Literacy and Numeracy Achievement
1. Executive summary
Competence in literacy and numeracy is essential for the pursuit
of lifelong learning and career opportunities. Studies have shown
that individuals without adequate skills in these areas are at a
significant disadvantage in education, employment opportunities,
earnings potential, social status and self-esteem.
The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development
(DEECD) has overall responsibility for improving the literacy and
numeracy achievements of government school students in Victoria.
DEECD supports schools and teachers to improve student literacy and
numeracy through a range of programs.
DEECD and the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
(VCAA) assess and monitor student achievement at selected year
levels through statewide testing across all government schools.
Teachers also assess and monitor the progress of individual
students, including making judgments of student progress against
the state education curriculum (known as the Victorian Essential
Learning Standards) at the end of each semester.
Over the last six years there has been a major focus on further
developing the curriculum, school leadership and teaching and
learning in government schools. There has also been $42.1 million
invested in new initiatives specifically for schools with poor
literacy and numeracy achievement. This funding was in addition to
the $120 million spent annually to improve literacy and numeracy
across all government schools.
The objective of the audit was to determine whether student
literacy and numeracy are improving in Victoria’s government
schools.
Primarily this involved a detailed analysis of DEECD’s and
VCAA’s statewide student achievement data covering the period 1998
to 2007. While the principal focus was on trends in state average
achievement, we also examined achievement for different
socio-economic status (SES) groups, the nine DEECD education
regions and for the lowest- and highest-achieving students.
These results were then considered against DEECD’s initiatives
since 1998 to support improved student literacy and numeracy
achievement, including DEECD’s response to the recommendations of
our 2003 literacy audit.
This audit assessed trends in student achievement against the
expected performance level set for students in Victorian government
schools.
The results from the new national testing program, the National
Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), introduced in
2008, are encouraging. However, the data have not been used because
the minimum standards for student achievement set under NAPLAN are
not comparable to those set for the government school sector in
Victoria, and the published data do not specifically identify and
separate the performance of the government school sector from the
non-government school sector.
The national and international benchmark results are also
acknowledged but were not used for this audit for the same reasons
the NAPLAN data were not used. These benchmarks are also lower than
Victoria’s achievement standards.
1.1 Overall conclusion
National and international experience indicates that improving
literacy and numeracy is a complex and challenging task. The
government has made a significant commitment, investing $1.19
billion in initiatives over the past six years.
Nevertheless, over the 10–year period to 2007, DEECD’s efforts
have not resulted in a marked improvement in average literacy and
numeracy achievement across age groups.
The most substantial improvement was in the ability of Prep to
Year 2 students to recognise written words although there is not
data to confirm whether word comprehension also improved. Moderate
improvements in other areas of literacy were also evident for this
age group. This demonstrates that the improvement program
introduced for this age group worked and that big gains can be
generated at a system-wide level. The improvements for Number by
students in their early years were also encouraging. Some small to
moderate impacts for the particular sub-groups examined for this
audit were also evident.
However, the improvements in literacy and numeracy made by
students in the early years were not sustained as they progressed
through schooling. Students generally performed less well in
numeracy than in literacy, with average student performance often
further below the expected level, and with fewer improving trends
apparent.
DEECD expected improvements in literacy and numeracy
achievements resulting from its actions since 2003 would start to
emerge by 2008. DEECD considers the NAPLAN results bear out its
expectations. However DEECD also acknowledges the results are
indicative and not conclusive because NAPLAN is a new test with no
comparable data. Given the limited improvement in student
achievements shown by the statewide data from 1998 to 2007 and the
national benchmark results from 2001 to 2007, it seems unlikely
literacy and numeracy achievements could markedly change over the
course of one year.
Nevertheless, these results need to be monitored in coming years
across the full range of achievement, to see whether they can be
sustained and further improved upon. This should include the use of
disaggregated analysis of Victoria’s performance to enable an
understanding of levels of, and changes in, performance of
government schools.
It is clear that in order to make a difference, both the nature
and the scale of the literacy and numeracy strategies currently
being applied need to be thoroughly re‑assessed. There is a need to
focus effort early, on the students that need support, and for that
support to be closely monitored and sustained as students progress
through school. This focus is needed for both low-SES schools and
for low-achieving students in higher-SES schools.
The overwhelming evidence indicates that the greatest
improvements will come from systematic and sustained intervention
in the early years. Effectiveness of strategies for students who
have fallen behind in later years also needs to be re-assessed.
