Where's the Assessment? and Other Things

At our first editorial meeting in December of 2007, we set some themes for the 2008/2009 issues of Literacy Learning: the Middle Years. We discussed and debated what the 'important' current issues for literacy in the middle years of schooling were and decided upon the theme of new texts and digital literacies for our first issue and assessment for our second. The research interests of all three editors are evident in the first choice, and also in the second, but the real justification for selecting assessment as a theme for this issue was the currency of the topic in Australia at this time. Students in years 3, 5, 7 & 9 were preparing to sit National Tests in aspects of literacy and numeracy for the first time, and panels of politicians, policy makers and educators were planning to come together to debate the form and content of a National Curriculum. Assessment, we thought, would be at the forefront of teachers' and education researchers' thinking at this time. We were then, to say the least, surprised by the difficulty that we have had in attracting papers on this topic. It would seem that just as the Literate Futures (The State of Queensland, 2000) team identified in 2000 in Queensland, capacity in assessment needs promoting. Several of the papers in this issue detail how state systems are addressing these issues. The lead article builds on work completed by Allan Luke and Annette Woods (2007, 2008) around policy making in literacy, and by Luke, Woods and Katie Weir (Luke, Weir & Woods, 2008; Luke, Woods & Weir, in press; Woods, Luke & Weir, in press) around curriculum and syllabus. Using the No Child Left Behind legislation as an example, Luke and Woods make the argument that increased prescription through standardised testing and scripted pedagogy has not worked to improve outcomes or to narrow the achievement gap in the United States. The authors detail the other effects of such a policy direction--collateral damage as framed by Nichols and Berliner (2006)--and suggest some lessons for the Australian context to be learnt from this experience. The Luke and Woods article aims to engage educators--and specifically teachers--in the debates currently occurring around system and assessment outcomes, quality and equity, and national consistency. Jill Freiberg extends this invitation into the dimensions of standardisation, consistency and moderation in assessment. Current debate in Australia encompasses the issues of 'value' and 'truth'--or perhaps validity and reliability--of current assessment practices. Freiberg problematises the notion that the application of generally applicable, pre-specified criteria and performance standards works to minimise the subjectivity of assessors' qualitative judgements. She queries the point to which standards, criteria and moderation can be characterised as a value-neutral and efficient assessment technology, calling on data collected through interviews of teachers asked to respond to questions about the quality of student work and the judgements made about that work. Barbara Garrick presents an interdisciplinary unit in an article that endeavours to discuss concepts of authentic and productive assessment. What makes the implementation of the unit interesting is that these assessment techniques were achieved within a context where traditional techniques of high stakes, criterion-based assessment were the norm. Garrick's unit planning is based on the Queensland Essential Learnings in English. These form part of the Queensland Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Framework (QCARF), a system initiative used as a case study by Susan Brown in her article that discusses assessment and issues of alignment for 21st Century literacies. Brown investigates the current Queensland approach to supporting schools to provide meaningful and cohesive, student-centred literacy learning, teaching and assessment. …