DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
2014 NAPLAN
Data Analysis
Guide
National Assessment Program
Literacy and Numeracy
CONTENTS
Introduction
3
Process for using data
4
1. Data collection and storage
5
2. Analyse, interpret and discuss data
6
Level 1 – top level interrogation
6
Level 2 – sub-group interrogation
9
Level 3 – item level
11
Numeracy
12
Reading
17
Language Conventions
20
Writing
24
Collaborative Data Review
27
3. Reflect, gain new understandings and decide on actions
28
4. Make decisions and commit to action
29
5. Feedback to students and classroom/school changes
30
Appendices
31
References
40
Contacts:
See your regional team in the first instance for data analysis assistance.
For NAPLAN or RAAD queries contact:
Sarah Belsham
Senior Manager National Assessment
Curriculum, Assessment and Standards
Ph: 8944 9239
Email: sarah.belsham@nt.gov.au
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
Gay West
Numeracy Assessment
Curriculum, Assessment and Standards
Ph: 8944 9246
Email: gabrielle.west@nt.gov.au
2
Introduction
An assessment culture that involves the transformation of quality assessment data into knowledge
and ultimately effective teaching practice is critical to advancing students’ literacy and numeracy
achievement.
This booklet provides a framework or process for the efficient use of data – collecting, analysing,
discussing and deciding on actions in response to student achievement data. The examples used
in this booklet are NAPLAN reports, from the RAAD tool, that inform teachers about how to assist
students to improve their learning outcomes. This valuable information supports whole school
accountability processes and enables strategic and operational planning at the school level and
also at the classroom level.
The RAAD application and the User Guide are available on the DET website:
www.education.nt.gov.au/teachers-educators/assessment-reporting/nap
Effective use of data
A shift is occurring in the way educators view data and its potential to inform professional learning
needs, intervention requirements and resource allocation. Data can be used to focus discussion
on teaching, learning, assessment, teacher pedagogy, and monitoring of progress.
School improvement requires more than just presenting the data and assuming it will automatically
transform teachers’ thinking. Rather, teachers need sensitive coaching and facilitation to study the
data and make connections between data and instructional decision making.
School leaders, as data coaches, need to ask purposeful questions to promote thoughtful
discussion which should be followed by targeted action. Effective data use has to become part of a
school’s culture. A culture where:
-
there is a shared belief in the value of data
-
data literacy capacity and skills are proactively developed
-
there are planned times to collaboratively interrogate the data
-
effective change in classroom practice is achieved in a supportive environment.
A culture change requires people to believe in the data, get excited by it and use it as a focus for
future planning. Holcomb (2004) sees the process involving three Ps: people, passion and proof –
everyone’s responsibility, commitment and ownership of the process – and carried out with three
Rs: reflection, and relentless resilience.
The process outlined below can be used or adjusted by schools to suit their individual context and
the different data sources that they are interrogating. In this booklet NAPLAN data, as presented in
the RAAD, will be used exclusively to elucidate and expand each of these steps involved in the
process of effective data use.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
3
Process for using data
Step 1. Collect and store data
Gather and collect good quality data from multiple sources.
Develop a process whereby data is well-organised in a central location to allow easy
retrieval and review at any time now and in the future.
Step 2. Analyse, interpret and discuss the data
Interrogate the data in a supportive group environment.
Aggregate and disaggregate the data in different ways and ask probing questions that
reveal information about the students, the teaching, the resources and the school
structures.
Step 3. Reflect, gain new understandings and decide on actions
Reflection after the data interrogation and discussions, and further student questioning will
reveal new knowledge and understandings about the sequence of learning involved in
concept development.
This will guide decisions about changes or adjustments to the types of classroom
approaches, strategies and resources already in use.
Step 4. Make decisions and commit to action
Leadership teams, in collaboration with teachers, will decide on which parts of the
curriculum to target. From this, a whole school action plan that identifies, prioritises and
schedules the professional development, structural changes and resource allocation must
be organised. Leadership teams must drive the process and set up regular feedback to
keep the plan on track.
Step 5. Feedback to students include them in the process
Students have to be part of the effective data use process by providing them with
constructive explicit feedback and supporting them to develop SMART learning goals, see
Section 5, page 30.
Repeat the cycle
This cycle is a never-ending process in that the effect of any change in practice should be
monitored.
Begin the process again: Collect data …
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
4
1. Data collection and storage
Reliable data from good quality assessments can range from teacher in-class specific skill
observation and student reflection information (qualitative) at one end of the spectrum to teacher
constructed assessment and standardised diagnostic assessment results (quantitative) at the
other. Results from NAPLAN, commercial standardised tests or any of the online diagnostic
assessments described on the website shown here provide good examples of qualitative data:
www.education.nt.gov.au/teachers-educators/assessment-reporting/diagnostic-assessments
Multiple sources of data allow triangulation and verification of student achievement levels. Putting
as many of the assessment jigsaw pieces together will produce a clearer picture of what is
happening in the classroom and the school and what specific actions are required to improve
results.
Data storage cannot be ad hoc. Files, reports, assessments and subsequent action plans need to
be stored systematically, in easy-to-access, clearly labelled digital or hard copy folders. This
allows trouble-free retrieval and review of achievement data along with records of previous data
analysis sessions. New staff or regional officers should be able to access previous data and
discussions. Of course data should be accessible, but also needs to be treated confidentially.
In addition to student academic achievement data, parallel school data sets need to be gathered
and analysed to inform what changes must occur to make it possible for student learning to
improve. Measures such as student demographics, attendance, perceptions, staff and community
attitudes, expectations and expertise, school processes, programs and protocols contribute to
building a comprehensive picture of a school’s culture.
Understanding these data sets, and the interplay between them, will allow schools to build a big
picture view so that teachers and school leaders can reflect on their practices, decide on and
instigate change to improve their performance.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
5
2. Analyse, interpret and discuss the data
At its core, effective data use requires a collaborative group of educators coming together regularly
to interrogate the data sets and discuss future actions. Presenting data in a variety of formats,
aggregating and disaggregating results, filtering down to specific subgroups, and drilling down to
the smallest grain size (individual student responses to questions) allows thorough analysis and is
essential to effective data use. By questioning, discussing, deciding and implementing using three
levels of data interrogation, a quality set of assessment results can be transformed into an
instructional tool to shape strategic professional development and future programming and
planning.
