Curric Perspect
DOI 10.1007/s41297-017-0008-8
RESEARCH ARTICLE
An evaluation of the Australian Government’s Students First
agenda for strengthening the curriculum
Michael Watt 1
Received: 27 November 2016 / Accepted: 9 February 2017
# Australian Curriculum Studies Association 2017
Abstract The purpose of this article is to evaluate wheth-
er the Australian Government’s initiatives for a robust
national curriculum, set out in The Coalition’s Policy for
Schools: Students First, are leading to positive outcomes.
Content analysis was used to dissect policy documents
and reports relevant to the study. Results showed that
most of the Australian Government’s initiatives have not
yet produced measurable outcomes. Initiatives to restore
the focus on science, technology, engineering and mathe-
matics in schools are at different stages in the process of
development, diffusion and adoption. Evidence from
qualitative data suggests that direct instruction and explic-
it direct instruction are improving student learning in
schools participating in the Flexible Literacy Learning
for Remote Primary Schools program. The initiatives for
improving the take up of foreign languages are likely to
fail, because they do not establish connected pathways
between preschool, primary school and secondary school.
Activities undertaken to rebalance the Australian Curriculum
and refocus the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and
Reporting Authority produced only minor adjustments.
Transitioning the annual literacy and numeracy tests to online
assessments is being implemented over two years from 2018.
Results of the study showed that implementation of the
Australian Government’s initiatives in the education system
have the potential to affect curriculum policy.
* Michael Watt
michaelgwatt@internode.on.net
1
316 Churchill Avenue, Sandy Bay, Tasmania 7005, Australia
Keywords Australian curriculum . Literacy skills . STEM
education
Introduction
Leading up to the federal election in September 2013, the
Liberal and National parties released The Coalition’s Policy
for Schools: Students First. The policy was based on four
principles: stable and sustainable funding; a greater say for
school communities; a robust national curriculum; and im-
proved teacher quality and support. The policy’s principle
for a robust national curriculum centred on five actions: re-
storing the focus on science, technology, engineering and
mathematics (STEM); flexible literacy learning for remote
primary schools; improve the take up of foreign languages;
revisit the national curriculum and reform the Curriculum
Authority; and expedite turnaround of literacy and numeracy
reporting in the National Assessment Program.
Specific measures were outlined in the policy for each of
these actions. Restoring the focus on STEM would be accom-
plished by establishing a STEM Ministerial Advisory Board
to ensure these subjects get more attention in teacher prepara-
tion, working with states to ensure these subjects are given a
greater focus, and maintaining funding for the Primary
Connections: Linking Science and Literacy and Science by
Doing programs. Grants would be provided to school com-
munities to deliver flexible literacy learning programs to re-
mote primary schools based on a rigorous school attendance
strategy, a commitment to the teaching of phonics and evi-
dence of community support and involvement. Improving
participation in foreign languages would be achieved by con-
tinuing to prioritise the development of languages in the
Australian Curriculum, working with the states to make the
study of a foreign language mandatory in secondary schools,

recruiting specialist language teachers, improving teacher
preparation courses, giving children in preschool the opportu-
nity to study a foreign language, and conducting research into
the provision of foreign languages in years 11 and 12.
Reviewing the Australian Curriculum would be conducted
to ensure it was delivering what parents expect, paying special
attention to the curriculum of years 11 and 12, continuing
work and implementation of the curriculum, and reforming
the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority (ACARA); this would focus on transferring all data,
reporting and compliance functions that are not curriculum-
related to the Australian Government Department of
Education and Training. Expediting turnaround of literacy
and numeracy reporting in the National Assessment Program
would focus on producing the results faster, reviewing the
MySchool website, and reporting the results annually.
The federal election held in September 2013 resulting in
the election of the current Liberal National coalition provided
the opportunity for the new government to put into effect The
Coalition’s Policy for Schools: Students First. The purpose of
this article is to delineate the scope of the Australian
Government’s initiatives in each of the policy’s five actions
for a robust national curriculum. The account of these initia-
tives provides the basis for a policy-oriented evaluation focus-
ing on answering the following research questions. Are the
elements of the initiative to restore the focus on STEM in-
creasing student participation and affecting student perfor-
mance? Is the strategy used in flexible literacy learning for
remote primary schools affecting the performance of students
in these schools? Are the initiatives to encourage students to
learn foreign languages increasing student participation and
affecting student performance? Are the initiatives to review
the Australian Curriculum and ACARA restoring balance in
the curriculum and refocusing ACARA on developing a
world-class curriculum? Are the initiatives to transition liter-
acy and numeracy testing in the National Assessment Program
to online assessments ameliorating problems with reporting
the results?
Methodology
The research design comprised a review of reports on research
studies with the intention of uncovering information to answer
the research questions. This design allowed the researcher to
cover each of the five actions comprehensively through a pol-
icy and literature review.
The procedures for collecting information for the study
involved following a sequence of steps. Initially, reports on
relevant research studies relating to strengthening the curricu-
lum were identified by searching the Australian Government
Department of Education and Training’s Students First
website. Reports and news articles about particular elements
Curric Perspect
of the initiative to restore the focus on STEM were identified
on the websites of Education Services Australia (ESA),
ACARA, Skilling Australia Foundation, Australian
Mathematics Trust, Australian Science Innovations and the
Education Council. Reports and news articles about the
Flexible Literacy Learning for Remote Primary Schools pro-
gram were identified on the websites of the Australian Council
for Educational Research (ACER), Queensland Department
of Education and Training, T. J. Ryan Foundation, Good to
Great Schools Australia and Cape York Aboriginal Australian
Academy (CYAAA). Reports and news articles about the re-
views of the Australian Curriculum and ACARA were identi-
fied on the Students First and ACARA websites. Reports and
news articles about the National Assessment Program were
identified on the ACARA website.
