Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia

Assessment is a major component of education, significant in directing what is identified as valued student learning. This paper is framed within an understanding of imperative and exhortative policy. Two paradigmatically different, and potentially contesting, assessment policy directions in Austral...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of education policy 2019-11, Vol.34 (6), p.836-857
Hauptverfasser: Cumming, J. Joy, Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M., Adie, Lenore
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 857
container_issue 6
container_start_page 836
container_title Journal of education policy
container_volume 34
creator Cumming, J. Joy
Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M.
Adie, Lenore
description Assessment is a major component of education, significant in directing what is identified as valued student learning. This paper is framed within an understanding of imperative and exhortative policy. Two paradigmatically different, and potentially contesting, assessment policy directions in Australian education - educational accountability to monitor school and teacher performance, and teacher assessment practices to improve learning (assessment for learning [AfL] or formative assessment) - are examined for their impact on teacher professionalism. Both approaches have official endorsement in Australian policy. Mandated participation in national tests is indicative of educational accountability assessments under national direction. While also endorsed nationally, AfL implementation is reliant on state and territory direction. Our examination reveals tensions in the alignment of both policies. This is evident in the impact of accountability assessment on AfL implementation, in particular, teachers' understandings of valued assessment evidence. We conclude that a paradigmatic shift to support student learning in Australian schools is a policy imperative that includes the need for professional development and learning support for teachers.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/02680939.2019.1608375
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>eric_rmit_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_eric_primary_EJ1230142</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1230142</ericid><informt_id>10.3316/aeipt.225146</informt_id><sourcerecordid>EJ1230142</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-f4684a1419c8d28ce4554337e17ada6fd01f5d133383b4c9a04608b60ecc424e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwCJXyAile23GcG6Uqf6rEBc7W1nGKURpXtivUtychhSOnPcw3sztLyAzoHKiit5RJRStezRmFag6SKl4WZ2QCQoq8ACrPyWRg8gG6JFcxflJKhWRiQsql75KNyXXbzNYHg8n5DtsMY7Qx7myXsr1vnXE2Zq7LFoeYArYOr8lFg220N6c5Je8Pq7flU75-fXxeLta54RWkvBFSCQQBlVE1U8aKohCclxZKrFE2NYWmqIFzrvhGmAr7s6jaSGqNEUxYPiXFmGuCjzHYRu-D22E4aqB6aK9_2-uhvT61732z0WeDM3-e1QswTkGwXr8f9bBzSaN1-6Q_UtpHXWNC7brG_yg-bHXt3bCNc5AnkrGif24fcjeGjDh--dDWOuGx9aEJ2BkXNf__zm_Za4Ii</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Journals Complete</source><creator>Cumming, J. Joy ; Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M. ; Adie, Lenore</creator><creatorcontrib>Cumming, J. Joy ; Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M. ; Adie, Lenore</creatorcontrib><description>Assessment is a major component of education, significant in directing what is identified as valued student learning. This paper is framed within an understanding of imperative and exhortative policy. Two paradigmatically different, and potentially contesting, assessment policy directions in Australian education - educational accountability to monitor school and teacher performance, and teacher assessment practices to improve learning (assessment for learning [AfL] or formative assessment) - are examined for their impact on teacher professionalism. Both approaches have official endorsement in Australian policy. Mandated participation in national tests is indicative of educational accountability assessments under national direction. While also endorsed nationally, AfL implementation is reliant on state and territory direction. Our examination reveals tensions in the alignment of both policies. This is evident in the impact of accountability assessment on AfL implementation, in particular, teachers' understandings of valued assessment evidence. We conclude that a paradigmatic shift to support student learning in Australian schools is a policy imperative that includes the need for professional development and learning support for teachers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-0939</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-5106</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2019.1608375</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Routledge</publisher><subject>Accountability ; Alignment (Education) ; assessment policy ; Critical analysis ; Educational Assessment ; Educational Policy ; Evaluation methods ; Foreign Countries ; Formative Evaluation ; National Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) (Australia) ; National competency tests ; National Curriculum ; Policy analysis ; Primary secondary education ; Professional development ; Professionalism ; School Effectiveness ; Student assessment ; Student Evaluation ; Teacher Effectiveness ; teacher practice</subject><ispartof>Journal of education policy, 2019-11, Vol.34 (6), p.836-857</ispartof><rights>2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-f4684a1419c8d28ce4554337e17ada6fd01f5d133383b4c9a04608b60ecc424e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-f4684a1419c8d28ce4554337e17ada6fd01f5d133383b4c9a04608b60ecc424e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3874-397X ; 0000-0002-1013-0218 ; 0000-0001-9221-7677</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02680939.2019.1608375$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02680939.2019.1608375$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,59620,60409</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1230142$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cumming, J. Joy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adie, Lenore</creatorcontrib><title>Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia</title><title>Journal of education policy</title><description>Assessment is a major component of education, significant in directing what is identified as valued student learning. This paper is framed within an understanding of imperative and exhortative policy. Two paradigmatically different, and potentially contesting, assessment policy directions in Australian education - educational accountability to monitor school and teacher performance, and teacher assessment practices to improve learning (assessment for learning [AfL] or formative assessment) - are examined for their impact on teacher professionalism. Both approaches have official endorsement in Australian policy. Mandated participation in national tests is indicative of educational accountability assessments under national direction. While also endorsed nationally, AfL implementation is reliant on state and territory direction. Our examination reveals tensions in the alignment of both policies. This is evident in the impact of accountability assessment on AfL implementation, in particular, teachers' understandings of valued assessment evidence. We conclude that a paradigmatic shift to support student learning in Australian schools is a policy imperative that includes the need for professional development and learning support for teachers.