Level 1 The top level of data interrogation looks at the school’s overall achievement data for
each year level.
For example in NAPLAN each area of testing – numeracy, reading, writing, spelling, grammar and
punctuation – could be analysed and discussed using the following questions:
•
Does the school mean differ significantly from the national mean?
•
How does the school distribution of student achievement compare to the national range
(highest 20%, middle 60% & lowest 20%)?
•
Who are the students below, at and above the National Minimum Standard?
•
Does this data provide information on the impact of specific programs or approaches that
teachers are using?
•
In what areas of testing did we do well/poorly?
-
Did this vary between year levels or was it across the board?
-
Does this data validate teachers’ A–E assessment of the students against the Northern
Territory or National Curriculum achievement standards?
-
Are there any surprises in the overall results?
The Reporting and Analysing Achievement Data (RAAD) program takes the NAPLAN data and
presents it in a variety of data analysis displays. At the top level, the display shows:
-
achievement across the year level where students can be ordered according to results of
below, at or above the national minimum standard
-
the spread of the students across the national achievement bands
-
student year level achievement as compared to the top 20%, middle 60% and bottom 20%
of Australian results.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
6
Year level/cohort data analysis in the RAAD display screens
Tabular display
Graphical display
Means
Top 20%
Middle 60%
Above
At
Bottom 20%
Below
Achievement distribution across the bands shows whether students are clustering at certain
NAPLAN national bands and if their placement is skewed to the lower or upper areas of
achievement. This data can be used to validate classroom observations and assessment
information.
Schools should reflect on the programs and resources used to drive improvement of the ‘at risk’
students, below minimum standard, and those that are at or just above the minimum standard. It is
also important to look at the extensions offered to students who cluster just under or in the top 20%
achievement category. Reviewing and rethinking the programs offered to all students will form part
of the discussion with the questions that include:
• Why are students clustering in certain bands?
• What do we need to do to move our students on?
• What strategies can we put in place for the students above the national minimum standard
but below the Australian mean?
• How do we extend those students who are well above the national minimum standard?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
7
NAPLAN means can be recorded for previous years at a school, region, territory or national level
and compared to the 2014 results. Using Excel the means can be plotted for a number of years
and the resulting visual charts can help staff to identify trends.
The graphs below show some of the ways that means can be tracked within a school and
compared to the Australian, NT or Regional means. The same cohorts can be tracked every 2
years e.g. 2010 Year 3 to 2012 Year 5 to 2014 Year 7 cohort.
Data analysis over time
These examples show trends overtime:
- numbers of students within a year group level
that achieved below, at and above the national
minimum standard over a 3 year period in the
NAPLAN spelling test
- school means for a year level compared to the
Australian means over a 4 year period in the
NAPLAN numeracy test
Reading 2013
Reading 2014
- a four way comparison of school, region, NT
and Australian means for reading over a 2 year
period.
Staff discussions will include questions like:
• Are results improving at a satisfactory rate over time?
• Can we use these results to prove or disprove the veracity of our school program in a certain
area?
• Can we use these results to support the need for a change in our school program in a certain
area?
• What other evidence can we use to validate the programs we use in our school?
A template for recording and comparing Australian and school means is shown in Appendix G and
a variety of ready-made analysis graphs are available on the DoE NT website, see Appendix D
page 32.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
8
Level 2
The second level of data interrogation involves disaggregating the results and
looking at specific subgroup achievement within the year level for particular assessments.
The RAAD, using NAPLAN data from each test area, provides a variety of student filters that can
be used to disaggregate the data into subgroups such as class, gender, Indigenous status, LBOTE
or ESL groups. It also allows schools to customise filters and create subgroups using specific
program codes (see the RAAD User Guide).
Questions similar to the ones above need to be asked for specific groups of students:
• Does the subgroup mean differ significantly from the national mean?
• How does the spread of this subgroup differ from the whole year group?
• What are the specific strengths and weaknesses of this subgroup?
Data analysis focussing on a subgroup
This Assessment Data display
shows the question statistics
and responses for the females
in one class group.
Filtered subgroup display
This disaggregated data set will
reveal the particular questions
that proved difficult for this
group of students and point to
curriculum areas of concern.
The patterns of response to
each of the questions will also
show up any common
misconceptions within this
group.
Another type of display –
Student Distribution – will show
the mean and the spread of
this group in graphical form.
Discussion using this data will focus on the special needs of this specific subgroup:
• What specific programs or teaching approaches will produce the best results?
• Are their extra resources that would support these programs?
• What community members have the skills that will influence this group of students?
• Were there any surprises in the results for this group of students?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
9
Data analysis comparing the spread of two subgroups
NAPLAN Distribution comparison
32%
males
6%
females
These two distribution displays show the disaggregated achievement data for a Year 5 group of males
and females for Numeracy. This subgroup filtering into male and female groups shows the contrasting
spread of achievement that the whole year level distribution would not show up.
This comparison shows the poor achievement of the Year 5 females in numeracy compared to the
males e.g. 32% of males compared to 6% of females are in the top 20% of Australian Achievement.
Questions for discussion using this data information could be:
• Does the class assessment align with this data?
• How can we engage the young females at this level in relevant mathematical investigations?
• What special approaches or content will tap into their interests?
A variety of visual presentations of the data, for whole cohort or subgroup analysis, can be very
effective when used as springboards for staff discussions about the efficacy of programs being
used at the school.
National Minimum
Standard
- % above
- % at
- % below
- % absent
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
Results from the NAPLAN tests can be
exported to an Excel spread sheet and
graphed in a variety of ways.
This pie chart visual representation of
the data can be used to start
discussions about the efficacy of
programs and teaching methods being
used with this cohort of students.
10
Level 3
The third level of data interrogation looks at the students’ responses to individual
questions or items within an assessment.
Using NAPLAN data, individual question responses in the numeracy, reading, spelling, punctuation
and grammar test and the criteria scores for writing can be examined in detail. From this close
examination, we can obtain detailed evidence about the students’ conceptual understanding and
the skill level and discover what may have been previously unknown misconceptions in specific
areas of the curriculum. This level of interrogation also gives the classroom teacher insights into
his/her instructional practice and programming – the strong points and the gaps.
Analysing the question data can show common areas of the curriculum where students are having
difficulty or conversely achieving success. Individual criteria scores will show up areas of poor
achievement in specific components of writing in general.