The procedure for analysing information collected during
the study used content analysis to summarise the subject mat-
ter focusing on interpretation of the relevant reports. The re-
ports of research studies were read and summaries prepared.
Reporting the results involved organising the summaries chro-
nologically, and incorporating them into the appropriate sec-
tion of the article.
Restoring the focus on science, technology,
engineering and mathematics
In July, the Office of the Chief Scientist (2013) released a
position paper setting out a strategy and social compact to
enhance STEM together with pathways for education, new
knowledge, innovation and influence. In response to the
position paper receiving broad support across research and
business sectors, the Office of the Chief Scientist (2014) put
forward a strategic approach to STEM as a recommendation to
government to advance Australian competitiveness, education
and training, research, and international engagement.
In October 2014, the Australian Government funded the
Mathematics by Inquiry project, the Coding Across the
Curriculum program, adapting and piloting the Pathway in
Technology Early College High School (P-TECH) model de-
veloped by IBM in New York City, and summer schools for
high-achieving students to restore the focus on STEM.
The Mathematics by Inquiry project is intended to provide
innovative materials for mathematics for foundation to year 10
incorporating contemporary mathematics pedagogies. The
Australian Academy of Science and the Australian
Association of Mathematics Teachers were commissioned to
review gaps in pedagogical approaches and materials for
mathematics. The reviews were guided by a set of 14
research questions referring to pedagogy, resources and a
gap analysis of existing materials. The Australian Academy
of Science (2015) found that instruction in mathematics is
quite well-supported by materials aligned to the Australian
Curric Perspect
Curriculum. Yet through a combination of different resources,
inappropriate pedagogy, and the way in which resources are
used in schools, the depth of the Australian Curriculum is
lacking, particularly in relation to problem-solving and rea-
soning proficiencies. Three major issues pertaining to mate-
rials were identified in the review. Novice and out-of-field
teachers, in particular, lack the knowledge and time to identify
high-quality materials. It is a major effort for teachers to screen
and review materials available in the marketplace. Many open
educational resources are of poor quality. The Australian
Academy of Science recommended that a coordinated initia-
tive should be conducted in resource development and evalu-
ation, research and professional learning for system-wide im-
provement in mathematics education. Three major projects
and eight minor projects were proposed for the initiative. In
addition, three recommendations were presented referring to
the Australian Curriculum. The Australian Association of
Mathematics Teachers (2015) concluded that high-quality ma-
terials developed through a process of verifying new materials
with learners and revising them need to be used by teachers
committed to exploring new approaches to instruction in
mathematics.
In May 2015, the Australian Government Department of
Education and Training convened a roundtable of mathemat-
ics education stakeholders in Adelaide to discuss the findings
of the two reviews and provide advice on the priorities to be
addressed in the Mathematics by Inquiry project.
Recommendations from the roundtable participants led the
Department to commission two projects. ESA was commis-
sioned to curate and annotate materials for mathematics avail-
able on the Schools Online Teaching and Learning
Environment (Scootle) by describing them more specifically
and identifying which materials can support teachers’ needs.
Initially, ESA consulted subject associations, principals and
teachers to identify the relationship between quality in math-
ematics materials and an inquiry approach, and to determine
ways of making materials available to teachers. With the as-
sistance of a project working group consisting of representa-
tives from the subject associations, ESA identified which ma-
terials best matched the Australian Curriculum content de-
scriptions and created 20 annotated sequences to provide a
small collection of the best mathematics materials available
on Scootle. New annotated sequences for these mathematics
materials were added to Scootle. ACARA was commissioned
to develop work samples for mathematics focusing on
problem-solving and reasoning. In August 2016, ACARA
released the work samples for mathematics covering four pro-
ficiency strands: understanding; fluency; problem-solving;
and reasoning. Illustrations of practice and student work sam-
ples were collected from primary and secondary schools
across Australia. In February 2017, a set of videos was re-
leased showing students demonstrating the mathematics
proficiencies.
The Coding Across the Curriculum program is intended to
introduce computer coding into Australian schools and sup-
ports implementation of the Australian Curriculum for
Technologies in developing students’ algorithmic thinking.
As an initial step, the University of South Australia’s
Computer Science Education Research Group was engaged
to identify available materials and gaps in materials for
Technologies. In February 2015, a quality assessment
framework containing criteria for context, integrity,
alignment and sustainability was developed to evaluate the
materials. Computer science materials were identified and
mapped against the content descriptions of the Australian
Curriculum for Technologies using a survey tool. From a
total of 79 websites reviewed, 65 computer science materials
were identified as relevant to the Australian Curriculum for
Technologies. Of these materials, 52 related to Digital
Technologies, two related to Design and Technologies and
12 related to both subjects. Falkner and Vivian (2015) found
that these materials focused on developing programming
skills with an emphasis on developing content knowledge,
and sharing lesson and activity ideas. When mapped to the
content descriptions, there were significant areas of the
Australian Curriculum for Technologies that were either not
addressed or addressed only implicitly. Analysis using the
quality assessment framework identified deficiencies in ex-
plicit techniques and advice in assessment and guidance in
appropriate pedagogy. The review concluded that gaps in
some of these materials could be best bridged by developing
supplementary materials, such as assessment frameworks,
guiding pedagogy and lesson plan exemplars. Thirteen recom-
mendations were presented in the report to provide a basis for
developing new materials. Following completion of the pro-
ject in March 2015, the Australian Government Department of
Education and Training commissioned ESA to develop a
Digital Technologies Hub, containing over 250 materials
aligned to the Australian Curriculum for Technologies, case
studies on school practice, resources for students, parents and
school communities, and a searchable repository. The Digital
Technologies Hub, which went online in June 2016, was
launched at the conference of ICTENSW held in March 2017.
