriculum Implementation Exploratory Studies 2. Ministry of Education. Retrieved from Ministry of Education’s website Education Counts:
  38. Hipkins, R., Cowie, B., McDowell, S., & Carr, M. (2013). Key competencies and effective pedagogy. Retrieved from
  39. Hipkins, R., & Spiller, L. (2012). NCEA and curriculum innovation: Learning from change in three schools. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  40. Hume, A., & Coll, R. (2009). Assessment of learning, for learning, and as learning: New Zealand case studies. Assessment in Education, 16(3), 263–268.Google Scholar
  41. James, M., & Pedder, D. (2006). Beyond method: Assessment and learning practices and values. Curriculum Journal, 17(2), 109–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. M. (2010). Standards, teacher judgement and moderation in the contexts of national curriculum and assessment reform. Assessment Matters, 2, 107–131.Google Scholar
  43. Madjar, I., & McKinley, E. (2010). Understanding NCEA: A relatively short and very useful guide for secondary students and their parents. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER.Google Scholar
  44. Madyar, J., McKinley, E., Jensen, S., & van der Merwe, A. (2009). Towards university: Navigating NCEA course choices in low-mid decile schools. Retrieved from
  45. Mahuika, R., Berryman, M., & Bishop, R. (2011). Issues of culture and assessment in New Zealand education pertaining to Māori students. Assessment Matters, 3, 183–198.Google Scholar
  46. McGee, C., Harlow, A., Miller, T., Cowie, B., Hill, M., Jones, A., et al. (2004). Teachers’ experiences in curriculum implementation: General curriculum, the arts, and health and physical education (Report to the Ministry of Education). Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  47. Minister of Education. (1988). Tomorrow’s schools: The reform of education administration in New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  48. Ministerial Working Party on Assessment for Better Learning. (1990). Tomorrow’s standards. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  49. Ministry of Education. (1993). The New Zealand curriculum framework. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  50. Ministry of Education. (1994). Assessment: Policy to practice. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  51. Ministry of Education. (2007). New Zealand curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  52. Ministry of Education. (2008). Ka Hikitia – Managing for success 2008–2012. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  53. Ministry of Education. (2011). Ministry of Education position paper: Assessment (schooling sector). Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  54. Nusche, D., Laveault, D., MacBeath, J., & Santiago, P. (2012). OECD reviews of evaluation and assessment in education: New Zealand 2011. OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264116917-en
  55. Penney, D., & Cowie, B. (2014). Assessment: Power relations, political influences, and pedagogical change. In A. St. George, S. Brown, & J. O’Neill (Eds.), Facing the big questions in teaching: Purpose, power, and learning (2nd ed., pp. 73-80). Melbourne, Australia: Cengage.Google Scholar
  56. Poskitt, J., & Taylor, K. (2008). National education findings of Assess to Learn (AtoL) report. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  57. Sheehan, M. (2013). “Better to do than receive”: Learning to think historically through internally assessed course work. Wellington, New Zealand: Teaching and Learning Research Initiative.Google Scholar
  58. Stiggins, R. J. (2008). Assessment manifesto: A call for the development of balanced assessment systems. A position paper. Portland, OR: ETS Assessment Training Institute.Google Scholar
  59. Thrupp, M. (2010). Emerging school-level education policy under National 2008–9. New Zealand Annual Review of Education, 19, 30–51.Google Scholar
  60. Thrupp, M. (2013). National standards for student achievement: Is New Zealand’s idiosyncratic approach any better? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 36(2), 99-110.Google Scholar
  61. Thrupp, M., & Easter, A. (2013). ‘Tell me about your school’: Researching local responses to New Zealand’s National Standards policy. Assessment Matters, 5. Retrieved from
  62. Timperley, H., & Parr, J. (2009). Chain of influence from policy to practice in the New Zealand literacy strategy. Research Papers in Education, 24(2), 135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Torrance, H. (2007). Assessment as learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post-secondary education and training can come to dominate learning. Assessment in Education, 14(3), 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (1998). Investigating formative assessment: Teaching, learning and assessment in the classroom. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  65. United Nations Educational Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2007). Education for all global monitoring report 2008: Education for all by 2015. Will we make it? Paris, France: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Ward, J., & Thomas, G. (2012). National Standards; School sample monitoring and evaluation project 2011. Reporting to the Ministry of Education. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  67. Wylie, C., & Hodgen, E. (2010). NZCER 2010 primary and intermediate schools national survey: A snapshot of overall patterns and findings related to national standards. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationThe University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityFrankstonAustralia

Personalised recommendations