Background to National Standards

(for Community Meeting Wednesday 3^rd November 2010)

 

(Source: Charlotte Oakley.   National Standards; Parliamentary Support Research Paper.  June, 2010)

 

National Standards have been formulated as nationally consistent benchmarks of achievement for students in reading, writing and mathematics in Years 1-8 for all state and state integrated schools. Note that the National Standards do not apply to private schools.  They aim to set clear expectations about what knowledge, understanding and skills a student should be achieving at each year level, based on judgments about what students need to be on target to achieve National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) Level 2.

National Standards were part of the National Party’s election campaign in 2008. When the National Party came into government, the Education Act was amended, giving the Minister of Education the power to set National Standards. The Standards were devised in 2009 and were published in late 2009, ready for implementation in schools at the start of the 2010 school year. From 2011 Trustees will be required to gather school-wide achievement data against the National Standards and from 2012 report to the MOE on the progress and achievement of their school in relation to National Standards.

The National Standards regulatory framework gives schools more specific assessment and reporting requirements. Previous requirements gave schools some freedom in how they chose to manage their assessment and reporting, in accordance with the model of self-managing schools established in 1989. [13]   The reporting requirements for National Standards are contained in the National Administration Guidelines (NAGs). NAG2 relates to planning and reporting and NAG 2A was inserted in October 2009 to cover National Standards. It includes requirements to:

·         report to parents in plain language at least twice a year; and

·         include in the annual report the numbers and proportions of students achieving at, above, below and well below the standards.

 

 

Why National Standards?

One in five children without basic literacy or numeracy

A strong driver of the National Standards initiative is the government’s claim that one in five New Zealand students leaves school without basic literacy and numeracy skills.  International studies of student achievement show that New Zealand has a highly performing education system but has a wide spread of achievement compared to other highly performing countries. The Standards aim to identify low achieving students.  It is important to note that National Standards by themselves will not raise achievement; that is done through good teaching and learning.  It is also worth noting that the ‘one in five’ figure was reached using data already available to the government prior to the introduction of National Standards.

One standard for students to be measured in relation to

While most schools currently use nationally standardised tests as a means of measuring students’ achievement, the tests are not all aligned to the curriculum and schools do not all use the same tests. National Standards aim to address these issues of consistency by providing a system where achievement can be compared across schools using the same measure.

Information for parents

The Government has identified parents wanting more information on their child’s progress at school as a reason for the initiative. [8]   While most schools were already reporting regularly to parents, National Standards requires schools to report on a student’s progress in plain language twice a year. The reports are to include the student’s next learning steps, how parents can help at home and any details of extra support that may be needed.

Assessment in schools can be variable

Issues have been identified with the quality of assessment taking place in schools. National Standards propose to address this by requiring all schools to collect quality assessment information on students and to report on the information collected.

 

Concerns about National Standards

Speed of design and implementation

The lack of a trial period or testing of the Standards has caused concern. Education sector groups and academics sought a phased introduction of the Standards, as opposed to full implementation in schools during 2010. Full implementation means that schools are required to learn about the Standards while trying to apply them.  Interestingly the government has agreed to trial the Maori version of the Standards, to be used in kura kaupapa (Maori language immersion) schools.

Concern has also been expressed that with no trial of the Standards, there has been no opportunity to establish whether they have been set at the correct level, or to see how they relate to actual patterns of student progression. Not all students follow the same developmental trajectory to get to the same level of performance at the same time. [27]  

Professional Development for Teachers

Professional development support is inadequate for teachers, principals and trustees to implement National Standards effectively.  In 2010, some trustees, principals and lead teachers have attended Ministry of Education professional development workshops on the Standards, but these have been abandoned as they tended to cause confusion.  Information is also being provided online and in the Education Gazette with the responsibility largely left to schools to apply this information to their own systems. This minimal professional development inevitably leads to patchy implementation and threatens the integrity of the National Standards system.

Standards by themselves do not lift achievement

National Standards aim to identify students who are struggling to meet the standards. However, it is not the identification of students that leads to improved educational achievement; it is effective teaching and learning. For education achievement to improve, it will be important that teachers are provided with adequate opportunities to participate in programmes that improve their teaching capacity. The entire provision of professional development provided by the MOE is currently under review and it is becoming clear that for schools such as ours that are high decile and reasonably successful there will be little or no access to Ministry-funded professional development from 2011.

Student motivation

Students who are not meeting the Standards may be assessed by schools as achieving ‘below standard’ and ‘well below standard’. This is the wording that the Ministry of Education requires schools to use in their annual reports in regard to the standards. If this wording is adopted by schools in their reports to parents and students this could lead to students who fail to meet the Standards becoming demoralised and unmotivated toward their learning. Internationally, low achiever’s self esteem has been compromised where such measures of student achievement have been adopted [31] .

The Overall Teacher Judgement

National Standards require teachers to use assessment information gathered from various sources to form an Overall Teacher Judgement (OTJ) on whether students are meeting the Standards. The Ministry of Education bases this approach on the understanding that no single source of assessment information can provide an accurate summary of a student’s achievement or progress, and the best systems internationally are those that value and utilise teachers’ professional judgement. [33]   Overall Teacher Judgements have been found to offer more reliability than tests.  However without careful training and support Overall Teacher Judgements can be biased, inaccurate and subjective.

Moderation

Effective moderation is critical to ensure National Standards are reliable benchmarks of achievement.  Moderation is a ‘quality control’ process to check that the Overall Teacher Judgements of students’ work can be compared nationally with confidence. The issues experienced with establishing a reliable moderation system at NCEA level, illustrate the importance of this.

Under National Standards, schools are encouraged to use group moderation processes; that is, teachers discussing student assessments and work samples to reach a common understanding of achievement levels.  For these to be successful, schools need time, resources and professional support.  At Southbridge School we have conducted group moderation for the past three years, paid for from our operations and staffing budgets.  We receive no additional support to extend this process to National Standards.

For consistency in judgements nationally, moderation between schools is needed. [37]   This happens at secondary level with NCEA but there is no provision for it under National Standards, beyond an encouragement for schools to get together to do it.

League Tables

From 2012 schools will be required to report their results from National Standards in their Annual Reports. The Government has stated it will not protect this data from being available to the media to create league tables comparing school results.

Internationally, league tables have created an incorrect perception of schools’ performance, as they do not take into account variants in intake (schools with large numbers of struggling students are compared directly to schools with large numbers of high achievers) and they generally provide only a ‘snap shot’ of achievement. [39]   For instance, a low decile school could be having a good impact on its student’s progression in regard to the National Standards, but, the league table would only recognise the student’s low achievement relative to the Standards. This information does not help parents make an informed choice on what is a good school to send their child and ends up unfairly labelling some schools. Internationally, league table accountability has not been found to improve student achievement. [40]  

By unfairly labeling schools league tables also undermine one of the foundations of New Zealand’s education system: that every child should have an equal opportunity to receive a good education.  New Zealand’s high levels of student achievement are linked to our strongly equitable education system.

Teaching Methods, such as Teaching to the Test

Internationally, where schools have been under pressure to achieve from league tables and other measures of accountability, this has led to teaching methods that are hinder student learning such as ‘teaching to the test’. ‘Teaching to the test’ involves teachers teaching only what is going to be assessed at the expense of the wider curriculum. As National Standards measure achievement only in literacy and mathematics, teachers in New Zealand will face the same pressure to narrow the curriculum.

Another threat stems from the tendency of National Standards to become minimum standards.  Schools under pressure to look good in a league table will devote their resources to lifting the greatest number of children up to the bar.  This means they will concentrate on children just below the Standard, to the neglect of those above or well below.  So both the brightest and the most needy children may suffer, with the ironic result that National Standards may foster the very mediocrity and inequity they aim to eradicate.

 

Conclusion

National Standards present a dilemma for concerned trustees, principals and teachers.  NAG2A places a legal obligation on schools to introduce and use the National Standards, but on the other hand many people within education are concerned that the Standards as they exist now will cause more harm than good.  The New Zealand Principals Federation, the New Zealand Educational Institute and many of the country’s leading academics have agreed that the Standards are fundamentally flawed, that they should be trialled and improved before being implemented and that the data should not be available for use in league tables.

At Southbridge School we are confident that our methods for assessing and reporting student achievement are already outstanding.  The Education Review Office agrees and has extended us the unusual privilege of being placed on a 4-5 year review cycle.

Perhaps we may find our way through the dilemma posed by National Standards by considering our school vision:

Learning for Life

The vision incorporates two fundamental expectations we have for our children: firstly, that we equip them with the academic skills to be independent lifelong learners, and secondly that we teach them the physical, moral, emotional and civic capabilities to live rich and purposeful lives.

The question we must ask ourselves is, to what extent do National Standards help or hinder us in achieving our vision?