Adaptation of the P-TECH model arose from a series of
visits by business leaders and educators to the USA.
Following an overseas study trip in 2013 to research new
approaches to engage young people in skilled careers,
Nicholas Wyman, chief executive officer of the Skilling
Australia Foundation, convened a roundtable of business rep-
resentatives to consider approaches that involve partnerships
between the private sector and secondary and higher educa-
tion. This initiative led to then Prime Minister Tony Abbott
touring the P-TECH high school in Brooklyn, New York, in
June 2014. In October 2014 he announced that the P-TECH
model would be piloted at Newcomb Secondary College in
Geelong. In April 2015, IBM president, Stanley Litow visited

Geelong to discuss the P-TECH model with representatives of
Geelong’s business community. In May 2015, a delegation of
Geelong’s business leaders visited the USA to tour businesses
and to continue discussions with IBM about the P-TECH
model. In August 2015, the Australian Government an-
nounced that Federation College in Ballarat had been chosen
for a second pilot site. Each school collaborated with other
education and training providers and locally based employers
to involve students in pursuing an industry-supported pathway
to a STEM diploma. In May 2016, the Australian Government
extended the P-TECH pilot to 12 additional sites to enable the
P-TECH model to be tested and adapted in different states and
school systems.
Summer schools for STEM students provide high-
achieving female, indigenous and disadvantaged students
with opportunities to attend summer schools followed by five
months of mentoring and a second residential school. In 2014,
the Australian Government Department of Education and
Training provided grants to the Australian Mathematics
Trust and Australian Science Innovations to develop a pro-
gram, Curious Minds, for girls in years 8 to 10. Each of the
initial Curious Minds programs, held at the Australian
National University in Canberra in 2015 and 2016 and the
University of New South Wales in Sydney in 2016 and
2017, involved groups of 54 girls selected on their perfor-
mance in competitions run by these organisations.
At the meeting of the Education Council held at Brisbane in
May 2015, Ministers agreed to collaborate on developing a
strategy to increase student participation in STEM. In
November 2015, Adrian Piccoli, the New South Wales
Minister for Education, convened a STEM education summit
in Sydney to discuss key issues to inform development of the
strategy. The first of two sessions at the summit examined
types of skills students need for workplaces in the future. In
the second session, discussions among the participants fo-
cused on increasing student participation and diversity in
STEM. Key themes emerging in discussions focused on
under-representation of female and indigenous students, an
overcrowded curriculum making it difficult for teachers to
provide deeper engagement, the importance of coding and
the Australian Curriculum for Technologies, the need to attract
more qualified teachers, the role of universities in supporting
better outcomes in schools, and better coordination of partner-
ships between schools, industry and universities. Following
the summit, over 40 percent of the participants submitted fur-
ther ideas online and suggested areas for change.
In December, the Education Council (2015) adopted a na-
tional strategy in STEM for 2016 to 2026 setting out goals to
ensure all students finish school with a strong foundational
knowledge in STEM, and are inspired to take on more chal-
lenging STEM subjects. The two goals for the national strat-
egy are supported by five areas of national action. Student
ability, engagement, participation and aspiration in STEM
Curric Perspect
should be increased by exploring options for a minimal level
of numeracy attainment and increasing the recognition of the
subject load of advanced subjects. Teacher capacity and teach-
ing quality in STEM should be increased by collecting and
developing online exemplar teaching modules, establishing a
professional learning exchange, lifting the quality of initial
teacher education, and working with universities to improve
the pathway for graduates into teaching. Education opportu-
nities for STEM within school systems should be supported
by extending the national literacy and numeracy continuums,
developing online formative assessment tools, and revising
the scope and extending the reach of the national science
and information, communication and technology assessments.
Effective partnerships with universities, business and industry
should be facilitated by establishing a STEM partnership fo-
rum. A strong evidence base for STEM should be built by
national reports charting changes in data indicators, and shar-
ing and synthesising research and evaluation.
In December 2015, the Australian Government released the
National Innovation and Science Agenda, which includes five
initiatives to increase participation of school students in STEM
and improve digital literacy. First, the Australian Government is
funding expansion of the Computer Science Education
Research Group’s Digital Technologies Massively Open
Online Courses to provide a nationally facilitated professional
learning program and a national lending library of digital edu-
cational equipment. Second, the Australian Government is
funding national computing challenges for all years 5 and 7
students, a national competition for years 4 to 12 students,
and a computer science summer school for up to 60 years 9
and 10 students. Third, the Australian Government is funding
the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organisation's Scientists and Mathematicians program, which
involves volunteer STEM professionals working in partner-
ships with schools to engage students in these disciplines.
Fourth, the Australian Government is providing grants, which
are assessed on a competitive basis, to schools in 2016 and
2017 to conduct projects to facilitate implementation of the
Australian Curriculum for Digital Technologies. Fifth, the
Australian Government is funding the Early Learning STEM
Australia program to provide opportunities for preschool chil-
dren to explore a series of applications for tablet devices that are
rich in STEM concepts.
