Choice based on what now?

Happy Sunday, teachers!

This day of rest greets us with the most excellent news that Julia Gillard has answered the calls of parents around the nation to identify exactly which schools the poor, low-achieving and, most importantly, Indigenous students are attending, so that we can all avoid these cesspools of failure with confidence rush to enrol our children in these schools.

Gillard is spot on when she denies the information would be used to stigmatise schools.  AS IF!

Even the President of the Australian Education Union Angelo Gavrielatos has argued that the use of NAPLAN data alone does not take into account the rich contribution that schools make to their students’ lives in ways that stretch beyond simple evaluations of literacy and numeracy.

Enter Gillard with the antidote to Gavrielatos’ gripes: publication of “richer” data, i.e. an index of disadvantage.

I mean, there are some really good reasons that parents would want to be able to easily check a one-stop website to see how disadvantaged their local school really is.  For example, parents may want to:

  • increase the chances of their kid getting the Dux award by choosing a school with a low year 12 retention rate
  • make it easier for their kid to become popular by ensuring their backpack is the most expensive one in the playground
  • bolster their kid’s chances of joining a hip Indig. rap group that rails against the ghetto and brings the family muchos street cred via phat beats.

Seriously folks.  This is getting out of hand.

Gillard says that “We have never had a robust index that gives us the ability to look at the level of advantage and disadvantage across all schools.”  So fine – make an index.

Heck, you might even be able to balance out some of the overfunding that is provided to elite private schools that way.

But don’t publish it Jules, for crying out loud!  Stigmatising schools is ALL this information will be used for.

, ,

  1. #1 by M Dahms on January 24, 2010 - 2:39 pm

    Stigmatising schools is ALL this information will be used for.

    This is exactly my problem with the whole set up – as has been said again and again, the only thing this website is going to do is make teachers and students feel good or bad about themselves. I heard Allen Luke speak this week and he pointed out that this information has been around for years, but nothing has been done about it in all that time – can’t see that changing any time soon. He also said that following down this US/UK path is likely to see the gaps between the rich and poor widen in terms of performance . . .

  2. #2 by 2sparkley on January 24, 2010 - 2:45 pm

    Definitely agree with everything that you say. Some parents are not going to want the ‘whole world’ to know that they are a low income family. Where is that information going to come from? the latest census? we have a community that moves in and out rather regularly with housing commission and more and more rental properties very close.Some of the rental market properties are very transient- how is this going to be reflected. I know when we tried to encourage extra funding for the school the parents who we really needed to fill out th forms did not- therefore we did not get the extra funding .
    It is going to make for a very interesting year 🙂

  3. #3 by Dean Groom on January 24, 2010 - 3:06 pm

    This is not a RANT. Quite frankly the desire and politico career-making of a few are being allowed to run rifle over school governance and what it popularises as nation-building or Ruddy revolutionary. School had to decide on hall or classrooms in a few days (literally) when the IMF gave Rudd the “how to not stuff you economy more than you have to” instructions. We see no mention of how it WILL measure the improvement to learning thought the wheezy laptops; nor how this table will improve learning outcomes. There is no public explanation of how ‘schools of excellence’ were determined and selected … and the National Curriculum lumbers in motherhood statements and vague quangos despite an imminent launch.

    The politic rides ahead of logic and yet little is mentioned. Mullumbimbi High claims it is ‘generally’ safe, apart from the poor child who was killed by thugs and negative cultures (see YouTube videos) and I’m yet to meet a year 9 student who thinks laptops are much more than something else to lug about.

    Professional development is pathetic. No vision, poor leadership and a total reliance of individual principals and deputies enthusiasm and creative accounting. The bubble wont allow anyone in or out unless they meet the obviously floored employment criteria, and farm all hard discussions to committees and policy groups — ensuring the politico’s remain free from any repercussion.

    This league table is just another simplistic effort to ‘prove’ to the masses that public education is in step with the 21st Century. I blogged my predictions for 2010 — and right now I can’t see how public education can keep pace with anything, except the political career of a small few.

    As a parent I want my kids to have great public education — as EdTech parents, we are resigned to the fact we will fill the growing gap — and therefore won’t be putting back into a system that can flow that on to the classroom.

    Sad and getting worse.

