RETHINKING NAPLAN: A Constructivist Critique
In 2008, Australia’s Education Department, while replacing various State-based standardised tests, introduced a national standardised literacy and numeracy test in Australia: National Assessment program- Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). It is the nation-wide assessment designed to measure and monitor grade 3, 5 7 and 9 students’ literacy (reading, writing, and language conventions) and numeracy skills. The numeracy test covers numerical and algebraic calculations, measurement and geometry, and statistics and probability. The reading test consists various text types and sample skills, ranging from direct questions to inferred questions whereas the writing part requires one composition: persuasive or narrative writing. The Language conventions assess the spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Most parts across the test are multiple-choice questions with some constructed response items except from the writing test. The test is developed by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) in collaboration with the Australian government, education Authorities, and experts in assessment and areas of literacy, numeracy, ICT, science, and civics and citizenship. The test is administered annually by the respective states in the month of May which is moved earlier to the of March this year. The test is aligned to the Australian Curriculum, since 2016, and is “constructed to assess knowledge, skills and understandings appropriate of students in particular year levels”. NAPLAN test helps to drive improvements in student outcomes and provide increased accountability for the community. It provides information to the parents, teachers, schools and school systems about the literacy and numeracy achievements of the students. 
from: https://youtu.be/2jGzgR4FHnI
NAPLAN,
though, provides valuable data on student performance it is important to
critically examine its reliability, fairness, and inclusivity.
How reliable NAPLAN is?
Reliability
refers to how consistent and stable the results of the assessment are irrespective
of when, where, and how the test was conducted, and by whom and when it was
marked. To ensure the reliability of any test it is
administered multiple times in multiple forms measuring the same underlying
construct, assessment criterion is agreed, and there is consensus on moderation
procedures. NAPLAN follows a standardised design, to
ensure uniformity and comparability across different testing locations, and that
they align with the curriculum and jurisdiction-based circumstances.
Multiple-choice questions are marked electronically, and text-entry items and
the writing responses are marked by trained and independent markers. Moderation process is employed where students’
responses are reviewed, and the results are analysed and scaled onto the
measurement scales. However, reliability is directly related to
error: internal (anxiety, health, motivation, mood, fatigue, etc.) and external
(scoring, directions, item ambiguity, sampling of items, etc.). It is not only
based on the actual knowledge, understanding and reasoning of the students but is
also impacted by internal and external circumstance on the test day where
anxiety and personal circumstances can influence performance and reliability. Giving clear and specific directions, and the objectivity in scoring
ensures greater reliability. Similarly multiple- choice questions ensure reliability
of the test in comparison to the written composition where it is difficult to
maintain objectivity. Markers may interpret the criteria differently and there
may be variations in scores.
How fair it is in assessing students' skills and abilities?
Students
taking the tests have varied attributes, life opportunities and values and
predispositions, so to ensure fairness assessment tasks need to be unbiased and
not favouring any specific individual or group over another. It is important that students are engaged in learning
activities that assists them to be ready for the assessment task, and ample
instructional time and resources are allotted that clearly align with the
assessment.
There need to be transparency, and students should be familiar with the
expectations and formats of the assessment task. Socioeconomic disparities are often reflected in NAPLAN scores and
students’ achievements differ in government and non-government schools highlighting
the role of school resources. The test may inadvertently
exhibit cultural biases through the vocabulary, prior experiences, skills, and
values favouring certain cultural backgrounds or experiences which may put the
students from diverse cultural background having different knowledge and
perspective in disadvantage. Moreover, the success primarily
depends on the proficiency in Standard Australian English which pose a
challenge for students with limited English proficiency, and Indigenous
children in remote communities where English is not their first language.
How inclusive NAPLAN is?
ACARA
has developed and implemented some effective and inclusive assessment regime
for all Australian students. Inclusive assessment practices recognise the
diverse needs of the learners and respond to their needs. Students
with disabilities need to be provided with special support provisions. Depending on the student’s needs the testing accommodations need to
be individualised that involve presentation of a test (sign language, Braille,
oral delivery), test-timings (extended time, multiple test-days), the mode of
response, or the different physical environment (separate room, limited
distractions). Adjustments are provided to the students with
disability to encourage maximum participation. Students can have access to one
or more adjustments and should be aligned to the support students receiving during
classroom activities and the integrity of the test is maintained. NAPLAN
provides with assistive technology, online test adjustments, extra time and
rest breaks, reading to students, alternative format (disability adjustment)
tests, and scribes and support person (not for writing test) for the students. For example, Antonia, a 3-year student, has severe vision impairment
requiring large font and has been learning braille (at a medium level) and uses
scribe for writing. So, Antonia can have adjustments including scribe, extra
time, and large print.
