In higher education around the world, there is a reform movement quickly gaining traction: standards-based assessment. It is a process by which students are assessed, their achievement measured, against agreed upon and concrete national standards. This reform agenda currently being negotiated within higher education in Australia, Europe, UK and the US, is driven by a concern for quality assurance and accreditation in an increasingly fluid and competitive global economy and student body. It also has implications for student learning and achievement and will shape the teaching and learning process of many higher education systems. The standards will, and should be, high.
Next month, world leaders will attend a summit in New York to review the progress on the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Are the same high standards being set in education systems in developing countries? Although this may seem an unfair and unsuitable question to ask, it is extremely pertinent in the context of education, student learning and the MDGs.
- Goal 2, Target 1: Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling
The MDGs, in particular Goal 2, are inspiring in terms of their aspirational nature and the global consensus reached to support them. However, the overall picture of education is distorted. The vantage point of any view often determines what you see. So, what do we see when we look at global education from the vantage point of the MDGs? Enrolment ratios and rates tend to dominate – from the Human Development Index to the MDGs to the EFA Global Monitoring Reports. And, despite significant achievements, it is estimated that 101 million children were still out of school in 2007.
From this vantage point, there are two aspects of education that are being overlooked. First, what is often overlooked in the advocacy of the MDGs is what happens once children are enrolled – what happens both inside and outside the classroom? Why is there an average 10% difference between the net enrolment rate and net attendance rate for primary school across the world? How are we addressing the issues of attendance, attainment, attrition and quality?
Second, these same issues for secondary schooling are overshadowed and underperforming. In the African continent, while 79% of boys and 74% of girls are enrolled in primary school, only 34% and 30% respectively are enrolled in secondary schooling. In Least Developed Countries (LDCs) worldwide the difference in enrolment is 81/76% to 31/27% (figures from Unicef). This is not to mention the attendance and attrition rates nor even the quality of students’ learning.
We need to set the standards high for education in developing countries. We need to look beyond enrolment rates and primary education. By 2015, many of the children currently enrolled and attending will be completing their primary schooling. They will not have the opportunity to complete their secondary education nor even the hope of higher education. Not only does every child have the right to access school, but they also have the right to a long and quality education, which caters to their needs, desires, hopes and dreams. This should not only be aspirational, but a minimum standard.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Although assessing the standards of schools is important, you make the good point that superficial assessment has inherent dangers. We've already seen some of that play out in Australia with the My School program, which attempts to put crude figures on a school's literacy and numeracy levels, based on exams taken at different stages of the student's schooling lives. With the knowledge that there is funding attached to the results of these exams, there have already been allegations of cheating by schools (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/12/2897008.htm) and teachers who are teaching to accommodate these tests, rather than what is in the curriculum. Talk about a disaster in key performance indicators. I guess the point is that assessment needs to be specific and thorough, not broad brushed and superficial.
I have to admit that I feel really nervous about universalizing standards for education. While I understand the idea that it can create an equal playing field, I think the reality of it is a lot messier than that. For instance, the students in my small town are writing provincial exams, and there is a pretty strong argument out there that rather than increasing standards, these standardized tests actually compromise the quality of education they are receiving. Their learning is decontextualized and, as Weh said, driven by the tests themselves. Teachers become less able to be responsive in the classroom; their ability to incorporate innovative and creative curriculum is limited … Whereas the tests are intended to simply 'measure' learning, they end up doing much more. And of course there is also the very important question: Who sets the standard? Generally, when power is centralized, there are certain voices that don't make it into the mix of what then because 'universal'. That said, there is also an argument (driven by $, rather than educational standards) that standardized tests help students compete for entrance scholarships to major universities … An important consideration for parents, to be sure.
Janet
I share your reservations Janet and am not suggesting that academic standards, as assessment and learning tools, be universalised. Unfortunately/fortunately, depending on the perspective you take, Australia is currently developing nationalised standards in higher education. I agree with the majority of your points. However, to paly the devil's advocate, if achieving these standards enable a student to transition into higher education, then we have every reason to 'teach for the test'. Furthermore, assessment has great potential to be used as an area for learning and not just for measuring. As Weh restated, it is superficial assessment that is problematic and detrimental to students' learning and achievement. i.e. My School and NAPLAN.
In terms of 'who sets the standards', see http://www.graduateskills.edu.au for a project I have been involved with led by Macquarie University. Through a 2-year collaboration between researchers, academics, students and government, this project has developed four sets of academic standards for the learning and assessment of generic skills.
In regards to education in developing countries, I am not suggesting we develop universal standards as assessment and learning tools. I am using the term 'standards' to refer to quality and the expectations we have of all students. Surely, our expectations must exceed primary schooling?
absolutely … your points are well-taken. And thanks for the link; it looks great!
Janet