Flexible literacy learning for remote primary schools
Across Australia, there are more than 250 remote primary
schools, whose students have literacy and numeracy results
for year 3 that show 30 percent or more students are below
national minimum standards for reading and writing. These
schools form the population from which schools were selected
to participate in the Flexible Literacy Learning for Remote
Curric Perspect
Primary Schools program, based on whether they have a
whole-of-school attendance strategy, a whole-of-school liter-
acy strategy, and parental and community support. The pro-
gram supports improvement of literacy results by mastering
the alphabetic code using direct instruction, developed by the
National Institute of Direct Instruction based in Eugene,
Oregon, USA, or explicit direct instruction, developed by
DataWORKS Educational Research based in Fowler,
California, USA.
In 2010, Aboriginal leader, Noel Pearson, founded Good to
Great Schools Australia to promote an educational program
intended to close the academic achievement gap between in-
digenous and mainstream students and support the students’
bicultural identity. CYAAA was established through an agree-
ment with the Queensland Department of Education, Training
and Employment to implement the educational program in
three schools based at Aurukun, Coen and Hope Vale. Good
to Great Schools Australia developed and implemented a
model of effective instruction based on four learning domains
supported by community initiatives to ensure student atten-
dance and well-being. The Childhood domain supports devel-
opment of children from birth to three years. In the Class
domain, direct instruction is used to develop literacy and nu-
meracy skills. The Club domain encompasses sports, the arts
and music. The Culture domain focuses on building knowl-
edge about cultures, and history of family, community, coun-
try and people.
In October 2012, the Queensland Department of
Education, Training and Employment contracted ACER to
evaluate CYAAA. A representative working group was
formed to oversee the evaluation and a reference group
established to provide advice. The methodology involved
analysing available quantitative data about students and
teachers, and interviewing 73 people with knowledge about
the initiative. The Australian Council for Educational
Research (2013) found that as the initiative had only been
implemented in the schools for one or two years, it was pos-
sible there was insufficient time for any measurable impact. It
was impossible to conclude from the available test data wheth-
er the initiative had had an impact on student learning, but
interviewees reported improvements in student learning, par-
ticularly in literacy. There was evidence that families were
making a greater commitment to their children’s education
and weak evidence that a greater proportion of students were
at or above national standards for literacy. The initiative
seemed to have had a positive effect on teachers’ perfor-
mances and reduced staff turnover.
In July 2014, the Australian Government provided a grant
to Good to Great Schools Australia to implement the Flexible
Literacy Learning for Remote Primary Schools program in 39
remote primary schools in Western Australia, Northern
Territory and Queensland over three years. In December
2014, an Advisory Committee was appointed to provide
policy advice, support implementation, and monitor the re-
view and evaluation process for the program. In January
2015, Good to Great Schools Australia provided initial train-
ing in implementing direct instruction and explicit direct in-
struction to over 250 principals, teachers and teacher aides
from these schools. Teachers in participating schools receive
ongoing training, coaching from visiting experts, data assess-
ment and teacher improvement strategies, classroom materials
and implementation resources.
In 2016, Good to Great Schools Australia commissioned
ImpaxSIA Consulting to evaluate the impact of the Flexible
Literacy Learning for Remote Primary Schools program to pro-
vide a basis for improving its implementation. In May 2016, an
evaluator, who visited four schools in Western Australia and
Northern Territory, interviewed 43 principals, implementation
managers, teachers and parents. Data collected from the inter-
views were used to develop a case study on each school illus-
trating implementation of direct instruction or explicit direct
instruction as part of the program. An online questionnaire,
developed from the findings of the interviews, was administered
to principals and teachers in 39 schools participating in the pro-
gram. Responses were received from 185 subjects representing
about 50 percent of the staffs in these schools.
Holden (2016) found that implementation of direct instruc-
tion or explicit direct instruction had led to a wide range of
improvements in student and teacher capabilities, including
more students performing at grade level, improved student be-
haviour, better learning outcomes for children with disabilities,
and improved school attendance. Of the subjects responding to
the survey, 64 percent in schools implementing explicit direct
instruction and 56 percent implementing direct instruction per-
ceived that the overall learning environment had improved.
Most respondents reported changes in students having a clearer
understanding of expectations, building better habits and rou-
tines, becoming more confident, and showing improved oral
skills in English.
Improving the take up of foreign languages
The Australian Government funded several initiatives to pro-
mote the goal of 40 percent of year 12 students studying a
foreign language within a decade.
In 2013, the Australian Government Department of
Education commissioned the Asia Education Foundation to
conduct research into the provision of foreign languages at
the senior secondary level. The study sought to identify ways
to enable and encourage more students to study foreign lan-
guages by providing recommendations to government. The
Asia Education Foundation appointed an initial scoping
group, which met in February 2014 to refine the proposed
scope and methodology for the study. The methodology
consisted of a policy and literature review, surveys of samples

of students, parents and principals, and consultations with
approximately 70 stakeholder groups conducted over three
rounds. The Asia Education Foundation also appointed an
Advisory Group, consisting of representatives from stake-
holder groups, to ensure the research met the goals for the
study and to provide advice on data collection and analysis.
The Asia Education Foundation (2014) found that only 11
percent of year 12 students are studying foreign languages as
part of their senior secondary certification. The low participa-
tion of students in language learning is due to policies focus-
ing on the mid-primary and junior secondary levels, and the
failure to mandate the learning of foreign languages beyond
these levels. Four interventions were identified as appropriate
to build and sustain demand for language learning at the senior
secondary level. First, opportunities to study languages should
be expanded by increasing the number of subjects required for
senior secondary certification and by providing multiple path-
ways for students to gain certification in foreign languages.
