NATIONAL LITERACY AND NUMERACY TESTS

Mr PISONI (Unley) (16:15): My question is to the Minister for Education and Child Development. Why does the minister's department use NAPLAN practice testing to prepare students in years 2, 4, 6 and 8 for the following year's NAPLAN tests when the federal education minister, Peter Garrett, does not support this? The federal education minister's office stated on 9 June 2012:

...it is not beneficial for schools to use the tests to prepare students for NAPLAN when they will not be sitting the test that year.

The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) also does not endorse practice testing.

The Hon. G. PORTOLESI (Hartley—Minister for Education and Child Development) (16:16): I thank the member for Unley for this question. He makes a number of assertions: the first is that practice testing is undertaken in these year levels, and I would ask him to give me the information that substantiates this assertion—

Mr Pisoni: I'll send the release out after question time.

The Hon. G. PORTOLESI: No—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The Hon. G. PORTOLESI: No, show me—

The SPEAKER: Member for Unley, order!

Members interjecting:

The Hon. G. PORTOLESI: No, I am very happy to look at that because I am aware that there was one school (and I cannot recall whether it was a government school or a school in the non-government sector) where, in fact, they were doing a practice test in year 6. Of course, they do not do NAPLAN testing in year 6; they were doing it in anticipation of the test in year 7. My view and ACARA's view—in fact, we talked about it at our last SCSEEC meeting (our last national ministerial council meeting)—is that the NAPLAN testing has to be put into its appropriate context. It is one tool in the toolkit, and there is absolutely nothing to be gained by excessive testing.

The other thing, in fact, before I go on, is that our schools across all sectors do a variety of things to prepare their children for the NAPLAN tests but also, more importantly, for the ongoing requirements of literacy and numeracy.

Ms Chapman: So you agree with Peter Garrett?

The Hon. G. PORTOLESI: My view—and I have always maintained this, and I said this, in fact, just before we did the NAPLAN test here in South Australia—is that families, students and teachers should consider this test as simply one of the tools in the toolkit, that there is no point becoming anxious about it, and that we should approach it like we approach any other test. I think we get useful data from our NAPLAN tests.

In fact, I visited a number of fantastic schools with the member for Taylor this morning. I visited Two Wells Primary School, and I have to say I congratulate the principal of that school. Before, or possibly at the same time as NAPLAN, she arrived at the school, and she introduced a whole-of-school focus on literacy. I think it was an accelerated reading program—I can't remember the title of the program, whether it was accelerated reading or accelerated literacy—and then got results and then moved on to attacking numeracy, again seeing fantastic results in the NAPLAN data.

So, I congratulate our schools in the government and non-government sectors. We have a whole-of-sector commitment to improving our literacy and numeracy, not just because of NAPLAN, but I have to say, NAPLAN does give us useful data.