House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time National Literacy and Numeracy Tests National Literacy and Numeracy Tests Mr PISONI House of Assembly Unley National Literacy and Numeracy Tests Mr PISONI (Unley) (15:00): My question is to the Minister for Education and Child Development. Does the minister stand by her public comments this morning that South Australia's NAPLAN results have not deteriorated since the first NAPLAN testing in 2008? The Hon. S.E. CLOSE House of Assembly Port Adelaide Minister for Education and Child Development Minister for the Public Sector National Literacy and Numeracy Tests The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Minister for Education and Child Development, Minister for the Public Sector) (15:01): The briefing that I have received from the department is that, in absolute terms, the performance has held steady but that what has occurred is that a couple of the other states (I think, particularly, Queensland, that was fairly far behind) have put in a big effort and lifted and, therefore, the average has increased. I think the larger point is that what we are looking at is a system of measuring performance that is one of many ways in which we can assess how we are travelling. In the case of NAPLAN, what we are really talking about is fairly close results in a band that isn't too broad. If it may comfort some people who are concerned about some of the relentless negativity that we hear about our state schools and our general school population in South Australia, I can point out that, if we look at the PISA assessment (which is the OECD's way of assessing how different countries are performing) and if South Australia were to be treated as a country, it is ahead of both the UK and USA in maths literacy, for example, and better than the USA on science literacy. We have a very good education system and we have kids who learn an enormous amount in the basics and beyond the basics as well. NAPLAN is a standardised test (about which there is much controversy across the world, and I think it is quite legitimate for there to be that controversy) that attempts, in one way, to assess the capabilities of students in literacy and numeracy. It is only one way of assessing that. It is not suitable for all students and that is why I am always at pains when talking about it to say that it has validity in terms of a comparison of systems. It is extremely data rich and is getting more data rich by the year and, therefore, enables different school sectors and different states to work on ways in which they can improve. As I said in public this morning as well, we use that data as one of the bases for the school reviews that we are undertaking at the moment. We do take it seriously because it is one of the tools: it is one of the measures. But I am at pains to say that it isn't necessarily the best measure for an individual student and it is far better for parents to be closely engaged with their children's education than to wait every two years for a test that then takes several months to spit out a result.