Anonymous #301

Submitter information

Name

Anonymous #301

Where are you located?

Queensland

What type of area do you live in?

Metropolitan

Are you an education professional?
(e.g. teacher, school leader, learning support assistant, teacher’s aide)

No

Elevating the profession

The actions proposed recognise the value teachers bring to students, communities and the economy.

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Improving teacher supply

The actions proposed will be effective in increasing the number of students entering ITE, number of students completing ITE and the number of teachers staying in and/or returning to the profession.

Neither agree nor disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

How many students who, on the basis of all other available evidence (e.g., ITE coursework, prac reports), are likely to be effective teachers have been excluded from the teaching profession because they have failed either the Literacy or Numeracy component of LANTITE? Is there any evidence that LANTITE is actually effective or useful in addition to ITE coursework for classifying teachers as literate and numerate enough to be effective teachers? In other words, how many false negatives and false positives is it producing? If there is such evidence, why is it not publicly available? If there is no evidence that it is effective, why are we still allowing capable ITE students to be denied entry to the profession solely on the basis of their Literacy and/or Numeracy Test results? And why are we allowing this to affect teacher supply in the midst of a crisis?

Strengthening Initial Teacher Education (ITE)

The actions proposed will ensure initial teacher education supports teacher supply and quality.

Neither agree nor disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Regarding action 13, increasing the number of permitted LANTITE attempts and better feedback to LANTITE participants are the bare minimum that could be done to ensure that LANTITE test-takers are treated with respect, fairness and justice. However, there seems to be a major assumption that LANTITE is a useful and effective instrument for achieving policy goals. This is a flawed assumption, in my view; in many respects, I see LANTITE as a case study in how *not* to do high-stakes testing (see, for example, Rick Morton's recent article on LANTITE: https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/10/01/standardised-testing-failing-would-be-teachers).

To evaluate a test such as LANTIT, the concepts of merit and beneficence are useful (see the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research for definitions). The question that needs to asked is, ‘Given what we know of LANTITE’s merits, do its likely benefits justify risks of harm, discomfort and cost to individual test-takers?’ We know quite a lot now about the harms and costs (e.g., ), but very little about LANTITE’s merits or benefits. Is it technically sound? How many classification errors (false positives and false negatives) is it producing? Is it actually helping to improve literacy and numeracy teaching and educational outcomes? Is it helping to increase public confidence in ITE graduates?

These are very serious matters relating to the ethics, fairness and justice of LANTITE. There should be an urgent and thorough review of LANTITE to determine its merit or otherwise. This review should inform any further changes to LANTITE policies and administration. Until this review is done, informed decisions cannot be made about whether LANTITE should be made mandatory in the first year of an ITE course, whether it should be an entry requirement, and so on. A test that is doing more harm than good should not be made an entry requirement; it should be reformed or scrapped altogether, and the responsibility handed back to ITE providers, as has been done in the UK. Moving LANTITE to a different part of the ITE system just shifts and changes the harms, without actually resolving them.

Maximising the time to teach

The actions proposed will improve retention and free up teachers to focus on teaching and collaboration.

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Better understanding future teacher workforce needs

How effective are the proposed actions in better understanding future teacher workforce needs, including the number of teachers required?

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Better career pathways to support and retain teachers in the profession

The proposed actions will improve career pathways, including through streamlining the process for Highly Accomplished and Lead Teacher (HALT) accreditation, and providing better professional support for teachers to retain them in the profession.

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?