Second, increased access to high-quality language programs
should be provided through technology-based and immersion
approaches. Third, a communications strategy should be de-
veloped to engage stakeholders in recognising and promoting
the value and utility of foreign languages. Fourth, data collec-
tion on student participation in foreign languages, policies that
could boost student enrolments in foreign languages and ways
to strengthen the engagement of students in foreign languages
across the primary and secondary levels should be enhanced
by collaboration at the national level.
In 2014, the Australian Government funded a one-year trial
of the Early Learning Languages Australia program to deter-
mine the effectiveness of preschool children learning a lan-
guage through play-based applications without a proficient
language teacher. ESA was contracted to manage the develop-
ment of language apps and implement the trial in 41 preschool
sites across Australia. Seven apps were developed in each of
five languages: Chinese; Japanese; Indonesian; French; and
Arabic. ESA provided support for the trial through an intro-
ductory workshop, site visits by a liaison officer, a help desk,
webinars and a website.
Late in 2014, the Australian Government Department of
Education commissioned Deloitte Access Economics to eval-
uate whether the trial was designed appropriately and effective
in achieving desired outcomes. The evaluation involved
collecting app usage data, surveying educators at trial sites,
surveying parents of children participating in the trial, visiting
more than half of the trial sites, reviewing literature on the use
of digital technology for language learning in preschools,
analysing data on the trial provided by ESA, and consulting
officials in state education agencies.
Deloitte Access Economics (2016) found that the trial dem-
onstrated promising results as a model for enabling language
exposure in preschools. Although the time frame for the trial
was short, implementation of the trial was generally smooth.
Curric Perspect
Flexible delivery of the trial allowed resources to be used in a
way that suited local circumstances. Almost three-quarters of
children participating in the trial used the apps at least once a
week. These findings indicated that the trial was positive in
increasing language exposure for preschool children and
showed that educators need not be language proficient in order
for children to participate in the program.
Following the positive findings of the evaluation, the Early
Learning Languages Australia program was extended to more
than 300 preschools in 2016 and more than 1,900 preschools
in 2017. In 2017, apps for Spanish and Italian were added, and
in 2018, apps for Modern Greek and Hindi will be added to
the program.
In 2014, the Australian Government funded the develop-
ment of curricula for Hindi, Turkish, Australian Sign
Language, Classical Greek and Latin. Commenced in
December 2014, the curricula for Hindi and Turkish were
completed in October 2015, and approved by the Education
Council in December 2015. Commenced in April 2015, the
curricula for Australian Sign Language, Classical Greek and
Latin were completed in October 2016, and approved by the
Education Council in December 2016.
Reviewing the Australian Curriculum
and refocusing the Australian Curriculum,
Assessment and Reporting Authority
In January 2014, the then Minister for Education, Christopher
Pyne, appointed Professor Kenneth Wiltshire and Dr. Kevin
Donnelly to review the Australian Curriculum. The reviewers
commissioned 15 individuals and groups to analyse the sub-
ject matter of 10 subjects, conducted meetings with organisa-
tions and individuals, and reviewed a range of documents,
data and projects derived from national and international
sources. Almost 1600 public submissions were lodged on
the Australian Government Department of Education’s
Students First website.
The reviewers contended that the Australian Curriculum
emphasised utilitarian ends, twenty-first century learning,
personalised learning, and equity and social justice. These
intentions were reflected in the prominence of cross-
curriculum priorities and general capabilities at the expense
of subject disciplines. The perceptions of stakeholders varied
about the concept of a national curriculum, and the extent to
which it would be mandatory. Furthermore, the developmen-
tal process was unclear to many stakeholders, the quality of
the shaping documents varied, the general capabilities were
developed separately from the content of the learning areas,
the debate about a rationale for the Australian Curriculum was
inadequate, and an iterative process was followed in each
learning area. The introduction of discipline-based content
into the early years, and incorporation of the cross-
Curric Perspect
curriculum priorities across the whole curriculum were seen as
major design faults by many stakeholders. The results of the
analysis of the Australian Curriculum in terms of its robust-
ness, independence and balance were mixed. The
benchmarking studies, which were reported by the
Australian Department of Education (2014), showed that
English, History, the Arts, and Economics and Business were
lacking rigour, independence and balance in many aspects.
Based on an analysis of the submissions, feedback from the
meetings and the reports of the subject matter specialists, the
reviewers presented recommendations for revising each learn-
ing area. The reviewers believed that a different governance
structure was needed for ACARA to ensure that decision-
making is based on educational expertise instead of policy
considerations. The reviewers concluded that ACARA should
be established as a company to ensure that board members are
not acting as representatives.
Donnelly and Wiltshire (2014) presented 30 recommenda-
tions for reducing the subject matter, cross-curriculum priori-
ties and general capabilities, informing parental engagement
with the Australian Curriculum, improving accessibility for
students with disabilities, rebalancing the emphasis placed
on specific subject matter, and reforming ACARA’s gover-
nance and functions. Concurrently, the Australian
Government published a response to the review focusing on
five themes: resolving the overcrowded curriculum; improv-
ing parental engagement around the curriculum; improving
accessibility for all students; rebalancing the curriculum; and
reviewing ACARA’s governance.
In December 2014, the Education Council referred the
recommendations relating to the first four themes to
ACARA for advice, but deferred acting on the recommen-
dations relating to ACARA’s governance pending the
findings of a legislative review. In March 2015, the
Education Council approved actions ACARA proposed
to address these recommendations.
