#What is neplan education drivers#
These short comings and the need for change have been understood for some time.Īs researchers have found (Gannon, 2019 McGaw et al, 2020) a NAPLAN-influenced structural approach to the teaching of writing has thwarted the development of imaginative capacity through a formulaic teaching approach.Īs the USC study and others have concluded, NAPLAN’s teaching, purpose, and testing around writing and literacy is not fit for purpose and missing the drivers that would achieve the results we crave. This research also constructively points to the change needed.ĭr Shelley Davidow, Dr Michael Carey, and Dr Paul Williams, researchers from the USC School of Education, and Business and Creative Industries found in a recent study that NAPLAN’s writing assessment is not fit for purpose and is inadequate in preparing students to be versatile, creative and engaged writers.Īn article by the researchers is under review by a journal and will hopefully be published soon it will add depth and further context to the findings I am skimming off the surface here.ĭespite the presence of NAPLAN in our classrooms for the last 13 years there has been no significant improvement nationally in Year 9 writing results, in fact standards are falling.
Research funded by Steiner Education Australia and conducted by the University of the Sunshine Coast (USC) provides more context for the anxiety many feel around NAPLAN. I am sure parents across Australia have seen and felt the building stress in the children and education professionals as the calendar ticked over to ‘NAPLAN season’. Since 2008 classrooms have been geared towards the annual NAPLAN alarm bell. NAPLAN is constraining creativity and missing literacy learning opportunities.
Core Principles for Australian Steiner Schools.About Rudolf Steiner and the growth of the Steiner/Waldorf education movement.