</description><subject>Accountability</subject><subject>Alignment (Education)</subject><subject>assessment policy</subject><subject>Critical analysis</subject><subject>Educational Assessment</subject><subject>Educational Policy</subject><subject>Evaluation methods</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Formative Evaluation</subject><subject>National Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) (Australia)</subject><subject>National competency tests</subject><subject>National Curriculum</subject><subject>Policy analysis</subject><subject>Primary secondary education</subject><subject>Professional development</subject><subject>Professionalism</subject><subject>School Effectiveness</subject><subject>Student assessment</subject><subject>Student Evaluation</subject><subject>Teacher Effectiveness</subject><subject>teacher practice</subject><issn>0268-0939</issn><issn>1464-5106</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwCJXyAile23GcG6Uqf6rEBc7W1nGKURpXtivUtychhSOnPcw3sztLyAzoHKiit5RJRStezRmFag6SKl4WZ2QCQoq8ACrPyWRg8gG6JFcxflJKhWRiQsql75KNyXXbzNYHg8n5DtsMY7Qx7myXsr1vnXE2Zq7LFoeYArYOr8lFg220N6c5Je8Pq7flU75-fXxeLta54RWkvBFSCQQBlVE1U8aKohCclxZKrFE2NYWmqIFzrvhGmAr7s6jaSGqNEUxYPiXFmGuCjzHYRu-D22E4aqB6aK9_2-uhvT61732z0WeDM3-e1QswTkGwXr8f9bBzSaN1-6Q_UtpHXWNC7brG_yg-bHXt3bCNc5AnkrGif24fcjeGjDh--dDWOuGx9aEJ2BkXNf__zm_Za4Ii</recordid><startdate>20191102</startdate><enddate>20191102</enddate><creator>Cumming, J. Joy</creator><creator>Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M.</creator><creator>Adie, Lenore</creator><general>Routledge</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3874-397X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1013-0218</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9221-7677</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20191102</creationdate><title>Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia</title><author>Cumming, J. Joy ; Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M. ; Adie, Lenore</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-f4684a1419c8d28ce4554337e17ada6fd01f5d133383b4c9a04608b60ecc424e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Accountability</topic><topic>Alignment (Education)</topic><topic>assessment policy</topic><topic>Critical analysis</topic><topic>Educational Assessment</topic><topic>Educational Policy</topic><topic>Evaluation methods</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Formative Evaluation</topic><topic>National Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) (Australia)</topic><topic>National competency tests</topic><topic>National Curriculum</topic><topic>Policy analysis</topic><topic>Primary secondary education</topic><topic>Professional development</topic><topic>Professionalism</topic><topic>School Effectiveness</topic><topic>Student assessment</topic><topic>Student Evaluation</topic><topic>Teacher Effectiveness</topic><topic>teacher practice</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cumming, J. Joy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adie, Lenore</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of education policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cumming, J. Joy</au><au>Van Der Kleij, Fabienne M.</au><au>Adie, Lenore</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1230142</ericid><atitle>Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia</atitle><jtitle>Journal of education policy</jtitle><date>2019-11-02</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>836</spage><epage>857</epage><pages>836-857</pages><issn>0268-0939</issn><eissn>1464-5106</eissn><abstract>Assessment is a major component of education, significant in directing what is identified as valued student learning. This paper is framed within an understanding of imperative and exhortative policy. Two paradigmatically different, and potentially contesting, assessment policy directions in Australian education - educational accountability to monitor school and teacher performance, and teacher assessment practices to improve learning (assessment for learning [AfL] or formative assessment) - are examined for their impact on teacher professionalism. Both approaches have official endorsement in Australian policy. Mandated participation in national tests is indicative of educational accountability assessments under national direction. While also endorsed nationally, AfL implementation is reliant on state and territory direction. Our examination reveals tensions in the alignment of both policies. This is evident in the impact of accountability assessment on AfL implementation, in particular, teachers' understandings of valued assessment evidence. We conclude that a paradigmatic shift to support student learning in Australian schools is a policy imperative that includes the need for professional development and learning support for teachers.</abstract><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/02680939.2019.1608375</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3874-397X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1013-0218</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9221-7677</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0268-0939
ispartof Journal of education policy, 2019-11, Vol.34 (6), p.836-857
issn 0268-0939
1464-5106
language eng
recordid cdi_eric_primary_EJ1230142
source Taylor & Francis Journals Complete
subjects Accountability
Alignment (Education)
assessment policy
Critical analysis
Educational Assessment
Educational Policy
Evaluation methods
Foreign Countries
Formative Evaluation
National Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) (Australia)
National competency tests
National Curriculum
Policy analysis
Primary secondary education
Professional development
Professionalism
School Effectiveness
Student assessment
Student Evaluation
Teacher Effectiveness
teacher practice
title Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T23%3A29%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-eric_rmit_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Contesting%20educational%20assessment%20policies%20in%20Australia&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20education%20policy&rft.au=Cumming,%20J.%20Joy&rft.date=2019-11-02&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=836&rft.epage=857&rft.pages=836-857&rft.issn=0268-0939&rft.eissn=1464-5106&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/02680939.2019.1608375&rft_dat=%3Ceric_rmit_%3EEJ1230142%3C/eric_rmit_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1230142&rft_informt_id=10.3316/aeipt.225146&rfr_iscdi=true