Between March and May of 2015, ACARA engaged
concurrently in various activities to address these
recommendations. The Australian Curriculum, Assessment
and Reporting Authority (2015a) reported engaging simulta-
neously in using a panel of primary teachers to work with lead
writers in drafting changes to content descriptions and
achievement standards, consulting experts to strengthen the
presence of phonics and phonemic awareness in the
Australian Curriculum for English, and replacing the subjects
of History, Geography, Civics and Citizenship, and
Economics by a single Humanities and Social Sciences cur-
riculum for foundation to years 6–7. The Students with
Disability Advisory Group was consulted to determine the
best approaches to improve accessibility for students with dis-
abilities, and proposals were developed for improving acces-
sibility. Discussions were held with a sample of teachers, cur-
riculum directors and ESA to identify strategies to improve
parental access to the Australian Curriculum, parent organisa-
tions were consulted to obtain feedback on possible actions,
and proposals were developed to improve parental engage-
ment with the Australian Curriculum.
Following completion of these activities, ACARA distrib-
uted the draft changes together with online surveys to key
stakeholders for review. The Australian Curriculum,
Assessment and Reporting Authority (2015b) reported that
responses received from 98 individuals and 31 organisations
to eight online surveys and from 24 written submissions were
divergent. Although the manageability of the primary curric-
ulum had improved, various views were expressed regarding
the reductions ranging from disagreement that the number had
been reduced to a concern that reduction could reduce clarity
and affect learning progression. There was support for mea-
sures to strengthen phonics and phonemic awareness in
English, and for the reorganisation of Humanities and Social
Sciences.
Work on changes to reduce content in the Australian
Curriculum, strengthen phonics and phonemic awareness in
English, proposals to improve accessibility for students with
disabilities, and proposals to improve parental engagement
were approved by the ACARA Board in June 2015. In
September 2015, the Education Council adopted the revised
Australian Curriculum for English, Mathematics, Science,
History, Geography and the Arts as well as Languages. In
addition, the Education Council adopted Health and Physical
Education, Technologies, and Economics and Business, and
Civics and Citizenship, both subjects of Humanities and
Social Sciences, comprising Phase Three of the Australian
Curriculum. In December 2015, new materials to improve
parental engagement with the Australian Curriculum were
published for each band.
In December 2014, the Australian Government Department
of Education commenced a review of ACARA as required by
the ACARA Act. In January 2015, Grahame Cook Consulting
was commissioned to interview 45 stakeholders, analyse the
feedback in terms of issues, review a set of relevant docu-
ments, and prepare a report presenting the findings of the
consultation. By examining the issues of ACARA’s purpose,
role and functions, curriculum, assessment, reporting, national
architecture, and governance and structure, Grahame Cook
Consulting presented 15 recommendations for consideration
in the review. Referring to the findings in the consultation
report as well as a review of the My School website, the
Review of the Australian Curriculum and a review of
national architecture, the Australian Government Department
of Education and Training (2015) analysed the context, deliv-
ery, future role and priorities for ACARA, and presented rec-
ommendations for five aspects: curriculum; assessment; data
collection and reporting; co-location of curriculum, assess-
ment and reporting activities; and organisation and
governance.

The review presented 15 recommendations referring to
four aspects examined in the review. ACARA should fulfil
four curriculum priorities: complete development of the
Australian Curriculum in all learning areas; institute a six-
year cycle of review for the Australian Curriculum; collect
information about implementation and international evidence
to lead development of the next generation of the Australian
Curriculum; and scope options for further development of a
curriculum for years 11 and 12. ACARA should fulfil two
assessment priorities: shift the balance of resources to assess-
ment; and provide online assessments aligned to the
Australian Curriculum. ACARA should effect two data col-
lection and reporting priorities: investigate ways to strengthen
its role in national performance reporting by making the
National Report on Schooling in Australia more useful and
timely; and assess data needs to enable new performance in-
dicators to be incorporated into the Measurement Framework
for Schooling in Australia. The Education Council should
address five organisational and governance priorities: revise
the charter with reference to the next four-year work plan;
remove the letter of expectation; delegate authority to the
Australian Education Senior Officials Committee (AESOC)
to monitor progress of ACARA’s work against the charter;
review ACARA’s role, function and governance every six
years; and retain the current representational basis for board
appointments, but include a more collaborative assessment of
members’ skills. AESOC should address the organisational
and governance priority of maximising alignment between
ACARA’s planning documents. ACARA should address the
organisational and governance priority of simplifying its ad-
visory and consultative mechanisms.
Expediting turnaround of literacy and numeracy
reporting in the National Assessment Program
In June 2012, the Australian Government Department of
Education funded ACARA to conduct research into moving
the National Assessment Program from paper-based to online
assessments over two or three years from 2017. ACARA de-
veloped a research plan to examine issues associated with
tailored testing, automated essay scoring, device suitability,
readability and layout, accessibility options, and student en-
gagement and motivation in relation to transitioning the annu-
al literacy and numeracy tests administered in years 3, 5, 7 and
9 to online assessments.
Late in 2012, ACARA collected evidence from 125
schools across Australia on whether students perform dif-
ferently in paper-based and computer-based tests. The re-
sults showed that students are capable of engaging with
tests online. In 2013, ACARA investigated the feasibility
of using a tailored test design consisting of three stages
and two branching points for test pathways. More than
Curric Perspect
250 schools across Australia participated in the study.
The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority (2014) found that the tailored test design is
sound and more engaging for students, and the branching
mechanism works effectively for different ability groups,
but further work is required to set pathway boundaries. In
2014, ACARA trialled fully branching tailored tests in
reading and numeracy in more than 260 schools. The re-
sults of this study assisted in determining the targeting
and measurement aspects of the tailored test design.