Educators can find patterns or trends in student performance by asking questions like:
• Were there specific strands in the Numeracy test where all students or specific groups of
students experienced difficulty or success?
• What elements within each sub- strand showed the strongest or poorest performance?
• Were there specific text types – narrative, information, procedural, letter, argument, poem –
in the Reading test where students experienced difficulty/success?
• What type of question – literal, inferential, applied – was most problematic for the group?
• Were there particular spelling words or spelling patterns that the group had problems with?
• What aspects of punctuation and grammar did students have trouble answering correctly?
• Which writing criteria did the students perform well in or not so well in?
• What areas of the curriculum did my higher level/lower level students find particularly
difficult?
The NAPLAN test papers, answers, writing marking guides and the NAPLAN analysis using a
curriculum focus support documents are vital resources to have on hand when analysing the
Assessment Data reports in the RAAD. It is essential to be able to refer to each individual
question, reading text, spelling word or writing criteria description when interrogating the data and
diagnosing areas of strength (see Appendix D for these resources).
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
11
Numeracy analysis
In any numeracy assessment it is important to resist the urge to look at the overall score, instead
look at individual item responses. The teacher becomes a detective and looks for common errors
which provide clues about shared misconceptions or lack of problem solving skills in certain areas.
In the RAAD tool, numeracy question responses are divided into sub-strands in the Assessment
Data screen for easier analysis. Results for a year level, class or other subgroup can be analysed
directly from the screen or saved to a clipboard picture or Excel spread sheet. The question
statistics and response details are also provided.
Numeracy data analysis at sub-strand and question level
This Assessment Data screen for the Year 3
2008 Numeracy test shows the Number substrand questions and the student responses.
Correct answers→
Australian % correct→
School % correct→
Expected % correct→
The three red highlighted questions are all
associated with money concepts in Number.
The red indicates that the students performed
below what was expected for these questions.
This points to an area of difficulty for that
curriculum area.
The green coloured questions indicate areas
where the students performed above what was
expected and points to an area of strength.
Questions to start group discussion:
• What approaches are used to teach this concept in Years 1, 2 and 3?
• What are the early learning stages in the development of this concept?
• What mathematical language is needed to access these questions?
• What other elements of the Number sub-strand are closely related to these understandings?
• Are teachers confident when teaching this sub-strand?
• What resources support the teaching of this concept?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
12
Numeracy individual question analysis
4.
2008
Year 3
This is question 4 from the
Assessment Data screen above.
The correct answer is d and the
three other alternatives are called
distractors.
These distractors are chosen
deliberately to ‘distract’ from the
correct answer, thus testing deep
understandings that aren’t
swayed by alternatives.
This is not to put students off or
trick them but to draw out
misconceptions and reveal lack of
comprehension or understanding.
In many of the numeracy questions, particular distractors show different conceptual
misunderstandings while other distractors are chosen by the students due to minor arithmetic
errors. In the question above, students who choose the first response $0.98, are taking the dollar
coin to be worth one cent. This is a major misconception compared to those students who choose
$3.45 which indicates that they did not add in the 50 cent coin. This last error could point to a lack
of problem solving skills e.g. crossing off the coins as you count them or rechecking your answer.
Questions to start group discussion:
• Which students chose a, b, or c in this question?
• What misconceptions can be concluded from the students who answered a, b or c?
• What problem solving strategies would be useful for this type of problem?
• What follow-up classroom activities will enable the teacher to verify and delve more deeply
into this misconception?
Sometimes a general look at the Assessment Data screen will show up a strand where many
questions are highlighted in red. This may indicate a weakness in this strand e.g. Year 7 Space, so
this would be a good place to start analysis of the items. Other strands which show many green
highlighted questions may indicate areas of strength in teacher pedagogy and programs.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
13
The clipboard picture of the item responses shown below is one way for groups of teachers to
evaluate their students’ performance. A printed hard copy of this report enables teachers to
highlight, circle and question mark any areas of concern. It is ideal for analysis sessions as it
shows the big picture for each test so that patterns and trends are easy to identify. It is important to
have the test papers on hand to view the questions in detail.
Numeracy analysis with Clipboard Display and Comparison Graphs
Clipboard Display
The RAAD Comparison Graphs are stacked bar graphs that show the questions ordered from left to right by
the degree of difficulty from easiest to most difficult. The green part of the bar shows the number of students
who answered correctly. The other coloured parts of the bar show the number of incorrect a, b, c or d
responses chosen by the students. The red part of the bar shows the missing or incorrect short answers.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
14
Teachers can identify common problems that may also show up across year levels. Schools can
categorise the questions and begin to inquire into the methods and strategies used to teach the
different sub-strands.
Individual questions may show that many of the students chose a similar incorrect response which
could indicate a common misconception.
Questions to start group discussion:
• For a specific question, was there a commonly selected incorrect distractor?
• What can this error analysis show both in terms of student conceptual development and
teaching pedagogy?
Another way to analyse the NAPLAN numeracy results is to use the NAPLAN analysis using a
curriculum focus (2008-10) Excel spread-sheets found on the Learning Links site with the past
tests. Schools can insert their percentage correct for each question and sort the spread sheet as
required. These documents identify the main mathematical skill for each question and provide
extension ideas to which teachers can add.
Numeracy analysis using percentage and extended activities
This is a section of the Year 3 Numeracy NAPLAN analysis using a curriculum focus spread-sheet, the
Australian percentage correct is in the second column and the schools percentage correct can be inserted
into the third column. The next column can be set up to show the difference between the Australian
percentage and the school percentage if required.
The 2011 and 2012 analysis documents align the questions to the Australian Curriculum and
extend the questions by relating the skills to the four mathematics proficiencies – Fluency,
Understanding, Problem Solving and Reasoning. The different strands and sub-strands are colour
coded for easy reference.
The percentage correct for the school can be inserted into the spread sheet and compared to the
national percentage correct. The questions can be sorted by strand and ordered from most poorly
answered to the best answered questions if required.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
15
Numeracy analysis using percentage correct and proficiencies
The 2014 numeracy analysis documents take the form of a set of PowerPoints with screen shots of
each of the NAPLAN questions. These are grouped into the strands and sub-strands of
mathematics e.g. Number and Algebra – Fractions and decimals. The notes view contains
focussing questions, extension ideas, statistics, analysis and resources relating to each question.
