Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A preliminary analysis of teacher perceptions of the effects of NAPLAN on pedagogy and curriculum

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

Abstract

This paper reports preliminary survey findings of Western Australian and South Australian teacher perceptions of the impact of NAPLAN on curriculum and pedagogy in their classroom and school. The paper examines how teachers perceive the effects of NAPLAN on curriculum and pedagogy and whether these perceptions mediated by the teacher’s gender, the socioeconomics of the school, the State and the school system in which the teacher works. Teachers report that they are either choosing or being instructed to teach to the test, that this results in less time being spent on other curriculum areas and that these effects contribute in a negative way to the class environment and the engagement of students. This largely agrees with a body of international research that suggests that high-stakes literacy and numeracy tests often results in unintended consequences such as a narrow curriculum focus, a return to teacher-centred instruction and a decrease in motivation. Analysis suggests there is a relationship between participant responses to the effect of NAPLAN on curriculum based on the characteristics of which State the teacher taught in, the socioeconomic status of the school and the school system in which they were employed (State, Catholic, and Independent).

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The data from NAPLAN began to be published online via the My School website in 2010.

  2. It must be noted that the individual teacher perceptions outlined here do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Government, Catholic or Independent school authorities in either SA or WA.

  3. For the purpose of the exploratory factor analysis, four items (#s 2, 6, 7 & 9) were reversed coded to maintain a common valence among all survey items.

References

  • ACARA. (2011). NAPLAN. Retrieved January 31, 2012, from Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA): http://www.nap.edu.au/naplan/naplan.html.

  • AERA. (2012, September). Position Statement on High-Stakes Testing. Retrieved September 26, 2012, from American Education Research Association (AERA): http://www.aera.net/AboutAERA/AERARulesPolicies/AERAPolicyStatements/PositionStatementonHighStakesTesting/tabid/11083/Default.aspx.

  • Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18), 1–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: a meta-synthesis. Educational Researcher, 5, 258–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Au, W. (2008). Devising inequality: a Bernsteinian analysis of high-stakes testing and social reproduction in education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(6), 639–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Au, W. (2009). Unequal by design: high-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, R. (2012). The effects of high-stakes testing policy on arts education. Arts Education Policy Review, 113(1), 17–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, E., Barton, P., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H., & Linn, R. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington: Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barksdale-Ladd, M. A., & Thomas, K. F. (2000). What’s at stake in high-stakes testing: Teachers and parents speak out. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 384–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barret, B. (2009). No child left behind and the assault on teachers’ professional practices and identities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1018–1025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, S., Reiss, M., & Stobart, G. (2010). What happens when high-stakes testing stops? Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of compulsory national testing in science of 11-year-olds in England and its abolition in Wales. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 17(3), 273–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comber, B. (2012). Mandated literacy assessment and the reorganisation of teachers’ work: federal policy, local effects. Critical Studies in Education, 53(2), 119–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillard, J. (2008a, April). NAPLAN, OECD Report, teacher quality, age pension. Retrieved April 29, 2011, from Hon Julia Gillard MP: http://mediacentre.dewr.gov.au/mediacentre/Gillard/Releases/NAPLANOECDReportteacherqualityagepension.htm.

  • Gillard, J. (2008b, June). Education revolution: COAG agrees to school reform agenda. Retrieved June 17, 2010 from Media Centre: http://mediacentre.dewr.gov.au.

  • Gonski, D., Boston, K., Greiner, K., Lawrence, C., Scales, B., & Tannock, P. (2011). Review of funding for schooling—final report. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, D. (2007). High-flying schools, student disadvantage, and the logic of NCLB. American Journal of Education, 113(3), 367–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B. (2008). The unintended outcomes of high-stakes testing. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 23(2), 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klenowski, V. (2011). Assessment for learning in the accountability era: Queensland, Australia. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 78–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2012). The impact of high stakes testing: the Australian story. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in US schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange, T., & Meaney, T. (2011). Becoming disadvantaged: Public discourse around national testing. Poland: European Society for Research in Mathematic Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, R. (2010). Policy borrowing, policy learning: testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, B., Creagh, S., & Vass, G. (2012). Education policy as numbers: data categories and two Australian cases of misrecognition. Journal of Education Policy, 27(3), 315–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, B., Hayes, D., & Mills, M. (2003). Teachers and productive pedagogies: Contextualising, conceptualising, utilising. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 11(3), 399–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lobascher, S. (2011). What are the potential impacts of high-stakes testing on literacy education in Australia? Literacy Learning in the Middle Years, 19(2), 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, T. (2009). The impact of high-stakes accountability policies on Native American learners: evidence from research. Teaching Education, 20(1), 7–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGaw, B. (2010). Driving education reform with curriculum reform and accountability. Banksia Lecture, Murdoch University, Perth.

  • Mockler, N. (2013). Reporting the ‘education revolution’: MySchool.edu.au in the print media. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 34(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S., Glass, G., & Berliner, D. (2006). High-stakes testing and student achievement: Does accountability pressure increase student learning? Education Policy Analysis Archive, 14(1), 1–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S., Glass, G., & Berliner, D. (2012). High-stakes testing and student achievement: Updated analyses with NAEP data. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(20), 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrault, G. (2000). The classroom impact of high-stress testing. Education, 120(4), 705–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, P. (2007). Standardized Testing. New York: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polesel, J., Dulfer, N., & Turnbull, M. (2012). The experience of education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families. Sydney: Whitlam Insititute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Productivity Commission. (2012). Schools workforce: Productivity commission research report. Canberra: Australian Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, A. (2009). Is this a revolution? A critical analysis of the Rudd government’s national education agenda. Curriculum Perspectives, 29(3), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudd, K., & Gillard, J. (2008). Quality education: The case for an education revolution in our schools. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R., & Weinstein, N. (2009). Undermining quality teaching and learning: A self determination theory perspective on high-stakes testing. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 224–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeed, J., Spiller, K., & Kimber, M. (2009). Issues for principals in high-stakes testing. Principal Matters, 81, 32–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, G., & Cook, I. (2013). The logics of good teaching in an audit culture: A Deleuzian analysis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(3), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, C. (2012). Teaching Music in an era of high-stakes testing and budget reductions. Arts Education Policy Review, 113(2), 75–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigglesworth, G., Simpson, J., & Loakes, D. (2011). NAPLAN language assessments for indigenous students in remote communities: Issues and problems. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 34(3), 320–343.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research has been made possible by a grant from the ARC.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia

    Greg Thompson & Allen G. Harbaugh

Authors
  1. Greg Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Allen G. Harbaugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Greg Thompson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thompson, G., Harbaugh, A.G. A preliminary analysis of teacher perceptions of the effects of NAPLAN on pedagogy and curriculum. Aust. Educ. Res. 40, 299–314 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0093-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0093-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation