Local experiences, global similarities: Teacher perceptions of the impacts of national testing

National Testing in Schools: An Australian Assessment

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 57-71

  Thompson, Greg ^a  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84960490907     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315659312     Document Type: Chapter

References (27)

1. ACARA. (2011). Why NAP. ACARA: Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority.
2. Retrieved March 11, 2014 from http://www.nap.edu.au/about/why-nap.html
3. AERA. (2000). Position statement on high-stakes testing. American Education Research Association (AERA). Retrieved September 26, 2012, from http://www.aera.net/AboutAERA/AERARulesPolicies/AERAPolicyStatements/PositionStatementonHighStakesTesting/tabid/11083/Default.aspx
4. 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. DOI: 10.1080/01425690802423312.
5. Baker, E., Barton, P, Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H., Linn, R., et al. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington: Economic Policy Institute.
6. Baker, R.A. (2012). The effects of high-stakes testing policy on Arts Education. Arts Education Policy Review, 113(1), 17-25. DOI: 10.1080/10632913.2012.626384.
7. Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215-228. DOI: 10.1080/0268093022000043065.
8. Berliner, D. (2011). Rational responses to high stakes testing: The case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(3), 287-302. DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2011.607151.
9. Braun, A., Ball, S., Maguire, M., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Taking context seriously: Towards explaining policy enactments in the secondary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 585—596. DOI: 10.1080/01596306.2011.601555.
10. Comber, B. (2012). Mandated literacy assessment and the reorganisation of teachers’ work: Federal policy, local effects. Critical Studies in Education, 53(2), 119-136. DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2012.672331.
11. Gillard, J. (2012, 12 September). A national plan for school improvement: Speech to National Press Club, Canberra. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://resources.news.com.au/files/2012/09/03/1226463/916021-120903-aus-na-file-pm-gonski-speech.pdf
12. Hardy, I. (2015). Education as a ‘risky business’: Theorising student and teacher learning in complex times. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(3), 375-394. DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2013.829746.
13. Jones, B. (2008). The unintended outcomes of high-stakes testing. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 23(2), 65-86. DOI: 10.1300/J370v23n02_05.
14. 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. DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2011.592972.
15. Kostogriz, A. (2012). Accountability and the affective labour of teachers: A Marxist- Vygotskian perspective. Australian Education Researcher, 39(4), 397-412. DOI: 10.1007/s13384-012-0072-x.
16. Lingard, B. (2010). Policy borrowing, policy learning: Testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 129-145. DOI: 10.1080/17508481003731026.
17. Lingard, B., Hayes, D., & Mills, M. (2003). Teachers and productive pedagogies: Contex- tualising, conceptualising, utilising. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 11(3), 399-423. DOI: 10.1080/14681360300200181.
18. Lingard, B., & Sellar, S. (2013). ‘Catalyst data’: Perverse systemic effects of audit and accountability in Australian schooling. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 634-656. DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2012.758815.
19. Mockler, N. (2014). Simple solutions to complex problems: Moral panic and the fluid shift from ‘equity’ to ‘quality’ in education. Review of Education, 2(2), 115-143. DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3028, 1-29.
20. Nichols, S., & Berliner, D. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
21. Polesel, J., Rice, S., & Dulfer, N. (2014). The impact of high-stakes testing on curriculum and pedagogy: A teacher perspective from Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 29(5), 640-657. DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2013.865082.
22. Productivity Commission. (2012). Schools workforce: Productivity Commission research report. Canberra: Australian Government.
23. Reid, A. (2009). Is this a revolution? A critical analysis of the Rudd government’s national education agenda. Curriculum Perspectives, 29(3), 1-13.
24. Stobart, G. (2008). Testing times: The uses and abuses of assessment. London: Routledge.
25. Thompson, G. (2013). NAPLAN, MySchool and accountability: Teacher perceptions of the effects of testing. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 12(2), 62-84.
26. Thompson, G., & Cook, I. (2014). Manipulating the data: Teaching and NAPLAN in the control society. Discourse: The Cultural Politics of Education, 35(1), 129-142. DOI: 10.1080/01596306.2012.739472.
27. Thompson, G., & Harbaugh, A. (2013). A preliminary analysis of teacher perceptions of the effects of NAPLAN on pedagogy and curriculum. Australian Education Researcher, 40(3), 299-314. DOI: 10.1007/s13384-013-0093-0.