Numeracy questions for class discussion
This data can stimulate reflection on classroom approaches and practice and act as a focus for
collegial discussion about ways to open up everyday problems and improve students
understanding and thinking.
Reflective questions might include:
•
How can we develop our understanding of the four mathematics proficiencies?
•
What do they look like in the class room? How can they help with concept development?
•
How can we help students to develop effective problem solving strategies and the specific
mathematical language needed to explain their understandings?
•
What activities will allow students the chance to connect mathematical ideas then explain
and justify their reasoning?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
16
Reading analysis
When analysing any reading comprehension data it is important to note what type of text is being
used and what kinds of questions are being asked. The NAPLAN questions are divided by text
type in the Assessment Data screen of the RAAD tool for easy analysis. As with Numeracy,
results for a year level, class or other subgroup can be analysed directly from the screen or saved
to a clipboard picture or Excel spread sheet. The clipboard picture of the item responses is the
recommended way for groups of teachers to evaluate their students’ performance in the test.
Reading analysis using text type and question data
Reading texts
Comparing results for different text types
The Assessment Data screen for Reading shows
the students’ responses for the first two texts in the
test. The first one is an advertisement and the
second, a narrative.
All the questions were poorly answered in the first
text as shown by the amount of a, b, c and d
incorrect distractors listed.
The red highlighted expected percentage correct
figures and the school percentages correct totals
are well below the national percentages correct.
Comparisons can be made with the students’
results for the other texts like the narrative shown
here which shows better results
This group of students had difficulty answering the comprehension questions for this persuasive
advertisement text. The three questions highlighted above and shown below illustrate different
levels of comprehension skills from literal to inferential. As the students were able to answer these
question types in the other text genres, this could indicate that the genre of the text was the
problem rather than the type of questions asked.
Questions from Helping our waterways
Question discriptors
1.--What is the main message of these posters?
Infers the main message of an advertisement.
4.--How do leaves and clippings kill aquatic life?
Locates directly stated information in an advertisement.
5.--According to Poster 2, what should we
Connects information across sentences in
compost or mulch?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
advertisement.
17
When examining these results, questions to start group discussion would include:
• Have students been exposed to a variety of text types?
• Have students been exposed to the various forms of each text type e.g. advertisements,
arguments, discussions (persuasive genre)?
• What strategies do the students use when reading and understanding various text types?
• Why did such a large proportion of the students choose a particular incorrect distractor, like b
in question 3?
• Did the students understand the words and language used in the test questions?
• What follow up classroom activities could improve student understandings of this specific
type of text?
Reading analysis using text type and question data
Year 7 Reading
Helping our
waterways
A Special
Day
Comparing results for different question types
The Assessment Data screen for Year 7 Reading
shows the students’ responses for the first two
texts on the test. The first one is an advertisement
and the second, a narrative.
As previously explained, the question statistics and
the student results are shown for each question.
For each text, students answered a variety of
questions ranging from literal to applied. The data
highlights which particular questions across the
genre types (e.g. 1, 5, 7 and 8), were answered
poorly.
These questions involve higher level critical
thinking skills – inference and interpretation –
rather than literal questions where the answer is
found directly in the text.
Examining the responses to common question
types, allows teachers to find areas of strength and
weakness in reading comprehension skill levels.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
18
Reading analysis by question type
Year 7 Reading questions
Question 7 asks the students to interpret the
significance of an event in a narrative text.
The authors’ meaning was not clear to these
students, as only 24% chose the correct answer c.
Question 8 asks the students to infer a reason for a
characters’ thinking in a narrative text. Again only
24% of the students chose the correct answer b.
Reflection of classroom practices will determine the
level of exposure students have to this type of
thinking.
Reading Analysis Guide for 2014
Comprehension of any reading text involves the
understanding of literal facts directly stated in
the passage and inferential meanings implied
but not directly stated by the author.
For younger students this literal understanding
of the text can be termed reading ‘on the lines’
while inferential meaning of the text can be
termed reading ‘between the lines’.
The reader also takes the information,
evaluates it then makes connections and
applies this to their existing schema. They can
then create new knowledge and
understandings.
The Reading Analysis Guide supports teachers
to use the meta-cognitive instructional
strategies to improve the reading
comprehension levels of all students.
NAPLAN reading questions contain many
different types of comprehension questions and
it is important to reflect on what level of
questioning the students experience in your
school.
Questions to start group discussion include:
• Is there a pattern of poor response in the literal or inferential types of questions?
• Are the students exposed to a variety of comprehension question types in class?
• What strategies will help students to understand the underlying meaning in texts?
• Do they have regular practice in answering, constructing and classifying different levels of
questions – literal, inferential, evaluative and applied?
This data can stimulate reflection on classroom approaches and practice and act as a focus for
collegial discussion about effective classroom practice.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
19
Language Conventions analysis
The language conventions of spelling, grammar and punctuation are a critical part of effective
writing. Many every day in-class writing activities and formal assessments such as NAPLAN allow
teachers to look for patterns of misconception within a group of students.
In the punctuation questions in the NAPLAN test, students have to choose the correct placement
of punctuation marks or the correct multiple choice option as shown in the question below.
Year 9 Language
Conventions
37. Which Sentence has the correct punctuation?
o “We need to start rehearsing, said Ms Peters so get your skates on.”
o
“We need to start rehearsing” said Ms Peters “so get your skates on.”
Correct answer c
o “We need to start rehearsing,” said Ms Peters, “so get your skates on.”
Most students
choose d
o “We need to start rehearsing,” said Ms Peters, “So get your skates on.”
The students who chose the incorrect response, d, show a relatively simple punctuation
misconception. This could be remedied by explaining the continuation of the sentence so that a
capital S is not needed. Reading this sentence aloud will reinforce the notion of it being one
complete sentence rather than two sentences. The students could also look for examples of this
rule when reading class texts. Teachers could also set up authentic writing tasks that involve this
skill so that rather than an isolated rule, students see it as a real skill to be mastered and used.
Students who chose the incorrect response, a, however have a more fundamental misconception
about direct speech and will need more support and reinforcement than the students who chose d.
In the NAPLAN there are a variety of grammar questions. In the item below the students had to
choose the correct verb to complete this sentence.
33.