In 2013, ACARA conducted a study to investigate whether
automated essay scoring is a viable solution for marking on-
line writing tasks. Four assessment technology companies
were contracted to score a sample of essays along with scores
provided by two human markers to train and validate their
automated essay scoring systems. The results of the study,
reported by the ACARA NASOP Research Team (2015),
showed that on overall scores and each writing criterion
assessed, the four automated essay scoring systems achieved
levels of agreement comparable with human markers.
In August 2015, ACARA conducted a device effects study
to ensure that the tests can be administered equitably across all
devices that meet minimal technical requirements. The study
consisted of a literature review on device effects in online
assessment and a field trial involving more than 3600
students from 73 schools. The students participated in an
initial session by responding to test questions followed by
structured interviews to evaluate the impact of using a tablet
without an external keyboard, a tablet with an external
keyboard, or a desktop or laptop computer. Davis et al.
(2016a) found that the tests can be administered online on a
range of devices with no overall effect, an external keyboard is
not necessary for successful interaction with items, and stu-
dent familiarity with the device of administration is an impor-
tant determinant of online readiness.
In 2015, ACARA conducted a readability and layout study
to investigate how students perceive and react to a range of
different online item configurations and displays. The study
consisted of a literature review on readability and layout of
onscreen assessments and a full trial using a sample of 103
students from 11 schools. The students participated in a series
of focus group sessions to evaluate different item display
options relative to onscreen layouts. The results of the study,
reported by Davis et al. (2016b) found that students’ prefer-
ences were consistent across all levels, except for passage
interface and line spacing.
In 2013, ACARA contracted ACER to identify the research
base for current adjustments to paper-and-pen tests for stu-
dents with disabilities and investigate on what basis they
may be duplicated or extended in an online delivery mode.
The study consisted of a literature review and interviews with
experts to determine whether the use of certain accessibility
options is supported through research and practice. The
Curric Perspect
Australian Council for Educational Research (2015) conclud-
ed that there is no evidence that any of the accessibility options
could violate the test construct by giving an advantage to
students with disabilities, but recommended further research
needs to be conducted into how adjustments work under test
protocols.
Between 2012 and 2015, ACARA conducted several
small-scale studies to investigate student engagement with
technologically enhanced items, challenging items, delivery
of spelling using audio files, and student motivation factors
and effects.
The online assessment platform, constructed by ESA, was
used by over 80,000 students from more than 1000 schools for
a trial in August 2016. The results of the trial showed that the
majority of schools could undertake online assessments suc-
cessfully and students engaged with the online platform pos-
itively. In April 2017, ACARA announced that transition to
online assessment would be delayed to 2018, because techno-
logical issues affecting the online assessment platform could
not be rectified in time for administration of the tests online in
May 2017.
Are these actions leading to positive outcomes?
The preceding sections show that the five actions form only
loosely connected elements of the principle for a robust na-
tional curriculum, but together they have the potential to affect
student performance. The following discussion focuses on
answering the specific research question for each action.
The ambitious agenda of the Australian Government to
restore STEM in schools encompasses four disparate elements
that are at different stages in the process of development,
diffusion and adoption. The Mathematics by Inquiry project
led the Australian Government to commission projects from
ESA and ACARA, which were completed in 2016. The
Coding Across the Curriculum program led the Australian
Government to commission a project from ESA to create a
Digital Technologies Hub, which was launched in 2017. At
the same time as the first P-TECH programs were offered at
two pilot sites in Victoria, the Australian Government extend-
ed the P-TECH model to another 12 schools from 2017. The
Curious Minds program, aimed at increasing girls’ interest in
STEM, has been offered twice in 2015 and 2016. It is ques-
tionable whether sufficient time has elapsed to generate out-
comes that can be measured in relation to these initiatives,
because international research studies have shown that it takes
several years for new initiatives implemented in schools to
have a measurable impact. Further research studies need to
be conducted in each of the four elements to determine wheth-
er they have shown sufficient traction to reverse the decline in
student enrolments and to improve student performance in
these subjects.
Debate about the educational program offered by CYAAA
has been shaped by youth violence in the Aurukun communi-
ty, which led to the closure of the school and the evacuation of
the school’s teachers on two occasions. A review conducted
by the Queensland Department of Education and Training
(2016) recommended that the Department of Education and
Training provides greater support for governance and opera-
tional arrangements of the school, develops a parent and com-
munity engagement strategy, revises arrangements for
supporting post-primary students, and broadens the instruc-
tional approach by implementing the core requirements of
the Australian Curriculum. In November 2016, Good to
Great Schools Australia withdrew from supporting
Aurukun’s school, because of restrictions placed on the use
of direct instruction. Soon afterwards, the Department of
Education and Training appointed a new principal to the
school to implement the recommendations of the review.
In the wake of this controversy, the T. J. Ryan Foundation
conducted a comprehensive analysis of issues associated with
the operation of CYAAA. McCollow (2016) concluded that
the model of effective instruction did not contribute to social
unrest, which has been present in the Aurukun community for
a decade. Analysis of test data from 2013 to 2015, however,
does not indicate that the model of effective instruction is
achieving significantly better outcomes than in similar
schools. On the other hand, the findings of the more extensive
study, reported by Holden (2016), indicated that most partic-
ipants believed direct instruction and explicit direct instruction
have improved learning outcomes for students.