Improving the literacy and numeracy skills of students remains a
significant challenge. Failure to succeed can have serious
consequences as it puts at risk the opportunities for students to
achieve their full potential. It is therefore recommended that
DEECD revisits its strategies to improve student achievement and to
rigorously oversight the purposeful use of the resources allocated
for this critical area of education.
Importantly, DEECD needs to improve the usefulness of student
literacy and numeracy assessment data for monitoring long-term
trends and the progress of individual students. Promptly
introducing the system of unique student numbers would dramatically
improve the capacity to identify and monitor students needing
support.
1.2 Key findings
1.2.1 Literacy and numeracy assessments
DEECD and VCAA collect data each year through four statewide
assessments: Assessment of Reading (AoR), teacher judgments of
student progress, Achievement Improvement Monitor (AIM) and the
Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE). These assessments span
the school years from Prep to Year 12 and different elements of
student literacy and numeracy skills.
The four assessments had a range of limitations when used to
analyse long-term trends. Not all students were assessed in the
same way, the extent to which the full range of student abilities
was measured varied, some data sets were not consistent over time,
and the capacity to track the progress of individual students was
restricted.
As a result, our analysis focused on the AIM and VCE data sets,
the assessments that were collected in a standardised way and
consistent over time.
1.2.2 Literacy and numeracy achievements since 1998
The audit analysed the trends in average achievement over time
and how average achievement compared with the expected level of
performance identified by the curriculum standard for each year
level, as set by the VCAA. It is recognised that changing
demographics and student movement in the latter years of schooling
from the government to the non-government sector may have affected
the results.
Trends in average literacy achievement
Our analysis found that between 1998 and 2007:
- The most substantial improvements were made by
students in Prep to Year 2 for recognising written words, although
there is not data to confirm whether word comprehension also
improved, e.g., 20 per cent more Prep students reached a state
reading benchmark. Moderate improvements also occurred for other
areas of literacy at these year levels.
- Some slight improvements were made between Years
3 and 7, e.g., equivalent to half a term of learning at Year 7, but
average literacy achievement declined over time at higher year
levels. Average student performance dropped further below the
expected level each year as students progressed from Year 3 to Year
9 to be more than 1 term below the expected level by Year 9.
- No improvement was recorded by VCE students in
Years 11 and 12. Average VCE achievement was slightly below the
standardised mean.
Trends in average numeracy achievement
Our analysis found that between 1998 and 2007:
- Achievement in the set of maths skills called
‘Number’ for Years 3 and 5 students showed some moderate
improvements between 1999 and 2007, e.g., increasing by over half a
term of learning at Year 3. Improvements in other areas of numeracy
were slight.
- Numeracy achievement declined in recent years in
some other areas of maths for students in Years 3 to 9 e.g., by
four weeks of learning in Year 7, prior to 2007. In Years 11 and
12, although achievement in the more difficult maths studies
improved, overall, achievement declined and was below the state
average.
- Numeracy achievement declined more in Years 7 to
12 than in Prep to Year 6. Average student performance also dropped
further below expected levels each year from Year 3 to Year 9.
Trends in achievement for students from key sub-groups
Our analysis found that between 1998 and 2007:
- The achievement gap between students from high-
and low-SES schools was considerable at all year levels, e.g.,
representing 15 months of learning at Year 9 for both literacy and
numeracy. These gaps had not narrowed over time for either literacy
or numeracy.
- The Eastern Metropolitan region consistently
outperformed all other regions. There were some improvements for
students in the low-SES metropolitan regions, suggesting that
initiatives targeted at low-SES schools may have had an impact,
however student achievement declined in several non-metropolitan
regions.
- The lowest-achieving students were well behind
their higher-achieving counterparts. There were, however, some
encouraging signs of improvement among the lowest-achieving
students in literacy though not in numeracy. There was also
improvement amongst the highest-achieving students in numeracy but
not literacy.
1.3 Ways to improve literacy and numeracy
1.3.1 Support for literacy
Efforts to improve literacy achievement over the last 10 years
have done little to improve the average achievement of students
across the state. Although the considerable focus on early years
literacy in the late 1990s led to some good initial gains, there
has been no system-wide assessment of the ongoing effectiveness of
key elements of the approach, such as the Reading Recovery
intervention. DEECD needs to routinely evaluate, at a system-wide
level, the ongoing effectiveness of its support to schools,
teachers and students and sustain targeted support and
interventions beyond the early years for students who need it.