  4. #4 by kmcg2375 on January 24, 2010 - 3:21 pm

    We are ‘likely to see the gaps between the rich and poor widen in terms of performance’ – so true.

    And it has always been the case that middle+ class parents tend to have the means to compensate at home. EdTech parents certainly know all about that.

    Dean do you really think that EdTech parents will be too busy filling the gap for their own kids to put back into the wider school community?

  5. #5 by kmcg2375 on January 24, 2010 - 3:21 pm

    (if so, we are soooo doomed)

  6. #6 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 3:54 pm

    Are there any positives to an index that identifies “disadvantaged” schools? It seems that only negatives are considered. Yes it will be used to stigmatise poor performing schools but won’t it potentially also be used to redirect funding (and quality teachers) to lower performing schools and away from the “elite schools”?

    I don’t understand why teachers are so reluctant to be judged. Yes there are always exterior influences over which we have no control, but doesn’t that exist in every element of our society, the very society we are preparing kids for? Every other industry is subject to scrutiny why should schools be exempt?

    As far as I am aware all of the information that is being discussed is currently in the public domain, all the government is doing is making it more easily accessible and able to be interpreted. Isn’t that reflective of the modern day “information age”? Isn’t the modern world about sharing information – any school worth it’s salt will look at what eventuates and use it to inform decision making , or sweep it under the carpet as the case may be.

    I agree with Dean’s comments about the usefulness (or not) or the current laptop programme, but we must look for how to make it work, not simply continually doubt it. Give it a bit more time (and a few retirements 🙂 )

    As educators how would we feel if our students were as pessimistic as the post and comments here? If you don’t like the approach give a solution, don’t just criticise.

    Sorry being a bit controversial, and yes I am sure any information made public will be misused, but is that enough of a reason not to provide it. I think no, for the same reasons I support #nocleanfeed.

    (Disclaimer: These are my views and not those of my employer.)

    Thanks for a thought provoking post Kelli 🙂

    • #7 by Simon Job on January 24, 2010 - 4:36 pm


      To your first paragraph. My gripe with this all along has been that the Government has not committed (as far as I know) to fix the funding for disadvantaged schools.

      Julia Gillard’s purpose is to give power to parents.

      The fact sheet on the myschool site “Using My School to support school and student improvement” does not suggest any response by Government.

      • #8 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 6:36 pm

        But have they not committed -all other post indicate this is the case.

        What is wrong with parents having the power?

      • #9 by Simon Job on January 24, 2010 - 6:46 pm

        What posts indicate this?

        I’m not saying it’s wrong, but there’s more to it.

        I’m concerned about the kids whose parents are not making decisions about their education.

    • #10 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 6:57 pm

      So because some parent don’t make a decision then we should not allow other parents access to the information to make decisions? I disagree.

      I repeat what is wrong with Julia Gillard’s purpose to give power to the parents? Who should have it?

      • #11 by Simon Job on January 24, 2010 - 7:28 pm

        As my original reply says, my concern is that the “Government has not committed (as far as I know) to fix the funding for disadvantaged schools”.

        I have not said it is wrong to give power to the parents. In fact, they already have the power to move their kids. My observation, however, would suggest that this is causing the degradation of some local high schools because of an apparent reputation.

        My point is that it’s time for the Government to fix the funding so that schools are given the funding required to meet the needs of their students, giving every student an equal opportunity.

      • #12 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 7:40 pm

        So those schools where parents are moving there kids need to fix their reputation (which currently is probably not based on any evidence at all – whereas in the future it may at least be based on some.)

        True Governments need to fix those schools where there is a problem – have they said they will not. In fact would it not be political suicide to say “this school is doing badly – blame the teachers!”

        Be realistic – if a school is underperforming it should be given the third degree and then any issues should be fixed whether it be through increased funding in various areas (not necessarily school based!) or by questioning the performance of the staff – or both as the case may be. But willingness to accept the eventuality of either is essential to improve our education system and my interpretation of the unions position is that they will not accept anything that criticizss its members performance no matter how dismal – and that is wrong!

  7. #13 by Troy on January 24, 2010 - 3:57 pm

    I just don’t have a problem with the ‘sharing of information’, but with NAPLAN.
    I like to think of this as our chance. We need our so called representatives to stand up with a clear alternative. No one test fits all, once a year multiple choice and one creative writing task. If we put the ‘exam’ into a series of tasks that requires interaction, innovation and reflection when the tasks need improving, with comprehension, responding, speaking (surely that is a literacy skill? No place for speaking in NAPLAN) reading, listening and writing tasks with multimodal and media publication, with an online elements.
    We need community members to stand up and say education is not just about boosting productivity, about demonstrating our skills once a year, that performance can been more than a test score.

  8. #14 by Troy on January 24, 2010 - 3:58 pm

  9. #15 by kmcg2375 on January 24, 2010 - 4:10 pm

    Well, you can certainly create a disadvantaged index that helps nut out funding issues, without making that index public knowledge. Government agencies use statistical information all the time to set policy without putting it up in friendly colour-coded charts for the public to dissect.

    I acknowledge that some NAPLAN information is already available through school reports etc, but as an English teacher, I deplore the idea that these results are going to get even more airplay.

    NAPLAN is designed to be a diagnostic test. For English teachers it is ONE way that we can make sure we aren’t missing any big pieces in our students’ literacy jigsaw. We also do lots of diagnostic activities in class for the same reason.

    But you try being in an English or Maths staffroom on the day that NAPLAN results come out. Heaven help you if “your” scores are down. All the rich portfolio work, the extended writing, the spoken literacy results – OUT THE WINDOW. Teachers with low scores are made to feel 2 inches tall. Never mind that you may know the kids in your class do better out of test conditions, or that they threw the test on purpose, for fun.

    And the comparisons between schools are seriously complicated by the fact that some (many??) schools already PREPARE their kids for the NAPLAN tests, while others use them as a true diagnostic to see how the kids use what they’ve learned in class in an exam context.

    This last point is the one that really gets me down. With a greater focus on NAPLAN, you can bet your kids will be doing LESS reading, LESS writing, LESS researching, and LESS speaking and listening to make time in class for…


    • #16 by M Dahms on January 25, 2010 - 5:42 am

      We’ve also just done NAPLAN ‘analysis’ where the Year 4 and Year 6 teachers went around making the Year 3 and Year 5 teachers feel 2 inches tall.

  10. #17 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 4:33 pm

    True Naplan is a very (the most?) useful diagnostic and I would hope that school principals would know that it is simply a single diagnostic not indicative of efforts across the year. Shame on person who makes anyone who is made to feel bad due to results – should be looked at as a potential indicator of where improvement is needed.

    Perhaps speaking and listening should be included in national tests?

    Yes some school teach to the NAPLAN tests – booooo! 😦 Mind you it is tempting to not teach Yr 7 and through effort into teaching Year 9 to be able to show value adding – NOT!) I believe our current programmes should do just that and if they don’t we should look at why. From our NAPLAN results last year our faculty must focus on basic numeracy concepts (without calculator) and interpreting worded problems (a literacy issue 🙂 )

    But I don’t understand why you don’t think information should not be made public. You have been a vocal supporter of the #nocleanfeed and to me it is exactly the same. Hiding the information from public view does not make it better, it is just subject to less (unscrupulous/ill-informed?) scrutiny,surely we want it to get better not just sweep under the carpet! LEts teach thte masses how to interpret properly!

    I say again booo 😦 😦 😦 😦 to anyone who teaches to the NAPLAN test! Mind you I will familiarise my students with the type of questions they will encounter so it is not unrepresentative of their understanding. Now don’t get me started on that stupid SC (1 mark – 4 questions) all correct and incorrect responses question that just stuffs kids up!

  11. #18 by Tony Searl on January 24, 2010 - 4:55 pm

    Gillard continues to clutch at the last decade or so of what schools (not learning) will be.
    MySchool is another desperate protective deflection to buffer responsibility for being bereft of innovation..

    Engaged, responsible parents will ultimately be the change leaders for their child’s learning.

    They are the new democracy for learning and will make decisions based on what learning they want their children to have.

    This is nothing new. Home schoolers have long known this because schools have not provided the neccessary learning, to their requirements. No biggy.Move on.Choice is good.

    With the greater empowering of individuals coming, institutions can choose to;

    # bunker down, ostrich style (what some Public Ed is doing),
    # fundamentally reform (what a scarce few “wacky pioneers” are doing, well) or
    # incrementally tread-tech-water and do as they are told because they know no better (the majority progressive middle)

    Our current wacky FB/twitter/hyper connected socmed teens & early 20’s who realsie their young kids (when hatched) are going to a daily place of disconnect reminiscent of their own hoary past will simply enrol in the new school’s.