The findings of the study conducted by the Asia Education
Foundation suggest that initiatives taken by the Australian
Government to increase student participation in foreign lan-
guages have no foreseeable way of achieving the goal of 40
percent of year 12 students within a decade. Evidence collect-
ed in this study shows the need to expand the number of
interested and engaged students in foreign languages from
preschool to year 12. The results of the study identified several
factors that inhibit the provision of foreign languages across
the primary and secondary levels. First, students show little
interest in learning a foreign language. Second, lack of access
to high-quality foreign language courses is common in region-
al, rural and remote areas. Third, state policies fail to mandate
the study of a foreign language beyond year 8 and restrict
senior secondary certification to five subjects, thereby limiting
student participation in foreign languages.
The evaluation of the Early Learning Languages Australia
trial showed that some children were producing words and
phrases in the foreign language and showed interest in the
culture associated with that language. However, the evaluation
identified concerns among educators about the lack of conti-
nuity of language learning for children once they left pre-
school. While the Early Learning Languages Australia trial
has established a sound basis for exposing children to a

foreign language in preschool, the Australian Government’s
initiatives fail to establish connected pathways for students to
learn foreign languages between preschool, primary school
and secondary school.
The initiatives undertaken in relation to rebalancing the
Australian Curriculum and refocusing ACARA’s work
achieved modest outcomes. Although the Review of the
Australian Curriculum was viewed by many educators as con-
troversial, it collected an extensive amount of feedback from
stakeholders through meetings and submissions. The main
focus of the revision of the Australian Curriculum on reducing
an overcrowded primary curriculum met with widespread ap-
proval from educators. Adjustments to meet the needs of stu-
dents with disabilities and parents also received widespread
support. Perhaps the most important outcome is that the re-
view has settled the debate over curriculum content until calls
arise for the next generation of the Australian Curriculum. The
legislative review did not support recommendations of the
Review of the Australian Curriculum concerning ACARA’s
governance, although it supported simplifying ACARA’s ad-
visory and reference group structure to more closely align
with the organisation’s future role.
Transitioning the annual literacy and numeracy tests to on-
line assessments is the most important priority for the National
Assessment Program, and justified ACARA’s engagement in
an extensive research plan. These investigations led to the
adoption of a tailored test design for online assessments, in
which students are directed to more or less challenging sets of
questions based on their responses to an initial set of ques-
tions. These studies place ACARA in a strong position to be
able to deal with challenges arising from problems with
reporting results from online assessments.
References
ACARA NASOP Research Team. (2015). An evaluation of automated
scoring of NAPLAN persuasive writing. Sydney, NSW: Australian
Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority.
Asia Education Foundation. (2014). Senior secondary languages educa-
tion research: Final report. Parkville, VIC: Asia Education
Foundation.
Australian Academy of Science. (2015). Desktop review of mathematics
school education pedagogical approaches and learning resources.
Canberra, ACT: Australian Academy of Science.
Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. (2015). Desktop review
of mathematics school education pedagogical approaches and
Curric Perspect
learning resources. Stepney, SA: Australian Association of
Mathematics Teachers.
Australian Council for Educational Research. (2013). Evaluation of the
Cape York Aboriginal Australian Academy initiative. Camberwell,
VIC: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Australian Council for Educational Research. (2015). NASOP research
study: NAPLAN online assessment research accessibility options for
student with disability. Camberwell, VIC: Australian Council for
Educational Research.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2014).
Tailored test design study 2013: Summary research report.
Sydney, NSW: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2015a).
Monitoring the effectiveness of the foundation-year 10 Australian
Curriculum. Sydney, NSW: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and
Reporting Authority.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2015b).
Draft changes to the Australian Curriculum F-10: Consultation
report. Sydney, NSW: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and
Reporting Authority.
Australian Government Department of Education. (2014). Review of the
Australian Curriculum: Supplementary material. Canberra, ACT:
Australian Government Department of Education.
Australian Government Department of Education and Training. (2015).
Departmental report: Review of the Australian Curriculum,
Assessment and Reporting Authority. Canberra, ACT: Australian
Government Department of Education and Training.
Davis, L. L., Janiszewska, I., Schwartz, R., & Holland, L. (2016a).
NAPLAN device effects study. Melbourne, VIC: Pearson.
Davis, L. L., Lai, E., & Brandt, R. (2016b). NAPLAN online readability
and layout study. Melbourne, VIC: Pearson.
Deloitte Access Economics. (2016). Evaluation of the Early Learning
Languages Australia trial: Final report. Canberra, ACT:
Australian Government Department of Education and Training.
Donnelly, K., & Wiltshire, K. (2014). Review of the Australian
Curriculum: Final report. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government
Department of Education.
Education Council. (2015). National STEM school education strategy: A
comprehensive plan for science, technology, engineering and math-
ematics education in Australia. Carlton South, VIC: Education
Council.
Falkner, K., & Vivian, R. (2015). Coding across the curriculum:
Resource review. Adelaide, SA: University of Adelaide.
Holden, A. (2016). Flexible literacy for remote primary schools.
Yeerongpilly, QLD: ImpaxSIA Consulting.
McCollow, J. (2016). Schooling in Aurukun (research report 49). South
Brisbane, QLD: T. J. Ryan Foundation.
Office of the Chief Scientist. (2013). Science, technology, engineering
and mathematics in the National Interest: A strategic approach.
Canberra, ACT: Australian Government.
Office of the Chief Scientist. (2014). Science, technology, engineering
and mathematics in the National Interest: Australia’s future.
Canberra, ACT: Australian Government.
Queensland Department of Education and Training. (2016). Review of
school education at Aurukun. Brisbane, QLD: Queensland
Department of Education and Training.