Sliced Bread

If we worked on the assumption that what is accepted as true really is true, then there would be little hope for advance. Orville Wright

I link Wright’s words to this question “Has the NSW BOS HSC reached it’s use by date for today’s learning?”

Today’s Australian IT News (etal) announced a new international assessment review will investigate high stakes school assessments, such as the NSW Board of Studies Higher School Certificate Exam (HSC).  The article states;

… that reforming student assessment is the key to transforming education to bring it into the 21st century.

The executive director of the review will be Australia’s National Curriculum Board Head Professor Barry McGaw and will be co-ordinated through MERI at Melbourne University.  

Is anyone seeing synergies for Australian Education reform?

Here we have the head of Australia’s emerging 2009 National Curriculum working con-currently on an international review of antiquated,summative and high stakes school assessment that have reached their collective use by dates. (my italics)

The policy paper was launched at the Learning and Technology World Forum in London yesterday. Professor McGaw

will oversee five working groups headed by other education experts charged with specifying 21st-century skills in a way that can be measured…

The red highlight is critical. 21st century tools and skills, vital as they are, will remain marginalised diversions to what a majority still see as the measure of ”real school learning” (UAI scores, NAPLAN, School Merit Lists, HSC results, media league tables, stressful competitive comparsions etal) 

Until HSC style summative assessment, that NSW education stakeholders feel beholden to, is substantially reformed, attempts to embedd more meaningful and relevant learning into the mainstream will be nigh impossible.

The miniscule number innovating now can, or should be able to, accurately answer this question.

After applying, how have we measured improvement?

I hope early adopters are keeping their micro measurements of successful learning transformation for that is the evidence also needed at the macro level. It is the only evidence governments will respond to, when their education systems are openly compared on global league tables such as PISA and OECD. Ironic isn’t it? almost bully like in fact.

That is the crux of embedding systemic change. If meaningful assessment is unavailable to demonstrate and prove the ’21st century skills and tools mantra’, then sorry, any leader will baulk at supporting what really remains just an interesting experiment, tinkering in the back shed style. 

This international assessment review should be the catalyst that forces the slumbering giants of education to actually ”get it”. As earnest as the disassociated minnows currently working wonders on the case by case, school by school level are, meaningful change will not occur until the powerbrokers change their measure of schooling, that is assessment.

The few innovators at the chalk face, the day to day doers, will keep plugging away because they already know this learning is what is needed, but they are having a hard time proving it beyond their tiny insular echo chambers. This must change and annoucements such as this review are important macro steps.

McGaw has wanted to align results with OECD,PISA and other educational indicaters that governments actually respond to for many years. No country likes coming out poorly in these results, whether or not we believe or respond to them, governments do. 

Therefore assessment reform is really the first imperitive before any other ’21st century’ change. Leaders need to see outcomes that are manifestly better than previous methods. Change for changes sake? No thanks.  

The policy paper outlines initial core skills as the basis for a new kind of assessment, covering

• creativity and innovation
• critical thinking
• problem-solving
• communication
• collaboration
• information fluency
• technological literacy

It argues that high-stakes assessments, such as Year 12 exams, determine what is taught in schools irrespective of what is dictated in the formal curriculum, and so changing the assessment will change what students learn.

More of this horse before the cart thinking is needed. In the article McGaw also says not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, acknowledging the current system is not broken but needs serious tweeking. The pace of any assessment reform should be called to question as even this review also has a three year life. Is that too long? Yes.

Our new National Curriculum can have as many motherhood objectives about “transformative 21st Century Learning”, but unless assessment substantially changes, teachers will continue to teach towards high stake exams, for myriad reasons.

If the 7 skills identified above are not meaningfully assessed, then they simply will NOT be taught in the mainstream. End of story.

Everything else that innovators attempting to drag leaders, colleagues, parents and students into the 21st century will be resigned to a patronising tinkering status.

But really, who can blame them? Teachers do what we know and do as we are told but is that really good enough now for our 2009 Kindy students graduating in 2022? Will a summative assessment ala HSC really prepare them for their future? No.

Know your destination before you choose your mode of transport. What we currently have should not be adjudged as the ultimate dictate of learning worth or success in the second decade of the 21st century.

The world has moved on, so should education, starting with assessment.