COSTRUCTIVISTS view of assessment
In
this part, NAPLAN will be explored through the lens of constructivism: cognitive
constructivism (Jean Piaget); social constructivism (Lev Vygotsky); and radical
constructivism. Constructivism is based on the principle that knowledge is
constructed through mental processes, is created through social collaborations
and interactions, students construct their knowledge based on their subjective
experiences and personal experiences. Constructivists believe
that students have their own deliberate and purposeful way of making meaning of
the world around them, and they have their own individual development and
growth level and not all students reach a particular level at the same time. Students are actively involved in knowledge
building and not just a passive recipient of information and filters the
information according to their individual perceptions and experiences and produces
their own unique reality. Concepts learned continuously
evolve and is contextualised where learners are involved in using the knowledge
acquired in real-world situations. According
to Brown et al. (1989), learning is not mere acquisition of fixed and abstract
concepts rather it needs to include “activity (practice), concept (knowledge),
and culture (context)” 9as cited in Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 56). The focus
is on authentic tasks, student-centred learning collaboration, using multiple
modes for representation and metacognition.
Assessment for learning and assessment as learning
Constructivists consider active involvement of students in both learning and assessment and believe that assessment is part of learning and stresses on assessment as learning and assessment for learning contrary to standardised testing which is assessment of learning. In Standardised testing, there is no relevance of learning, but the focus is on predetermined outcomes, however, constructivists do not emphasis knowing but, on the elaboration, and interpretation of information. It encourages on flexible use of pre-existing knowledge by constructing their own understanding and then validating new perspectives through social negotiation, and not just on retrieving knowledge.
Traditional versus authentic assessment
Standardised
tests like NAPLAN are form of traditional assessment and summative assessment
that is developed, administered, scored, and interpreted according to the set
procedures and are not student-centred assessment, and the purpose of test is
to acquire information for reporting. It
fails to take account of background variables such as socioeconomic status of
students that may impact their performances. On the
contrary, constructivism focuses on developing relationships with students and knowing
what they are doing and learning. It encourages formative and authentic
assessment, where assessment practices need to be relevant, meaningful, and
engaging for learners by providing greater opportunities to students to perform
at their best. Authentic assessment involves variety
of challenging tasks and a wide range of assessment strategies capturing the
quality of student’s performance and not focused on tests. It embeds assessment
in the classroom context and promotes higher-level thinking.
Challenging the students
According
to Wiggins (1992), when students circle the correct response from number of
options it does not assess their range of knowledge and cannot be termed as aim
of teaching. Standardised testing focuses
on subject mastery and not on problem solving abilities of students and their
abilities to think deeply and no information on how they approach tasks. Assessment in constructivism focuses on developing
problem-solving skills and focus is on transfer of knowledge and skills by
applying deductive reasoning from principles and inductive reasoning from
evidence. Authentic assessment can be in the form of performance
assessment, situated assessment, problem-solved assessment, and competence-based
assessment, and involves students in apprenticeships, collaborative learning. Debates,
discussions, open-ended assignments, concept-mapping, etc. It focuses
on creating a learning environment that stimulates cognitive challenge within a
‘zone of readiness’, and scaffolding is an important feature of effective
teaching where learning is structured into steps that are manageable yet
challenging for the learners. The focus is on
progress of students and not identifying weaknesses, and feedback is provided
to contribute to the learning environment and designated to shape learning.
CALL FOR A CHANGE
from: https://youtu.be/c9T9rjGQA7Y
Though
NAPLAN falls short of aligning with the constructivist theory, it provides a
valuable data on students’ performances and offers benchmark for assessing educational
assessment. If NAPLAN is not used as sole criterion, it helps to identify gaps in
literacy and numeracy skills, what has worked instructionally and target
interventions to address the areas of weaknesses. Schools are accountable for
their educational outcomes and evaluating their effectiveness. The focus needs
to be broader and include aspects of critical thinking, problem-solving, and
social skills. Wide range of skills and competencies should be included and
align with more holistic view of education. There is also need of providing
comprehensive feedback to students as it only offers a scaled score without
detailed insights into individual strengths and areas of improvement.
No comments:
Post a Comment