Which word correctly completes the sentence?
Sam -------- his homework before he went to soccer training.
did
done
does
doing
Year 5 Language
Conventions
Correct answer is a, but
many students answered b
and c.
The students’ responses indicated that they had difficulty with the concept of verb tense and
agreement. The teachers analysing this data would need to look for other similar errors across the
test and follow up with questioning and explicit teaching of this concept.
The Language Conventions Analysis Guide is divided up into Spelling and Grammar and
Punctuation. The guide helps teachers to analyse a question that students had difficulty with and
provides insight into how to correct this error in understanding.
All the analysis guides are available on the Learning Links site shown in Appendix C, page 34.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
20
Language Conventions analysis guide
Questions to start group discussion would include:
• Is there a pattern of responses that highlight similar misconceptions about certain concepts
in punctuation and grammar?
• Are the students exposed to and made aware of the variety, form and function of punctuation
and grammar used in different texts?
• What sort of effective teaching strategies could we incorporate into our program?
In the NAPLAN Spelling tests, link words appear in more than one year level test e.g. a particular
spelling word will appear in the Year 3 and the Year 5 test. This enables comparison of different
year level responses to the same spelling word. For example, in 2009 the spelling tests for Year 3
and Year 5 both contained the word ‘stopped’. The results for one school were as follows:
-
Year 3 result for spelling ‘stopped’ was 20% correct
-
Year 5 result for spelling ‘stopped’ was 47% correct.
Some relevant questions to ask here might be:
• Is there a whole school program for the teaching of spelling?
• Do teachers share and discuss different teaching strategies?
• Are there simple, easy-to-remember spelling rules being used in every classroom?
[e.g. ‘When there’s a lonely vowel next to me, then you have to double me.’]
• What are some new approaches, programs – commercial packages, games, computer sites,
Ipad applications – that are showing improved results?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
21
Note: Numeracy, Reading and Language Conventions NAPLAN tests include link questions –
common questions that appear in consecutive year level tests e.g. Year 3 questions appear in the
Year 5 test, and Year 5 questions appear in the Year 7 test etc. This provides teachers with the
chance to compare the responses of different year levels to the same test items, and monitor
improvement in some curriculum areas.
Some questions to be asked of these results are:
• Have the students made sufficient progress in certain areas of the curriculum over the 2 year
period?
When using the RAAD, the spelling results for the whole year level or class level can be compared
to the Australian results. By hovering over a question number the spelling word appears in a box
as shown below.
Spelling analysis using percentage correct
In this school, the Year 3 group on the whole had difficulty spelling the word ‘carefully’ – 21% were correct.
Language Conventions analysis guide - Spelling
In the analysis guide, the spelling
words have been organised into
lists for each test year level
according to the four areas of
spelling knowledge –
Etymological, Morphemic,
Phonological and Visual.
Teachers can use this resource
to supplement their existing
spelling programme.
They may wish to use the lists as
a starting point and find activities
to match the skills listed.
Some relevant questions to ask here might be:
• What spelling derivation activities occur in our classrooms?
• Do teachers share different classroom teaching methods to improve vocabulary and spelling
skills e.g. break up and expand words by cutting up word cards and pegging on a
clothesline?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
22
The reading, grammar and spelling test item responses can be viewed using the RAAD
Comparison Graph. This colourful visual profile helps teachers to make use of the detailed item
response data and spot common errors at a glance.
Reading analysis using the Comparison Graph
The green dotted line above shows an approximation of the national profile of performance. The red arrows
indicate questions where the students performed lower than the national level and conversely, the green
arrows indicate questions where the students’ achieved a better result than the national profile.
Questions to start group discussion on this data would include:
• What questions did the class or group have difficulty with compared to the national
performance?
• For a specific question, was there a common incorrect distractor (a, b, c, or d) that many of
the students chose?
• What can this error analysis show both in terms of student conceptual development and
teaching pedagogy?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
23
Writing analysis
The Writing task for NAPLAN is the same for all year levels. There is a common stimulus and a
common rubric where students are scored using the same 10 criteria. This allows direct
comparison between year levels and monitoring of student progress over the 2 years. The
NAPLAN persuasive and narrative rubrics can be used in schools for writing tasks and the data
can be compared in the same way as shown below.
Writing criteria analysis using mean comparison
The Year 3 writing results in the
Assessment Data screen show the
 Maximum Score for each of the
10 writing Criteria
 Mean (average) score for the
whole of Australia at Year 3
 Mean score for this Year 3
school group.
In paragraphing and punctuation
this group has performed better
than the Australian average.
In Sentence Structure, this group
has performed below the
Australian average.
Sentence structure average:
Australian = 2.03
School = 1.86
Questions to start group discussion on this data would include:
• What did the students score in each writing criteria?
• In what criteria did they achieve well or perform poorly compared to the Australian average?
• What do the criteria descriptors for each score level tell us about the features of the students’
writing?
• What strategies, resources and professional learning will improve our teachers’ capability
and the school outcomes?
The RAAD Comparison Graphs for Writing show the number of students achieving a certain score
for each of the 10 criteria.
Questions to start group discussion would include:
• What score within each criteria should my students be achieving?
• On which score has the group spiked?
• What teaching strategies will help our students move from simple sentences to good quality
compound and complex sentences in their writing?
• How can we progress our students onto the next level of writing?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
24
Writing criteria analysis using Comparison Graphs
This visual representation will indicate at a glance the most common score and spread of scores for a group
and can be used to ask reflective questions about where students are at in their writing skills.
The RAAD has the ability to export data to Excel spread sheets and these can be collated to show
how results are trending over time. The same cohort could be tracked (on most of the criteria)
since 2008. The marking rubric for Narrative and Persuasive has differences but the results for
many of the criteria can be compared over time – vocabulary, sentence structure and punctuation.
Writing criteria analysis over time
This spreadsheet allows for a comparison of writing results over a 3 year period for the criteria of Sentence
Structure.The different colours represent 2008, 2009 and 2010. This is a visual way to monitor the
performance of the students over time. These students are clustering at a score of 2 for this criteria. This can
be adjusted to show the 2012-2014 results.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
25
Writing analysis
Teachers can use the Persuasive and
Narrative Marking Guides and NAPLAN
Writing Analysis Guides to compare
samples with their own student’s writing.
