The National Assessment Program for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) is an annual and nationwide assessment for students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9. Testing can often be a stressful time for students, and has been associated with heightened levels of anxiety for those being assessed.
These levels of anxiety may be further exacerbated with mounting academic pressures, particularly if anxiety is a pre-existing condition particularly amongst older individuals. Experts say that more clarity around NAPLAN’s purpose can often result in heightened student wellbeing and lower levels of anxiety.
Learning expert Dr Florence Gabriel from the University of South Australia says, ‘Creating a more supportive testing environment will ensure that assessments serve their intended purpose without compromising student well-being.’
Dr Gabriel studies the cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, and affective factors that influence students’ learning and academic achievement, with a focus on mathematics education.
‘NAPLAN testing has been linked to increased stress and anxiety among students,’ she said.
‘Some perceive it as a high-stakes test, which can lead to test anxiety. This can manifest as physical symptoms (such as sleeplessness and nausea), emotional distress (such as fear or hopelessness), and cognitive difficulties (such as trouble concentrating or recalling information despite prior studying).’
She says test anxiety is particularly concerning for older students, who often face greater academic pressure and increased self-expectations, and those with pre-existing mathematics anxiety, with persistent effects.
‘These factors can undermine motivation and confidence, potentially affecting long-term learning engagement,’ said Dr Gabriel. ‘While not all students experience negative effects, the emotional strain on a significant portion raises serious questions about the impact of NAPLAN on student well-being and learning engagement.’
A better way?
Dr Gabriel suggests that to address the anxiety problem, ‘policymakers and educators should work to reduce unnecessary pressure, improve communication about NAPLAN’s purpose, and provide additional emotional and academic support.
‘Creating a more supportive testing environment will ensure that assessments serve their intended purpose without compromising student well-being,’ she said.
With the Minns government having recently announced plans to push NAPLAN targets higher, are the necessary supports in place? Are there enough resources for students and teachers?
Is the singular focus on NAPLAN results getting in the way of other educational goals?
Associate Professor Kay Carroll from the School of Education at Western Sydney University agrees that improving the critical literacy and numeracy of all students is important.
‘However, quantifying growth and demanding teachers raise the bar in the classroom denies teacher expertise and opportunities to develop embedded authentic and relevant literacy and numeracy tasks for their students.’
Dr Jennifer Dove, also from Western Sydney University said, ‘In a time of understaffed schools, increasing these expectations will only lead to more teaching to the test at the expense of critical literacy so crucial in response to gen AI, mis/disinformation, etc.’
Dr Dove says recent interpretations of the NAPLAN data show no decline in results, suggesting that the NSW Department of Education could focus more on other important aspects of education, like equity and valuing teacher professionalism.
This might assist with student anxiety too.
