Education Standards

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta) (15:32): 'Test scores out' read the headline a few weeks ago in an opinion piece written for The Advertiser by former Finnish education bureaucrat Pasi Sahlberg. Unless we pay attention, in my view, to test scores and standards, I think we risk failing all our students. I could not disagree with Mr Sahlberg more, with respect.

In particular, we especially place at risk, if we ignore standards, if we do not pay attention to test scores, the students who most need a strong education to lift them up in life. Arguments such as those raised by Mr Sahlberg in education have been present since the time of Jean-Jacques Rousseau before the French Revolution.

The thinking goes that if only the creativity and individuality of a child could be given full expression and dignity, then the teacher would learn as much from the child and vice versa. This brand of thinking in many ways has dominated teacher training in our universities for an extended period of time, during the seventies, eighties, nineties and until quite recently. It is the archetypal cliché of a seventies trope.

It is a type of thinking that is sceptical of having a teacher as the expert in the room explicitly teaching a rigorous knowledge-rich curriculum and instead favours helping children gain skills through their engagement with things that they may already be interested in or care about. That is, of course, quite damaging for a child who does not have a broad expression, a broader set of experiences in life, who may have had fewer books at their home, who may have had fewer opportunities and advantages through their family. Those children, if they are only encouraged to pursue those issues that they know about as a way of engaging them in their studies, are less likely to learn about the world and the things that will benefit them in life.

In recent years, as first South Australia, now followed by the rest of the country, has re-embraced phonics and the science of learning to the teaching of early years literacy, the so-called progressive education movement has resisted politicians and education department officials from focusing too much on standards and test scores, particularly in the domain of literacy.

I remember this well from the four years that I was education minister. I am sure that the current education minister has come up against it as well on occasion—the sense that a focus on literacy and numeracy is somehow diminishing the educational experience of our young people. My view was always that you need to get the basics absolutely right to ensure that students are able to unlock their potential, that they are able to appreciate the opportunities given them through a broad and rich curriculum. Unless a child can read effectively, can decode new words that they have not encountered before, how can they possibly grasp new concepts when they are encountering them in a book?

We hear instead from the progressive education movement, if you like, that you need to shift your focus away from literacy and numeracy and instead have it absolutely focused on wellbeing. Let me be clear: wellbeing is important, but without strong literacy skills a child will be at greater risk of unhappiness and poor wellbeing throughout their schooling and, of course, through the rest of their life.

Moving to best practice—rooted in the science of learning—in the teaching of reading across all of our schools, including a heavy focus on the teaching of phonics, saw South Australia's NAPLAN results in reading improve faster than any other state in Australia between 2018 and 2022, and that is why every jurisdiction in Australia, and the federal Labor Party as well, has now followed our lead. Year 1 Phonics Check data shows that the biggest improvements have been for the most disadvantaged students, coincidentally the same kids for whom our level of concern about their wellbeing is the greatest.

Ideally, we want all students to be supported in our schools to fulfil their potential, no matter what their background. To ignore standards and the test scores we expect them to achieve, in my view, stifles their potential. It succumbs to the numbing inevitability of low expectations that are therefore going to be met. It is an educational sedative. More than that, it is a betrayal of the opportunity that we expect a good education to give those kids who need it the most. Pasi Sahlberg's article concluded with the following quote:

The Age of Achievement where school’s success was judged by test scores, rankings, and data-driven teaching is fading. We are now entering…the Age of Agency, where trust, professional autonomy, and collaboration are becoming the cornerstones...

In my experience, people arguing the hardest for us to ignore the data are usually the ones who do not have any data to back up their argument. We would not accept that approach in any other area of public policy, and we must not accept it in education.