2014
This document will assist them to plan for
future programmes for teaching areas of
the Australian Curriculum associated with
writing.
It has been divided up into the 10 writing
criteria with one or two samples provided
for each category (or marking level).
Comparing trend data over time allows schools to ask questions like:
•
Have the programs we are using improved the performance over time?
•
What does this mean for the way we teach writing (especially sentence structure)?
•
Is a whole school approach needed across all grade levels?
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
26
Collaborative data review
Guiding questions for collaborative data review, where school leaders and classroom teachers
come together to ask questions about student performance, promotes purposeful evidence-based
discussion. This is central to maintaining a cycle of inquiry that focuses on improved standards of
student achievement. The matrix below outlines the overview of questions that collaborative
groups of educators need to work through (see Appendix A).
Interpretation of data needs to be a highly consultative process that involves all key stakeholders.
Data analysis supports teachers to set school and classroom targets, identify strategies for
improvement, focus resources, and strategically monitor progress towards those targets.
A collaborative data review process gives teachers a safety net for implementing change – taking
risks and improving their craft – and is aimed at creating a no blame culture. Teaching should not
be a ‘private profession’ where teachers spend long periods alone with their classes, rather they
should be encouraged to collaborate with colleagues in most dimensions of their work including
data analysis. A supportive group environment is needed to interrogate the data thoroughly and
unlock the real reasons for the students’ results. Many heads mean many solutions. Not one-off
sessions, but regular mentoring discussions. Collaboration benefits include:
- Experience and shared skills – a bigger group means more experience, a broader
consideration of issues and generation of a wider range of alternative strategies to address
issues. The total skill set in a group is greater than the skill set of any one person. Members of
groups learn from each other and with each other.
- Perspective – colleagues may look at each other’s programs, teaching and data from a different
perspective e.g. culture, language, family, location, social background.
- Objectivity – colleagues can be more objective than the teacher who is immersed in the culture
and emotion of the classroom. Working collaboratively can control bias.
- Emotional support – the evaluative dimension of teaching can be emotionally draining as
people may feel they are personally ‘under the microscope’. Support and encouragement can
alleviate some of this pressure.
- Shared responsibility – no one teacher can be held accountable for the learning of students.
Learning for all students is a shared responsibility.
- Taking ‘blame’ off the agenda – in a collaborative environment there is less risk that people will
feel blamed for student under-achievement. A group is more likely to ask:
What is happening here? How can we address the issue?
Rather than: Who’s to blame? (See the Data Rules in Appendix B)
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
27
3. Reflect, gain new understandings and decide on actions
During and after the data interrogation and collaborative discussion, teachers must be open to and
responsible for reflecting about their own practice. It is the simple acknowledgement that learning
has not occurred (or has not occurred to the desired degree). The teacher response to this must
be adjustments or changes in their teaching methods (pedagogy) and programs to address the
issues that were evident in the data.
‘One of the most powerful ideas in evidence-based models of teaching and
learning is that teachers need to move away from achievement data as
saying something about the student, and start considering achievement data
as saying something about their teaching. If students do not know
something, or cannot process the information, this should be cues for
teacher action, particularly teaching in a different way.’ (Hattie, 2005)
The questions used in this reflection might be:
• What does this data mean for my teaching?
• What is it saying about the students’ learning (or failure to learn)?
• How will I apply this new knowledge and understanding to my teaching?
• What could I change or adjust?
• What could I do differently?
As the ‘senior partner’ in the teaching/learning process the teacher has a professional obligation to
determine why the desired learning did not occur and implement changes to improve outcomes.
Any teacher who collects achievement data and does not use it to guide further intervention is
losing valuable opportunities to improve their own teaching/coaching and help their students reach
higher levels of achievement.
The changes in teaching that are likely to be effective will depend on what has been revealed in
the data and the reflection and thinking that is part of data analysis and improvement planning.
As part of a collaborative group of educators, teachers reflect, formulate a plan and then take
action on such factors as:
-
The design of the learning environment
-
Classroom planning and programming – setting goals/targets
-
Changes/adjustments to pedagogy and the associated professional learning required
-
Grouping of students and explicit teaching tailored for these groups
-
Use of resources, IT and manipulatives
-
Use of paraprofessionals
-
Community involvement – using the varied skill sets to improve student engagement
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
28
4. Make decisions and commit to action
Leadership teams, in collaboration with teachers, decide on which parts of the curriculum to target.
From this, a whole school action plan that identifies, prioritises and schedules professional
development, structural changes and resource allocation must be organised. Leadership teams
must drive the process and set up regular feedback to keep the plan on track.
•
What is it that we need to work on most?
•
Why did we get these student results?
Data-driven decisions and whole school action plans require
-
an active, effective leadership team with vision
-
the careful examination, discussion and analysis of all data sets
-
particular priority areas of the curriculum to be chosen.
Action plan includes:






Goals/targets
Teachers/students
Strategies/approaches
Resources/programs
Dates and times
Feedback loops
A limited number of areas are chosen at one time and reviewed at the end of set period of time
(term, semester or year depending on the areas). Schools should only focus on a few specific core
challenges – that’s where the change will begin!
Example:
Reading – inferential comprehension of texts
Writing – sentence structure and punctuation
Mathematics – geometry concepts or fraction and place value understandings.
Immediate attention and commitment needs to be given by ALL staff to address these focus areas.
Students also need to know the targeted areas for improvement.
School leaders have the responsibility to facilitate and drive:
- Collection and storage of data
- Analysis, interpretation, collaborative discussion and action
- Clarification of issues and target-setting (bring it all together)
- Mentoring support, professional development and resource allocation
- Follow up meetings/reviews/discussions to check progress.
School leaders have to become data ‘coaches’. Instructional improvement requires more than just
presenting the data and expecting it to automatically transform teachers’ thinking. Rather,
teachers may need sensitive coaching and facilitation to study their data and to build bridges
between data and instructional decision making.
Leaders can’t just ‘tell staff what to change’ rather they need to focus thoughtful discussion and
move it into action, coaches ask such questions as:
- How are we doing? What are we doing best? What do these assessments tell us?
- What are we missing? Is this the best we can do? Where should we place more emphasis?
- What do we already do that we can do more of? Is there something we can do sooner in the
year? Where can we place less emphasis?