    The ones those wacky pioneer learners are refining, now. And. Why. Wouldn’t. You?

    Currently the Titanic, that is public education, is still in Belfast, getting fitted up.
    The blind misinformed race to the top is just beginning with a tech fit out thats doomed.
    Again it’ll sink due to some selfish navigation imperitives made by disconnected head offices, not those possibly in the know on the bridge.

    Yes,the deckchairs will be rearranged, the band will play on and finally the Wacky heavier than air Wright brothers will cease to be laughed at. There are alternatives for schools. Let them fly A380 parents.

    MySchools is an entirely predictable reactionary unlearning move by Gillard. I’m not suprised, upset or angry.

    We’ll have about another 5 years till the new borns hit kindy, and a decade or so till high school.
    So 2015-2025 Parents ask yourself,
    Do you want your kids attending an archaic 30hour/week agenda museum or “attend’ to learning for learning?

    What we have now is; successful graduates of old systems, currently unlearning slowly, making earnest decisons based on the past, regardless of their political spots, that they think are correct for the future.

    But they are still not brave enough to remove the ice, even though they know it’s there.

  12. #19 by paralleldivergence on January 24, 2010 - 5:16 pm

    Ahh yes, change is tough. Some people like change, but they’re pretty much always the minority. Some people don’t like change at all – and they’re pretty much always teachers. 😉

    Now before you scream “unfair”, historically (and now) the Union is united against change and rarely if ever offers alternative solutions by the “profession” – just staunch and vocal opposition.

    Public perception is reality. If parents think that teachers and schools are trying to hide their performance data, then teachers and schools are trying to hide their performance data.

    The game is changing. We all have to play the cards we are dealt and make the most of them.

    Remember, the GST was the end of the world too.

    Is it 2010 already?

    • #20 by kmcg2375 on January 24, 2010 - 5:30 pm

      “If parents think that teachers and schools are trying to hide their performance data, then teachers and schools are trying to hide their performance data.”

      Who has actually done the research to say this is the case?
      Or is that based on gossip too?

      And…since when are parents right just by virtue of being parents?

      NB: The Federation of Parents and Citizens’ Associations of New South Wales has condemns the construction of league tables:
      and this from their President in today’s Oz:

      Advocates of public school education reject the notion that schools should be compared at all. NSW Federation of Parents and Citizens president Dianne Giblin told Focus that the federation believed the My School website would encourage parents to compare schools by area rather than simply by statistical similarity.
      “As parents we are always told not to compare our own children,” Giblin says. “But here we are having our Deputy Prime Minister asking us to compare hundreds of schools. We would say why would you want to compare schools? For a parent the best choice is the school local to them.”

      • #21 by paralleldivergence on January 24, 2010 - 6:08 pm

        It doesn’t matter about the research – it’s a public perception. Most parents don’t think that out-in-the-open school reporting is a bad thing. They certainly are NOT happy with the wishy-washy and vague reports they get now from their kids’ school(s) now.

        Parents are the majority of voters. What parents think matters to the politicians.

      • #22 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 6:28 pm

        I agree with Stu – public perception is the key. Whether we like it or not how the public perceives us is how we will be judged. So our only hope is to change how the public perceives us. I do not think that not disclosing information will help – how can it? It will merely indicate there is something to hide.

        You don’t have to like them but the public pay our salaries and their representatives make the rules, Think about how we should influence this situation – it is not the current position of the unions. 😦

      • #23 by kmcg2375 on January 25, 2010 - 1:03 am

        If what parents think matters, then research is going to be important here. Who says that parents are unhappy? You? Who’d you hear it from? Julia Gillard? The newspaper report that quoted Julia Gillard? Reported public perception is not always actual perception.

        Aaaand – in NSW we have already seen A-E grading adopted in most schools in response to parents’ ‘demands’ for clearer reporting. So far the parents that I have come across haven’t been too happy with it, as their kids are now mostly getting told they are ‘C’ students. Nice and clear, but not very helpful, or friendly.

