Public Opinion About National Large-Scale Student Assessment: A Case of NAPLAN

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Assessment Pub Date : 2023-05-21 DOI:10.1080/10627197.2023.2215977
Jihyun Lee, Jung‐Sook Lee, N. Ellis
{"title":"Public Opinion About National Large-Scale Student Assessment: A Case of NAPLAN","authors":"Jihyun Lee, Jung‐Sook Lee, N. Ellis","doi":"10.1080/10627197.2023.2215977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examines public opinion about the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) in Australia, based on an online survey conducted with a sample of New South Wales (NSW) residents (n = 2,017). Our study participants did recognize the benefits of NAPLAN despite their opinion generally trending toward negative viewpoints of the testing program. The views about the positive aspects of NAPLAN varied across socio-demographic groups, but there were more similar views concerning the negative views of NAPLAN. As predicted by the social-cultural and institutional performance models, those living in metropolitan areas and those from high SES groups tended to possess stronger positive views. Political party preference was a strong predictor of the perceptions about NAPLAN. Overall, this study offers possible explanations for the underlying mechanisms explaining sub-group differences in attitudes toward large-scale standardized national testing.","PeriodicalId":46209,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2023.2215977","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study examines public opinion about the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) in Australia, based on an online survey conducted with a sample of New South Wales (NSW) residents (n = 2,017). Our study participants did recognize the benefits of NAPLAN despite their opinion generally trending toward negative viewpoints of the testing program. The views about the positive aspects of NAPLAN varied across socio-demographic groups, but there were more similar views concerning the negative views of NAPLAN. As predicted by the social-cultural and institutional performance models, those living in metropolitan areas and those from high SES groups tended to possess stronger positive views. Political party preference was a strong predictor of the perceptions about NAPLAN. Overall, this study offers possible explanations for the underlying mechanisms explaining sub-group differences in attitudes toward large-scale standardized national testing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全国性大规模学生评估的民意:以NAPLAN为例
摘要本研究基于对新南威尔士州(NSW)居民(n = 2017)。我们的研究参与者确实认识到了NAPLAN的好处,尽管他们的观点普遍倾向于对测试计划的负面看法。关于国家适应行动方案积极方面的观点在不同的社会人口群体中各不相同,但关于国家适应计划消极方面的观点则更为相似。正如社会文化和制度绩效模型所预测的那样,那些生活在大都市地区的人和那些来自高社会经济地位群体的人往往拥有更强的积极观点。政党偏好是对NAPLAN认知的有力预测因素。总的来说,这项研究为解释亚组对大规模标准化国家测试态度差异的潜在机制提供了可能的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Assessment
Educational Assessment EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Educational Assessment publishes original research and scholarship on the assessment of individuals, groups, and programs in educational settings. It includes theory, methodological approaches and empirical research in the appraisal of the learning and achievement of students and teachers, young children and adults, and novices and experts. The journal reports on current large-scale testing practices, discusses alternative approaches, presents scholarship on classroom assessment practices and includes assessment topics debated at the national level. It welcomes both conceptual and empirical pieces and encourages articles that provide a strong bridge between theory and/or empirical research and the implications for educational policy and/or practice.
期刊最新文献
Dialect and Mathematics Performance in African American Children Who Use AAE: Insights from Explanatory IRT and Error Analysis An Analysis of DIF and Sources of DIF in Achievement Motivation Items Using Anchoring Vignettes Resolving and Re-Scoring Constructed Response Items in Mixed-Format Assessments: An Exploration of Three Approaches Extending Principles of Evidence-Centered Design for Diverse Populations: K–12 English Learners with the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities Reading Comprehension Tests: Students’ Question Reading and Responding Behavior
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1