1.3.2 Support for numeracy
Low student achievement results for numeracy indicate that
effective programs are needed to better support all teachers in
further developing their numeracy teaching strategies. The existing
focus on Number should be maintained, although programs should also
focus on improving teachers’ knowledge of the maths discipline,
particularly in areas other than Number. The programs need to be
appropriate to the different stages in the development of students’
mathematical understanding as they progress through school. DEECD
has increased its support for numeracy teaching in recent years
however it also needs to monitor the effective use of this support.
There is also an urgent need for early intervention and for
sustained support for students who need it.
1.3.3 Support to address social disadvantage
The literacy and numeracy achievements of students from low-SES
schools need to improve significantly to meet expected levels.
Funding to address social inequity in literacy and numeracy
achievement equates to around 3 per cent of the total schools’
budget. This is very low in light of the large achievement deficit
of students from low-SES schools. Some of DEECD’s low-SES regions
have demonstrated that the achievement of students from low-SES
schools can be improved. The challenge now is to expand this work
effectively across all low-SES schools, and to set targets for
reducing the achievement gap between students from low- and
high-SES schools.
1.3.4 Support for low-achieving students
The audit results highlight the need to target the large numbers
of students who are achieving well below the expected level,
especially for numeracy. Focusing on schools with low achievement
rather than individual students with low achievement—the common
practice—may miss the large number of students in higher-SES
schools who are also achieving well below the expected level.
1.3.5 Continuous improvement
DEECD needs to use a consistent and evidence-based continuous
improvement approach for improving student literacy and numeracy
achievement. For example, it has not evaluated the success of the
Early Years programs for literacy and numeracy, in place for over
seven years, its system-wide programs for teacher professional
development or set challenging targets to help drive
improvement.
DEECD needs to improve the usefulness of its statewide student
assessment data. For example, no information is collected on the
literacy and numeracy skills of students commencing their Prep
year, against which their progress can be measured. There is also
no standardised assessment of numeracy for Prep to Year 2
students.
The teacher judgments of student progress provide a holistic
assessment of student progress over each year from Prep to Year 10
but the limited number of curriculum progression points used for
the assessments does not accurately differentiate the great range
in student achievement that exists. This is an important issue to
address because until a national curriculum is implemented, teacher
judgments provide the only statewide assessment of student
achievement against the challenging standards of learning set for
Victorian students.
A system of unique student numbers for all students is still
being developed. The lack of a student identifier is a fundamental
deficiency because it limits student tracking, system-wide
monitoring of student achievement, evaluations of support
initiatives and targeting of support to individual students.
1.4 Recommendations
DEECD should:
- Adopt a stronger focus on numeracy, by:
-
developing and implementing an early
intervention strategy for students struggling with numeracy
-
strengthening support provided to
teachers to further develop their knowledge of, and teaching
strategies for, maths, and to select and implement the appropriate
strategies (Recommendation 6.1).
- Address the performance gap between high- and
low-SES schools, including setting targets for reducing the
influence that school socio-economic disadvantage has on student
literacy and numeracy achievement (Recommendation
6.2).
- Identify and address the issues contributing to
the declining literacy and numeracy achievement in some
non-metropolitan regions, and identify and share across regions the
successful approaches underlying the good results achieved by the
low-SES metropolitan regions (Recommendation
6.3).
- Improve identification and targeting of students
achieving well below the expected level in literacy and numeracy in
the early years of schooling in all schools, and sustain support
for those who need it as they progress through school
(Recommendation 6.4).
- Implement a consistent and evidence-based
continuous improvement approach to improving student literacy and
numeracy achievement through:
- setting challenging long-term
achievement targets
- identifying and addressing any
issues that may limit the effectiveness of the Early Years programs
and one-on-one literacy interventions in schools
- continuing successful initiatives
for as long as feedback and evaluations indicate they are needed
(Recommendation 7.1).
- Improve the value of the student literacy and
numeracy achievement data for monitoring student progress, by:
- promptly introducing the Victorian
Student Number and using it to monitor the progress of individual
students and student cohorts, and to evaluate the impact of
improvement initiatives
- assessing the literacy and numeracy
skills of all students starting Prep
- improving the usefulness of the
teacher judgment assessments, in conjunction with VCAA, by more
accurately differentiating the range in student progress that is
assessed through these judgments
- working with VCAA to review and
upgrade the AIM On Demand student assessment system
(Recommendation 7.2).