        It is the school’s responsibility to make reporting parent friendly. Schools (yes, like mine) who use direct syllabus outcome language in reports should know that the audience for that language was NEVER parents. Slapping an A-E grade at the end has not clarified the situation for parents, and neither will giving them a MySchool report telling them that Year 7 students at the school received an average score of 523 is reading while similar schools scored 525.

    • #24 by paralleldivergence on January 25, 2010 - 9:16 am

      In your comment here you just said “the parents I have come across haven’t been to happy”. That’s your perception and it’s the public’s perception. When I went to school, my parents knew if I was going well relative to my class because I was graded. Whether it was right or wrong, and regardless of the fact that there was no standardised test and my school was not compared to others, my parents knew how I was travelling in every subject – from a single sheet of paper.

      Fast forward to my kids and I get nine pages of stuff twice a year and it effectively tells me nothing. “Progressing towards”. Really? Now admittedly, there are many parents out there who have no clue about parenting and they will continue to send their kids to the closest local school. But ask any real estate agent if they get parents who want to buy into an area because of the reputation of a few “elite” public schools? Many well-performing schools are not identified by reputation, maybe “My School” will help them?

      What is the point of highlighting dud schools if the goal is not to rectify the problems? Is it to close them down? With our growing population, we need more schools, not less. What state government would want their name on a report indicating that they have the worst school in the country (however “worst” is interpreted).

      I think we’re all looking too locally at this whole proposal.

      My 2c.

  13. #25 by kmcg2375 on January 24, 2010 - 5:17 pm

    Touche, Simon. Gave me pause for thought re #nocleanfeed #openinternet vs. #MySchool

    I would say two things:

    1. The MySchool issue is not a censorship issue. It is a case of putting info out that isn’t out – not of closing off access that is already there. But reading that over even I will concede it is splitting hairs. More important is;

    2. The development of the MySchool website is not a process of putting all the information up and letting the public get informaed about what is important. It is about the Government telling the public that they SHOULD be valuing x, y and z as the most important measures of schooling success. In this case literacy and numeracy TEST SCORES, and only certain school demographic info.

    Some suggestions that I/others have tweeted of things that could/should also be measured to compare schools are:
    * staff retention figures
    * info on staff and student sick leave
    * student immunisation rates
    * student fitness
    * canteen prices and level of food healthiness
    * a breakdown of teachers into years of service
    * participation in a range of extracurricular activities
    * size and activity of P&C
    * size and activity of Student Representative Council

    If there was some way for a parent to Google search all of this and decide for themselves what was most important, then perhaps I wouldn’t oppose it. But MySchool IS going to stigmatise schools because our FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has declared high NAPLAN scores to be more important than joining a debating or soccer team, forming positive social relationships, or connecting knowledge across the curriculum.

    By limiting MySchool to standardised academic scores and demographic info, the Feds are actually engaging in a kind of censorship, if you think about it that way.

  14. #26 by Simon Borgert on January 24, 2010 - 5:47 pm

    Okay definitely concede that schools should not be ranked on an individual test such as NAPLAN. But is it not a start? Schools should be ranked and accountable, preferably based multiple indicators, but these need to stat somewhere and progress. Sure it is a problem if it gets cut down before fully developing – but evolution is messy?

    May be we should put Google in charge? 🙂

    I still believe in freedom of access to public information. (Even after dealing with very messy ministerials with another NSW Government Department) as it is fundamental to our development as a society. Sure every man and his dog will put their own “spin” on things with selectively choosing data and interpreting it in the way that suits them. However isn’t that what all academics/scientist do to push their point – subject to peer review? Just look at the current Climate Change debate.

  15. #27 by imeldajudge on January 26, 2010 - 2:11 am

    Both perspectives have incredible weight here. There is no doubt that there will be major teething problems with the MyScchool website. It is essential that this type of dialogue be open to public discussion…therefore avoiding censorship!
    Now the deed is done! My School is out there. With this type of discussiion continually played out in the media it will eventually make parents question the validity of the data and demand more; or reject the sanctity of the site!! Parents are not stupid!!!
    I am embarrassed that Gillard thinks this is earth-moving. I am sad for those schools that will be scorned by upwardly mobile parents with a limited understanding of the complexity of measuring the depth of every child’s literacy and numeracy ability, not realising how shallow the NAPLAN tests really are; but the reality is Gillard has started something that I think has the potential to make the public start asking some serious questions about our education system, and our measurement of student performance. We can only hope that this then forces the Feds to give the people what they want!! And I bet that will be a whole lot different to the My School site we are seeing today.
    Gillard has started something! But I don’t think she realises the enormity of it just yet!