Data capacity and culture
Leaders have to build skill sets and put in place time to collaboratively interrogate the data
effectively e.g. ‘data teams’ work together at regular intervals. They have to get people to believe
in the data and get excited by it. The 3 Ps – People, passion and proof – mean that everyone
has the responsibility, commitment and ownership of the data decision making process. Data use
determines Professional Learning needs, intervention requirements, and resource allocation. It
focuses discussions about teaching, learning and assessment, guides teacher instruction and
monitors progress. Teachers and administration teams have a shared belief in its value.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
29
5. Feedback to students and classroom/school changes
Explicit feedback delivered face-to-face opens possibilities for powerful leaning. This is more
potent when the process includes teaching the student how to analyse and use data generated
from previous learning. When students know and understand what it is that they are expected to
learn (preferably through a model or exemplar) how this learning connects to previous learning,
how learning will be assessed and how they can participate in the process, they are more likely to
be actively engaged in learning.
The most powerful single moderator that enhances achievement is feedback.’ Hattie (2005)
Peer assessment, peer tutoring and peer teaching can enhance the level of student engagement.
Insisting that students use data in these processes helps maintain rigor and discipline. Effective
teachers teach students how to use data to inform their own learning.
These students can:
-
look objectively at personal performances and self-correct where appropriate
-
use exemplars, performance criteria and standards to guide performance
-
set SMART learning targets or goals and coach and mentor others.
S
M
A
R
T
Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Time-related
Effective feedback helps students to learn and improve. It is recommended that feedback is:
Non- threatening: Feedback should be part of the classroom culture, where it is seen as a
positive and necessary step in any learning. It should be viewed as encouragement and improve
confidence and self-esteem. This can establish good communication based on trust. Resources
such as Tribes and The Collaborative Classroom may be useful.
Constructive and purposeful: Feedback should reflect the steps achieved so far towards the
learning goal as well as highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of a piece of work or
performance. It should set out ways in which the student can improve the work. It encourages
students to think critically about their work and to reflect on what they need to do to improve.
Timely: Feedback is given while the work is still fresh in a student’s mind throughout the semester
rather than just at the end. Regular timely feedback enables students to incorporate feedback into
later assessment tasks.
Meaningful and clear: Feedback should target individual needs and be linked to specific
achievement standards. It should ask the questions to help make connections and prompt new
ideas and/or suggest alternative strategies to solve a problem or produce a product. Prioritise and
limit feedback to include 2-3 specific recommendations. Teachers should ask students about what
feedback or types of feedback they find most helpful and what feedback is not so helpful.
Acted upon: How students receive, interact with and act on feedback is critical to the development
of their learning. They should become collaborative partners in the feedback and learning process.
Teachers need to incorporate effective feedback into their planning and every day classroom
practice.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
30
Questions about when to give feedback, what sort and how much feedback will include:
• What constructive feedback can I provide to learners?
• How should this be presented?
• How can I make feedback effective and avoid comparisons with other students’
performances?
• How can rubrics help students to improve their performance and/or deepen understanding of
the concepts?
• How can the data be used to help students become more deeply engaged in their learning?
• How can I involve the students in this?
The Individual Profile screen in the RAAD, will allow students to look at their own performance on
the NAPLAN tests. The example below, shows the individual student’s name and scaled score
which is the dark line. More importantly, the question descriptors and numbers for a particular test
are listed in order of difficulty, with the correctly answered questions in green and those answered
incorrectly in red.
Individual Profile of NAPLAN results
By using this report
and copies of the test
papers, students will
be able to review
their responses.
They can work out
which incorrect
questions were the
results of minor
errors or the result of
fundamental
misconceptions.
This analysis can be
done independently
or jointly with the
teacher or assistant
teacher.
Similarly if students become familiar with the 10 criteria in the writing marking rubric they can
review their piece of writing against the scores and descriptors for each criterion and use this
information to highlight areas where their skills require improvement.
The writing marking guide is available on the Learning Links site, see Appendix C page 34.
Repeat the cycle
This cycle is a never-ending process in that the effect of any change in practice should be
monitored. Begin the process again: Collect data …and start all over again…
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
31
Appendix A
Data sources* and question matrix
Driving questions
Data sources
What?
What do learners
already know?
What concepts are
already in place?
What ‘gaps’ are
evident?
So What?
Where do learners need
and want to be?
What skills do students
need to develop?
What are they ready to
learn next?
Now What?
How do learners best learn?
What approach is working?
What strategies can we put in
place?
What professional learning is
needed to improve practice?
What resources does the school
need?
NAPLAN test
results
NT and Australian
Curriculum:
Teacher
observations,
tests, projects,
performances,
tasks etc.
Commercial or
web-based test
results:
PAT, Torch, RAZ
Reading, OnDemand, On-line
Maths Interview,
CMIT (SENA 1 &
2)
Students’
learning logs,
reflections and
self-assessment
rubrics
Continuum
monitoring:
First Steps,
T–9 Net etc.
*Data sources can be quantitative with associated marks, scores, grades, levels, and percentages
e.g. tests, projects, assignments or qualitative as in teacher anecdotal notes, continuum tracking,
surveys, rubric descriptions, interview responses, student reflection and learning logs etc. All are
valid and enable triangulation of data to get a better ‘fix’ on student development.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
32
Appendix B
Data Rules
Here are two sets of data rules that can be put into a chart or card and be used for collaborative
data analysis sessions. Staff may amend/add/delete details to make their own Data Rules.
Data Rules

This is a safe room

There is no rank in this room

All ideas are valid

Each person gets a chance to speak

Each person gets a chance to listen

We are here to focus on the future

Our purpose is improvement, not blame
Victoria Bernhardt (2007)
Rules for using Data
 Let the data do the talking
 We will not use data to blame or shame
ourselves or others
 We’re all in this together
 Keep the focus on the kids
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
33
Appendix C
Support documents
Copies of NAPLAN support and analysis documents plus past test papers and answers from 2008 to 2014
can be found on the DoE Learning Links portal shown below:
http://ed.ntschools.net/ll/assess/naplan/Pages/default.aspx
A CD containing the 2014 test papers and analysis documents was sent to every school.
Writing, Reading and Language Conventions analysis
documents provide curriculum links, statistics, teaching
ideas for every year level.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
Numeracy PowerPoints with screenshots of the
questions and notes pages – teaching ideas,
resource links and statistics.
34
Appendix D
National Reports
The National Summary Report and student reports are released at the end of Term 3. This report
provides the percentage of students achieved at each band for each year level test for all states
and territories.
The full report – National Assessment Program Literacy and Numeracy Achievement – will be
published December 2014. This report builds on the National Summary Report and provides
detailed student achievement for all states and territories by geolocation, gender, Indigeneity and
Language Background other than English.
The National Summary Report and the full report will be available
on the DET website:
www.education.nt.gov.au/teachers-educators/assessmentreporting/nap
and the ACARA website:
www.nap.edu.au/Test_Results/National_reports/index.html
Student reports
Schools and parents are provided with information in the
student report. The student reports show achievement
of individual students, together with graphic
representation of the student’s performance in
comparison to other students in the same year group
across Australia (national mean) on the common
achievement band scale.
The 2014 student reports for some NT schools will
include the school average. It was agreed nationally to
include this additional information in the student report
so that parents have not only the national average to
compare their child’s achievement but also the school
average.
In order to maintain valid or accurate reporting to
parents, analysis of the averages has shown that for
some NT schools the school mean is not reliable. The
accuracy of the school average is influenced by both the
student cohort size and the range of student
performance for that year level in a school. It was
decided by the Minister that inclusion of the school
average will only occur for schools where there is
confidence in the accuracy and validity of the
information being reported.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
Year 5 Report
If a student’s result is here,
they are well above the
expected level for that year.
Student’s result
National mean for Year 5
Light blue area --------------represents the middle
--------60% of students
School mean for this student
National minimum standard
is Band 4 for Year 5.
Students in Band 3 are
below the national minimum
standard for Year 5.
35
Appendix E
NAPLAN BANDS
For each assessed area a NAPLAN scale of achievement has been developed. The performance
of Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 students is measured on a single common achievement scale. It is divided
into 10 achievement bands representing increasing demonstrations of proficiency in skills and
understandings. This also enables individual achievement to be compared to the national average.
Every raw score for a test is converted into a NAPLAN scaled score out of 1000. For example, an
average Year 3 student’s score is around 400, while an average year 9 score would be around
580. This is a vertical scale and a student’s score in 2010 can be compared to their 2012 and 2014
scores to gauge progress, (although not in the writing as the genre has changed).
Student results are reported against the NAPLAN achievement bands. There are 5 separate
scales: one each for reading, writing, spelling, grammar and punctuation and numeracy. A score in
one assessed area is not comparable with a score in another test domain.
The achievement scale’s 10 bands are represented across the four year groups, with each year
group being reported across 6 bands. This allows for tracking and monitoring of student progress
over time. Refer to the graphical representation of the achievement scale below.
The second bottom band for each year level represents the national minimum standard (orange).
This standard represents the minimum range of acceptable performance for the given year level as
demonstrated on the assessment. Students whose achievement places them in the band below
are identified as below the national minimum standard (red). For a more detailed description of the
national minimum standards go to:
http://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/student-reports.html
Students who are below the national minimum standard should receive focussed intervention and
support to help them achieve required literacy and numeracy skills. Students who are at the
national minimum standard are at risk of slipping behind and need close monitoring and additional
support.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
36
Appendix F
Means summary sheet
The RAAD Student Distribution – NAPLAN screen shows the school and Australian means.
This template can be used to collate and compare all the means. This top level analysis data may
provide a starting point for closer analysis and action in certain areas of the curriculum for each
year level.
In what areas did our school mean vary greatly from the Australian mean?
2014
Year 3
Year 5
NAPLAN
Means
Aust
School
Aust
School
Reading
Writing
Spelling
Punctuation and
Grammar
Numeracy
2014
Year 7
Year 9
NAPLAN
Means
Aust
School
Aust
School
Reading
Writing
Spelling
Punctuation and
Grammar
Numeracy
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
37
Appendix G
Analysis and Action Record Sheets
Schools may create documents that record the analysis of a particular set of assessment data and
the resultant decisions about what professional learning, adjustments to practice, change in
programming and allocation of resources are required to improve results.
Student-by-student needs analysis record
Group needs analysis record
Professional learning goals of an individual teacher or team
Assessment and analysis sheet and instructional plan
Ghiran Byrne in the Darwin Regional team, 8999 5603 and Leanne Linton in the Assessment and Reporting
unit 8944 9248 have developed the example resources shown here.
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
38
References
Articles from Educational Leadership Dec 2008/Jan 2009 Vol 66 Number 4 www.ascd.org/
Bernhardt, Victoria L. (2009) Data, Data Everywhere Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education
Bernhardt, Victoria L. (2007) Translating Data into Information to Improve Teaching and Learning
Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education
Burke, P. et al (2001) Turning Points Transforming Middle Schools: Looking Collaboratively at
Student and Teacher Work Boston MA: Center for Collaborative Education www.turningpts.org
Department of Education Queensland (2009) Various Guidelines on Curriculum Leadership,
Curriculum Planning, Data Use, Assessment, Moderation and Reporting.
education.qld.gov.au/curriculum/framework/p-12/curriculum-planning.html
Foster, M. (2009) Using assessment evidence to improve teaching and learning PowerPoint
presentation at the ACER 2009 Assessment Conference
Glasson, T. (2009) Improving Student Achievement: A practical guide to assessment for learning
Vic: Curriculum Corporation
Hattie, J (2005) What is the Nature of Evidence that Makes a Difference to Learning? Paper and
PowerPoint presented at the 2005 ACER ‘Using Data to Support Learning’ Conference
research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2005/
Holcomb, E. (2004) Getting Excited about Data: Combining People, Passion and Proof to
Maximize Student Achievement California: Corwin Press
Ikemoto, G. & Marsh, J. (2005) Cutting through the “Data-Driven” Mantra: Different Conceptions of
Data-Driven Decision Making Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education
Perso, Dr Thelma (2009) Data Literacy and learning from NAPLAN PowerPoint (NT workshop
presentation)
Timperley, H. (2009) Using assessment data for improving teaching practice Paper presented at
the 2009 ACER Assessment Conference
research.acer.edu.au/research_conference/RC2009/17august/
Wellman, B and Lipton, L (2008) Data-Driven Dialogue: A Facilitator’s Guide to Collaborative
Inquiry Sherman, CT: Mira
Assessment and Reporting August 2014
39
40