Pursuing quality and equity through a national curriculum Barry McGaw Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne Chair, Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority Bridging divides: ensuring access, equity and quality in literacy and English education - AATE/ALEA Conference, Hobart 12 July 2009

There is a rising demand for high-level skills

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 3 Changed demand for skills in the US The dilemma for schools: The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to digitise, automate and outsource. Autor, D., Levy, F. and Murnane, R. J., (2003) The skill content of recent technical change, Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, pp Levy, F. and Murnane, R.J. (2006), “How Computerized Work and Globalization Shape Human Skill Demands”, working paper, available at:

How good is our literacy education?

What do international comparisons tell us about the quality of Australian education?

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 6 Coverage of world economy 77%81% 83% 85%86%87% OECD’s PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 7 Mean reading results (PISA 2000) Australia tied for 2 nd with 8 others among 42 countries. OECD (2003), Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000, Fig. 2.5, p.76.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 8 Australia’s ranking in OECD/PISA Reading  Reading ranks  PISA 2000: 4 th but tied for 2 nd  PISA 2003: 4 th but tied for 2 nd  PISA 2006: 7 th but tied for 6 th Finland Korea Canada NZ Hong Kong Korea Canada NZ Hong Kong Finland PISA 2000 PISA 2003 PISA 2006 Ahead of Australia Same as Australia Behind Australia Finland Korea Canada NZ Hong Kong

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 9 Trends in reading performance Australia Finland Hong Kong China Canada New Zealand Korea Higher performers in Korea improved. Lower performers in HK improved. OECD (2007), PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, Vol. 1 - analysis, Fig. 6.21, p.319. Changes for Finland, Canada & New Zealand are not significant.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 10 Trends in Australian reading performances 95 th %ile OECD (2007), PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, Vol. 1 - analysis, Fig. 6.21, p th %ile 90 th %ile 10 th %ile 75 th %ile 25 th %ile Mean

The impact of raising expectations of low performers

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 12 Variation in reading performance (PISA 2000) Variation of performance between schools Variation of performance within schools OECD, UNESCO (2003), Literacy skills for tomorrow’s world: further results from PISA 2000, Table 7.1a, p.357.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 13 Variation in mathematics performance Variation of performance between schools Variation of performance within schools OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrow’s world, Table 4.1a, p.383.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 14 Trends in reading performance Australia Finland Hong Kong China Canada New Zealand Korea OECD (2007), PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, Vol. 1 - analysis, Fig. 6.21, p.319. Changes for Finland, Canada & New Zealand are not significant. Lower performers in Poland improved. Poland Lower and higher performers in Poland improved.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 15 The storyline so far… There is a growing labour market demand for higher level skills. International comparisons show that: Australian students are relatively high performing. The competition is not standing still. Setting high expectations for all can improve low performers.

What do international comparisons tell us about the equity of Australian education? matters too

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 17 % at each reading proficiency level: PISA 2000 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Below Level 1 Source: OECD, UNESCO (2003) Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow, Table 2.1a, p.274 Korea had relatively high mean but with few very high performers and very few low performers. Australia’s mean is high because of its relatively high percentage of very high-performing students. Australia has somewhat more low performing students than some high- performing countries around it.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 18 Socioeconomic status & reading literacy (PISA 2000) Social Advantage PISA Index of social background High Reading literacy Low Source: OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for life, Appendix B1, Table 8.1, p.308 Two indices of relationship: Social gradient Correlation or variance accounted for Social gradient: Magnitude of increment in achievement associated with an increment in social background (on average) Correlation: How well the regression line summarises the relationship

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 19 Social Advantage PISA Index of social background Low Reading literacy High Finland Germany Canada This gap is in the order of 3 years of schooling. Steeper slope = less equitable results Source: OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for life, Appendix B1, Table 8.1, p.308 Social gradients for reading literacy (PISA 2000) Australia

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 20 Social gradients for reading literacy (PISA 2000) OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for life, Table 8.1, p.308. High quality Low equity High quality High equity Low quality Low equity Low quality High equity

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 21 SES-science literacy correlations (PISA 2006) OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for life, Table 8.1, p.308. High quality Low equity High quality High equity Low quality Low equity Low quality High equity

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 22 The storyline so far… There is a growing labour market demand for higher level skills. International comparisons show that: Australian students are relatively high performing. The competition is not standing still. Setting high expectations for all can improve low performers. They are among the best in the world, but slipping. Australian students’ performance in reading: Low performers are left somewhat further behind than in other high- performing countries (though not in mathematics or science). The disadvantaged are over-represented among low performers.

Challenges for a national curriculum

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 24 Challenges for a national curriculum  To raise the quality of learning even higher  Stretching the high performers  Setting high expectations for low performers  To improve the equity of learning  Reducing the impact of socio-economic differences

Scope and governance of the national curriculum

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 26 Scope of work on national curriculum  Initial brief  English, mathematics, science, history from 2011  An early addition  Geography and languages other than English  Added in April 2009  The Arts  Report requested by October 2009  on implications of making the entire curriculum national

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 27 Governance of the national curriculum  Interim National Curriculum Board  Appointed by COAG in April 2008  Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority  Replaced National Curriculum Board in May 2009  Responsibilities National curriculum National assessment: NAPLAN and sample surveys Data analysis and transparent reporting on school performance

Shape of the national curriculum

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 29

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 30 Shape of the Australian Curriculum  Document setting out form of the curriculum  Draft in late June 2008  Revised version on website October-December 2008  Final version published 6 May 2009  Principles and specifications include  Make clear what has to be taught and learned - entitlements  Set high standards for all assuming all can learn  Build firm foundational skills and basis for expertise  Be feasible for teachers: In terms of time and resources available In terms of language in documents  Value teachers’ professional knowledge  Reflect local contexts

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 31

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 32 Development of K-12 framework for English  Initial advice for each learning area  Lead writer: Professor Peter Freebody  Team of collaborators to review initial draft  National forum in October 2008  diverse participants  Subject associations provided advice on following day  Consultation on revised versions  On website for advice 20/11/08 to 28/02/09  Final versions published on 6 May 2009  Framework for development of curriculum detail  Report on consultation setting out advice received and responses

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 33 Development of detailed curriculum  Features  3 strands: language, literature, literacy  Issues: Getting balance across strands, across years Meeting needs of students learning to read –Phonological and phonemic awareness –Sound-letter correspondences –Using of semantic and syntactic clues to make meaning Building grammar into language strand Articulating development in literature strand  Authors  Writers 10 - classroom teachers, academics from across Australia Expertise - early years to teacher education  Advisory Panel, Curriculum Committee and Board

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 34 Work plan  First 10 weeks  K-10 broad outline of the scope and sequence K-10 content descriptions of what student will be taught Placement across strands Language strand: –oral proficiency –grammar, spelling, punctuation, handwriting, word processing  Aims, rationales and broad outlines for four courses  Next phase  content elaborations  achievement standards.

Melbourne Graduate School of Education 35 Some key issues  Reducing clutter to achieve depth  Strategic choice of content, e.g. big ideas in science  Access to supporting resources  Curriculum primarily electronic and layered Links to resources for teachers who need them Annotated samples of students’ work to show standards  Teacher professional development  Need for good links with responsible agencies  Evaluation  Curriculum fidelity in implementation  Curriculum effectiveness in elevating student achievement