    • #28 by kmcg2375 on February 3, 2010 - 9:21 am

      Just revisiting some thoughts on this…interesting claim imelda – “parents are not stupid”.
      Well, no…being a parent doesn’t automatically make someone stupid. It also doesn’t automatically imbue them with intelligence. I would argue that I have met plenty of stupid people in my time, and some happen to have spawned offspring. I’ve met plenty of stupid teachers too, sadly.

      Do I think that parents know what is best for their children? No, not always they don’t. There are parents out there who feed their kids too much junk food, don’t let their kids play enough, don’t have books in the house let alone read with their kids, and there are even some very abusive parents out there too. Just like there are some parents out there sending their kids to schools to try and get a high academic grade, social development be damned. Or, conversely, parents who are utterly disengaged with the school system.

      You can throw all the rotten tomatoes at me you want, and tell me that ‘I just don’t get it’ because no, I haven’t spawned yet. But you’ve got to admit – the parents commenting on this blog will tend to be in the education sector, and therefore know a little more than your average Mr. Joe about what is really valuable in schooling.

      Parents are not always right. They certainly have rights, as they should. But democratic governments have to maintain a balance of freedoms i.e. freedom to know about my child’s school and education as well as freedom from a hierarchised and status-driven school system with a focus on test scores over pedagogy.

  16. #29 by Hiba R on January 27, 2010 - 4:33 pm

    A few questions out of curiosity: isn’t the point of Public Schools that parents just send their kids to the local community school? And if that’s the case, then parents wouldn’t need all this information about other schools because it’s not their local school, and their child will not go to any other government school.


    So parents have the right to know how their own child’s school is performing… but what gives them the right to know how another person’s child’s school is performing?

    And lastly, because league tables are about rating teachers, how can you actually RATE a job like teaching? There are so many dimensions to it besides the performance of students in test situations.

    It’s such an insult to teachers!

    • #30 by Simon Borgert on January 27, 2010 - 6:15 pm

      Agree that there is a lot more to a teaching job than just test performance. But I think teachers can and should be rated. It is simply a question of coming up with the criteria. Funnily all good teachers would rate themselves, many quite critically. I am all for a collegial ratiing system. After all we all experienced this as teaching students – why should it stop now?

  17. #31 by darcymoore on February 2, 2010 - 7:33 pm

    I tried to address the irony that one of our greatest thinkers re: open government and transparency is really concerned that data will be misused and I attempted to get people thinking about the ‘perils of transparency’ in my post re:

    Stu, I think your logic is flawed in being supportive of this change when it is being bungled. Data is good but not when it is confounded, as this data is – and as such – can only be misinterpreted. BTW The GST is not working out so well here in NSW.

    • #32 by paralleldivergence on February 5, 2010 - 5:49 pm

      Darcy, the model for divvying-up the GST pie was agreed to unanimously by every state government (every one of which was Labor at the time). NSW agreed to their slice and to all the other states’ slices. Problem is not the GST revenue in NSW, it’s this government’s inability to spend it (and it’s other budget revenue) wisely – this has been proven time and again over four different premiers.

      • #33 by darcymoore on February 5, 2010 - 5:53 pm

        Yes, I’m sure you’re right about that…but worry you have joined the forces of evil on the other ;O)

      • #34 by paralleldivergence on February 5, 2010 - 6:04 pm

        I think it’s more the forces of inevitibility. We play the cards we are dealt as best we can. I’m not necessarily supporting THIS change, but I do believe there is a need for transparency and openness, which we’ve not had at all – and a closed shop makes positive change almost impossible. Sometimes to have to expose everything to be able to correct what actually needs to be corrected.

  18. #35 by darcymoore on February 5, 2010 - 6:11 pm

    Yes, I understand and agree. However, the DPM’s strategy is flawed and counter-productive as the banning of NAPLAN tests will likel;y occur. We will have less data, data needed by teachers. BTW received an email today advertising NAPLAN tutoring and practice materials. It begins!

  1. Tweets that mention Choice based on what now? « Kelli McGraw --

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: