Validity and participation: implications for school comparison of Australia’s National Assessment Program

References

• ACARA (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority). 2011. Why NAP. ACARA: Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority. Accessed March 11, 2014. http://www.nap.edu.au/about/why-nap.html
   Google Scholar
• ACARA (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority). 2016. 2016, NAPLAN Achievement in Reading, Writing, Language Conventions and Numeracy: National Report for 2016. Sydney: ACARA.
   Google Scholar
• AERA (American Educational Research Association), APA (American Psychological Association) & NCME (National Council on Measurement in Education). 2014. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. 2003. “The Teacher’s Soul and the Terrors of Performativity.” Journal of Education Policy 18 (2): 215–228.10.1080/0268093022000043065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berliner, D. 2011. “Rational Responses to High Stakes Testing: The Case of Curriculum Narrowing and the Harm that Follows.” Cambridge Journal of Education 41 (3): 287–302.10.1080/0305764X.2011.607151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. 2010. Good Education in an Age of Measurement: Ethics, Politics, Democracy. Boulder, Co: Paradigm Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Bita, N. 2015. Room for improvement in NAPLAN report card, 1. The Australian.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach, L. 1980. “Validity on Parole: How Can We Go Straight?” In New Directions for Testing and Measurement, edited by W. B. Schrader, 99–108. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Crooks, T., M. Kane, and A. Cohen. 1996. “Threats to the Valid Use of Assessments.” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 3 (3): 265–286.10.1080/0969594960030302
   Google Scholar
• Gobby, B. 2016. “Obliged to Calculate: My School, Markets, and Equipping Parents for Calculativeness.” Journal of Education Policy 31 (4): 421–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grek, S. 2009. “Governing by Numbers: the PISA ‘effect’ in Europe.” Journal of Education Policy 24 (1): 23–37.10.1080/02680930802412669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardy, I. 2015a. “Education as a ‘risky business’: Theorising Student and Teacher Learning in Complex Times.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 36 (3): 375–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardy, I. 2015b. “A Logic of Enumeration: The Nature and Effects of National Literacy and Numeracy Testing in Australia.” Journal of Education Policy 30 (3): 335–362.10.1080/02680939.2014.945964
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, B. 2008. “The Unintended Outcomes of High-stakes Testing.” Journal of Applied School Psychology 23 (2): 65–86.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, M. 1992. “An Argument-based approach to Validity.” Psychological Bulletin 112 (3): 527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, M. 2013. “Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores.” Journal of Educational Measurement 50 (1): 1–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, M. 2016. Explicating validity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 23 (2): 198–211.
   Google Scholar
• Kickert, W. 1995. “Steering at a Distance: A New Paradigm of Public Governance in Dutch Higher Education.” Governance 8 (1): 135–157.10.1111/gove.1995.8.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klenowski, V. 2016. “Questioning the Validity of the Multiple Uses of NAPLAN Data.” In National Testing in Schools: An Australian Assessment, edited by B. Lingard, G. Thompson, and S. Sellar, 44–56. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lawn, M. 2013. “A Systemless System: Designing the Disarticulation of English State Education.” European Educational Research Journal 12 (2): 231–241.10.2304/eerj.2013.12.2.231
   Google Scholar
• Lingard, B. 2010. “Policy Borrowing, Policy Learning: Testing Times in Australian Schooling.” Critical Studies in Education 51 (2): 129–145.10.1080/17508481003731026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lingard, B., and S. Sellar. 2013. “Catalyst Data’: Perverse Systemic Effects of Audit and Accountability in Australian Schooling.” Journal of Education Policy 28 (5): 634–656.10.1080/02680939.2012.758815
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lingard, B., G. Thompson, and S. Sellar. 2016. National Testing in Schools: An Australian Assessment. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. 1989. “Validity.” In Educational Measurement, edited by R. Linn, 13–103. New York: American Council in Education.
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. 1998. “Test Validity: A Matter of Consequence.” Social Indicators Research 45: 35–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moss, P. A. 2016. “Shifting the focus of validity for test use.” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 23 (2): 236–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, P., and S. Shaw. 2014. Validity in Educational and Psychological Assessment. London: Sage.10.4135/9781446288856
   Google Scholar
• Nichols, S., and D. Berliner. 2007. Collateral Damage: How High-stakes Testing Corrupts America’s Schools. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ozga, J. 2009. “Governing Education Through Data in England: From Regulation to Self-evaluation.” Journal of Education Policy 24 (2): 149–162.10.1080/02680930902733121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polesel, J., S. Rice, and N. Dulfer. 2014. “The Impact of High-stakes Testing on Curriculum and Pedagogy: A Teacher Perspective from Australia.” Journal of Education Policy 29 (5): 640–657.10.1080/02680939.2013.865082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popham, W. 1997. “Consequential Validity: Right Concern-wrong Concept.” Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 16 (2): 9–13.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. 1997. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ranson, S. 2003. “Public Accountability in the Age of Neo-liberal Governance.” Journal of Education Policy 18 (5): 459–480.10.1080/0268093032000124848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudd, K. 2008. Questions and Answers, National Press Club, Canberra. PM Transcripts: Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia. Accessed April 12, 2016. https://pmtranscripts.dpmc.gov.au/release/transcript-16090.
   Google Scholar
• Rutkowski, L., and D. Rutkowski. 2010. “Getting it ‘better’: The Importance of Improving Background Questionnaires in International Large-scale Assessment.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 42 (3): 411–430.10.1080/00220272.2010.487546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sellar, S., G. Thompson, and D. Rutkowski. 2017. The Global Education Race: Taking the Measure of PISA and International Testing. Toronto: Brush Education.
   Google Scholar
• Stobart, G. 2008. Testing Times: The Uses and Abuses of Assessment. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, G. 2013. “NAPLAN, MySchool and Accountability: Teacher Perceptions of the Effects of Testing.” The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives 12 (2): 62–84.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, G., and I. Cook. 2014. “Manipulating the Data: Teaching and NAPLAN in the Control Society. Discourse: The Cultural Politics of.” Education 35 (1): 129–142.
   Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D. 2014. “What Do Teachers Need to Know About the New Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing?” Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 33 (4): 29–30.10.1111/emip.12051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, M. 2010. “The Inappropriate Use of NAPLAN Data.” Professional Voice 8 (1): 21–25.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, M. 2016. “What National Testing Data Can Tell Us.” In National Testing in Schools: An Australian Assessment, edited by B. Lingard, G. Thompson, and S. Sellar, 18–29. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar