ASSESSMENT ONE- THE FOUNDATION OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

102086- DESIGNING TEACHING AND LEARNING- 1H

17999508- JADE CUNNINGHAM

Foundation concepts have been constructed to shape and influence the design of teaching

and learning for Australian teachers in the classroom. Four concepts and their corresponding

feature hold significant importance, providing a defined direction for Australian teacher’s

professionalism, and their use of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. The foundation

concepts are an important aspect of the daily work of teachers in the contemporary education

landscape of Australia.

Teacher professionalism in Australia has been influenced by both historical and contemporary

perceptions of teaching and learning. A profession often defined through a group possessing

specific knowledge and skills, and the adherence to ethical standards (Professional Standards

Council, 2015). Much debate has surrounded the nature of teaching as a profession

throughout historical perspectives. Teaching as a profession has often been criticised based

upon its working hours and diversity of the range of tasks completed daily (Connell, 2013;

Thomas, 1998). In the contemporary education system of Australia, the Australian Institute

for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) has established the Australian Professional

Standards for Teachers, recognising perceptions of teaching as a profession. The introduction

of teaching standards promotes teaching as a profession in contemporary society, and

establishes professional conduct for Australian teachers in the classroom. Professionalism is

constructed of individual’s beliefs of one’s conduct in their profession, upholding its

principles, ethics and conventions in practice (Professional Standards Council, 2015). The

1
Australian Professional Standards for Teachers provides seven standards of teaching (AITSL,

2014). These teaching standards influence the behaviour and goals of teachers in their daily

work. As an overarching concept Professional standards influence the conduct in which

curriculum, pedagogy and assessment is delivered in an Australian context. Teaching

standards in Australia highlights the professional status of teaching and importance of

individual’s ongoing professional development (AITSL, 2014). Therefore, professional

standards for teachers in Australia has significant influence on the daily work and conduct of

teachers, along with the perception of teaching as a profession.

In a similar way to teacher professionalism, curriculum has been altered over time to form

Australia’s contemporary education system for teaching and learning. Curriculum can take on

many definitions with confusion often surrounding what a curriculum entails (Egan, 1978). In

the context of the Australian contemporary education system, curriculum is determined as

the expectations for what students should be taught (ACARA, 2016a). This definition can be

considered broad and open to interpretation. Curriculum in Australia has historically been a

state controlled entity until the adoption of an Australian National Curriculum in 2011

(Facchinetti, 2015). The current roll out of a national curriculum for Australia has been a

gradual process, stimulating much debate regarding its need and content. The curriculum

itself is defined to be constructed upon quality and equity, giving the opportunity for the same

content to be taught Australia wide regardless of location and background (ACARA, 2016a).

Positives and negative outcomes emerge for teachers in regards to the use of a national

curriculum. The National Curriculum has impacted the daily work of teachers, altering content

of the existing curriculum for each different subject area. Teachers have viewed aspects

2
including a less crowded curriculum to be an important positive for the Australian National

Curriculum, providing the opportunity for students to gain a deeper knowledge of particular

content (Bowden, 2014; Fehring & Nyland, 2012). However, criticism of the Australian

National Curriculum has been centred upon the inherent political agenda within Australia’s

education system (Fehring & Nyland, 2012). Teacher’s daily work has been impacted in a

range of ways through the adoption of an Australian National Curriculum to introduce a

contemporary approach to teaching and learning.

Teacher professionalism and curriculum in the contemporary Australian education system

have moulded the way in which pedagogy is used by teachers. Pedagogy can be explained as

the way a teacher teaches their students, in the numerous ways teaching and learning can be

delivered (Mayer, 2014). The use of pedagogy, particularly in an Australian context, has the

goal of achieving high quality teaching (Ladwig, 2005). The introduction of the Australian

Standards for Teaching and National Curriculum reflect the importance of pedagogy for

quality teaching (Mayer, 2014). The introduction of teaching and learning instruments for

pedagogy provides teachers with a guide of expectations for daily in class teaching. A New

South Wales Quality Teaching Model has been developed by Ladwig and Gore (2003) to

provide of model of pedagogy for classroom practice (NSW DET, 2003). The use of a quality

teaching model in Australia’s contemporary education system provides teachers with a tool

for self-reflection, analysis and planning of lessons through the use of coding (NSW DET,

2003). The use of a reflective model is an important tool for the daily work of teachers in

providing ongoing effective and quality teaching to their students. The use of pedagogy can

also be seen as a mechanism for creating supportive professional environments for teaching

3
and learning (NSW DET, 2003). Thus being particularly important for teachers in their

continual development of their teaching practices. Pedagogy is an important instrument for

teaching and learning in Australia’s contemporary education landscape.

The approach to assessment in Australia is a reflection of the embedded structures within the

curriculum and pedagogy, to present a contemporary application of teaching and learning.

Many different aspects of the National Curriculum incorporate formal and informal

assessment into Australian schools. The Australian National Assessment Program, overseen

by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) introduces a

method of formal, standardised assessment for years three, five, seven and nine (ACARA,

2016b). The use of a National Assessment Program- Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) is a

government led program. The ACARA (2016b) defines the use of assessment as a measure to

determine if Australia’s school students are meeting important educational outcomes. The

NAPLAN receives criticism from teachers and scholars as it has created unintended

consequences (Harris et al, 2013; Hardy, 2014). The use of standardised testing in the

Australian education system greatly impacts the daily work of teachers as it influences

teaching and learning practices, as well as placing political pressure upon teachers and

students (Hardy, 2014). The use of a national assessment program provides opportunity for

the development of a holistic understanding for teaching and learning, however is often

missed (Harris et al, 2013). Although the approach to national testing is an inclusive and equal

method of assessment, the data collected is measured on scales, highlighting the gap of

educational inequality (ACARA, 2016b; Harris et at, 2013). The use of assessment is a

necessary part of teaching and learning, though the approach of national standardised testing

4
often does not create an environment for successful learning and results. National

assessment is at times a difficult program for teachers, though is an integral part of the

contemporary education system of Australia.

An interrelationship exists between curriculum, pedagogy and assessment in designing

teaching and learning. Addressing the needs of different student groups for effective teaching

and learning is integral for teachers in catering for a range of student abilities. Gifted and

talent students are an example of one group teachers must address when designing

curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. Gifted and talented students have a diverse range of

varying abilities, aptitudes and achievement that must be considered when applying

differentiated instruction, to engage and provide learning opportunities for students

(Education Services Australia, 2017). Differentiated instruction is the adjustment or additional

support given to teaching, learning and assessment to meet the needs of student groups

when appropriate (NESA, 2017). It is important for teachers to identify different student

group rates and methods of learning, in order to provide them a quality learning environment.

The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers provides the considerations needing to be

addressed in the design of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment.

Differentiated instruction through modifications to the interrelated concepts of curriculum,

pedagogy and assessment is particularly important in a holistic approach to addressing the

specific learning needs of gifted and talented students. Gifted and talented students can be

difficult to identify due to a range of different factors, including disengagement from the

5
curriculum (Education Services Australia, 2017). Teachers are challenged with creating a

differentiated curriculum and assessment, delivered in an engaging and challenging way, to

allow for gifted and talent students to succeed, learn and grow. Students may demonstrate

gifts and talents in one subject area or across many areas (Education Services Australia, 2017).

It is important to identify the areas of an individual students talents as well as their level of

giftedness in that area (Education Services Australia, 2017). Each individual gifted and

talented student has a specific set of learning needs based upon their type and level of skills.

When addressing the needs of gifted and talents students, learning needs that need to be

addressed include their capacity to learn at faster rates, find and solve problems, and to use

and alter abstract knowledge (NESA, 2017). Curriculum and pedagogy strategies for gifted and

talented student’s differentiated instruction involve modification to the pace, level and

content being taught (NESA, 2017). Altering the pace of delivered content allows gifted and

talented to students to form an engaged and deep understanding of content. Modifying the

level and content that is being taught also supports engaged learning, and allows acceleration

of learning beyond the level of study of their age group (NESA, 2017). Differentiating the

curriculum and delivery of pedagogy is a particularly important skill for teaching in providing

a quality learning environment for gifted and talented students. Assessment is central tool for

teachers in forming differentiated instruction as it highlights student’s areas of success and

potential for learning. Assessing a gifted and talented students learning level provides the

opportunity to identify areas of the curriculum that have not been mastered (NESA, 2017).

Assessment of gifted and talented students provides teachers with important opportunities

to develop student’s understandings and draw upon interests. The specific learning needs of

gifted and talent students can be supported by differentiated instruction operating

throughout the interlinked curriculum, pedagogy and assessment.

6
There is strong impacts on gifted and talented students learning outcomes when their

particular needs are not met. Fundamental for successful learning and growth of gifted and

talented students is effective, differentiated instruction throughout curriculum, pedagogy

and assessment. Teachers are responsible for the effective delivery of engaging content that

facilitates learning for gifted and talents students to meet necessary outcomes. The impact of

gifted and talented students not having their particular needs met is often demonstrated

through withdraw and lack of motivation towards content (Education Standards Authority,

2017). Evidence based practice of differentiated instruction has demonstrated that gifted and

talented learners require daily challenges, the opportunity to work independently, and

provided with forms of accelerated content (Vialle & Rogers, 2012). The modification of

curriculum content, pedagogy delivery and method of assessment are important

considerations to allow for learning outcomes to be achieved. A particularly strong impact on

gifted and talented students in Australia is the infrequent use of differentiated instruction in

regular classrooms (Hertberg-Davis, as cited in Munro, 2012). Gifted and talented education

in Australia is often conducted through the use of selective schools and classes. The

polarisation of gifted and talented students away from other peers is shown often in research

to be an unsuccessful practice (Vialle & Rogers, 2012). Creating a successful formula for

effective and inclusive learning for gifted and talented students, through differentiated

instruction has been demonstrated as a particularly difficult task for teachers and schools.

Social, emotional and educational impacts occur to gifted and talented students that do not

receive the necessary learning environment to achieve learning outcomes (Rogers, as cited in

Vialle & Rogers, 2012). As gifted and talented students are not a homogenous group, each

individual student has varying learning needs, as well as impacts when their learning

outcomes are not addressed. There is not one particular, simple solution to addressing the

7
learning outcomes of gifted and talented students. Quality, effective teaching for these

students comes from reflection and analysis of successful learning to achieve outcomes.

Teachers have a critical role in designing curriculum, pedagogy and assessment to allow for a

range of students capabilities. Differentiated instruction for designing teaching and learning

is underpinned by teacher professionalism, in particular Australia’s Professional Standards for

Teaching. Differentiated instruction and teaching standards share the goal of quality teaching

for effective learning. The Australian teaching standards place emphasis on professional

knowledge, practice and engagement throughout the four levels of teaching proficiency

(AITSL, 2014). The seven standards in Australia are centred upon achieving the best, holistic

teaching for all students. Designing curriculum for the full range of student’s abilities involves

knowing your students and how they learn (AITSL, 2014). As each individual student learns a

different way, rate and also has varying background knowledge about different units, it is

important for a teacher to identify this when designing curriculum. Interlinked with

curriculum is the use of pedagogy in designing for all students’ range of capabilities. Pedagogy

incorporates knowing the content and how to deliver it in a tailored manner, as well as the

creation of a supportive learning environment (AITSL, 2014). Pedagogy is particularly

important for teachers to use alongside curriculum, in practice to form an effective and

supportive environment for learning. Pedagogy is an important tool for teachers in catering

for the full range of abilities, particularly in the delivery and reflection on content. Assessment

is a reflection of effective curriculum and pedagogy to allow for the catering of all students.

Assessment takes place through a number of different strategies and provides teachers with

the opportunity to provide students with feedback (AITSL, 2014). Assessment not only

8
provides students with feedback on their progression, it allows reflection for teachers on the

quality of their teaching, for students learning. Incorporating curriculum, pedagogy and

assessment is an important role of a teacher in addressing the different range of abilities that

operate within a class.

The Australian contemporary education landscape is influenced strongly by four concepts and

their corresponding features. Teacher’s role in providing quality learning environments is

underpinned by these concepts and their ability to support a full range of students and their

capabilities.

Word Count- 2 202

9
REFERENCE LIST

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2016a).

Australian curriculum. ACARA. Retrieved from

http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2016b).

National assessment program. ACARA. Retrieved from

https://www.nap.edu.au/

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2014). Australian

professional standards for teachers. AITSL. Retrieved from

http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-

teachers/standards/list

Bowden, T. (2014, October). Australian education review proposes 'less crowded'

curriculum. ABC News. Retrieved from

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4106131.htm

Connell, R. (2013). Teachers. Education, Change and Society. Victoria Oxford

University Press.

Education Services Australia. (2017). Student diversity: Australian curriculum.

Education Services Australia, in collaboration with ACARA. Retrieved from

http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/studentdiversity/gifted-and-

talented-students

Egan, K. (1978). What is curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 8(1). Taylor and Francis, Ltd.

10
Facchinetti, A. (2015). The Australian curriculum review: The good, the bad and the

messy. Education Today, 28. Retrieved from

http://www.educationtoday.com.au/_images/articles/pdf/article-pdf-

1005.pdf

Fehring, H., & Nyland, B. (2012). Curriculum directions in Australia: Has the new

focus on literacy (english) and assessment narrowed the education agenda?.

Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 20(2), 7-16.

Hardy, I. (2014). A logic of appropriation: Enacting national testing (NAPLAN) in

Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 29(1), 1-18.

Harris, P., Chinnappan, M., Castleton, G., Carter, J., De Courcy, M., Barnett, J. (2013).

Impact and consequence of Australia's national assessment program: Literacy

and numeracy (NAPLAN): Using research evidence to inform improvement.

TESOL in Context, 23(1), 30-52.

Ladwig, J. G. (2015). Monitoring the quality of pedagogy. Leading and Managing,

11(2), 70-83.

Mayer, D. (2014). Forty years of teacher education in Australia: 1974-2014. Journal

of Education for Teaching, 40(5), 461-473.

Munro, J. (2012). Effective strategies for implementing differentiated instruction.

University of Melbourne.

New South Wales, Department of Education and Training (NSW DET). (2003). Quality

teaching in NSW public schools: A classroom practice guide. NSW DET.

11
New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA). (2017). Differentiated

programming. NESA. Retrieved from

http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/support-materials/differentiated-

programming/

Professional Standards Council. (2015). What is a profession. Professional Standards

Council. Retrieved from http://www.psc.gov.au/what-is-a-profession

Thomas, N. (1998). Teaching as a profession. Education 3-13, 26(1), 8-16.

Vialle, W., Rogers, K.B. (2012). Gifted, talented or educationally disadvantaged?.

University of Wollongong.

12