As night follows day, whenever the Year 12 ATAR results are released critics argue it must be replaced. Instead of being a fair, reliable, and objective measure of a student’s academic ability, it’s condemned as inequitable, unfair, and stressful.
The think-tank Learning Creates Australia has released a recent report titled The Whole Learning which critiques Year 12 examinations, including the ATAR ranking.
After interviewing a small sample of students, the report’s authors argue the HSC and ATAR must be replaced as students find the experience stressful while the results pressure them to enrol in subjects they might not enjoy.
One of the co-authors states, ‘The people we spoke to said the ATAR creates a really high-pressure environment that inhibits their ability to enjoy learning, and it fails to recognise the diverse skills and capabilities they have.’
After admitting some pressure is good, the co-author goes on to argue ‘the amount of pressure around a rank – when the system doesn’t allow kids to explore and discover themselves – just isn’t good for wellbeing’.
While not the report’s intention, the arguments put forward criticising the HSC and ATAR sum up what is wrong with Australia’s education system, why standards have failed to improve, and why so many students leave school lacking resilience and the ability to overcome stress.
Reducing education to what a student finds most enjoyable and relevant and allowing them to ‘explore and discover themselves’, while immediately attractive, leads to a superficial and limited education.
Ignoring the reality that learning can be difficult and challenging. Competition is a fact of life where, after Year 12, one’s performance will be compared against others or the standards required by a profession.
Contrary to the New Age progressive view that has infected schools for the last 30 to 40 years, the reality is that learning requires hard work, motivation, patience, and a willingness to put aside personal likes and dislikes.
To be properly educated also means students have to become familiar with the essential knowledge, understanding, and skills associated with key subjects. At Years 11 and 12, this means being introduced to challenging material that is often not immediately relevant.
As to why education has been reduced to self-actualisation and therapy, we may look no further than those who have controlled Australia’s education systems over the last 40 years. Since the 1990s, the Australian Education Union has argued against what it describes as an academic, competitive curriculum.
According to the left-leaning teacher union, academic studies and competition reinforce capitalism where working class and non-English speaking students suffer. Year 12 examinations are perceived by them to be elitist and unjust, as wealthy non-government school students are always advantaged.
The Australian Association for the Teachers of English has, for many years, also argued against summative assessment where students are numerically graded or ranked in terms of performance. The AATE argues assessment should be ‘in descriptive prose rather than in numerical scores’.
A third professional body against competitive examinations is the Australian Curriculum Studies Association. In its 1996 policy statement ACSA argues assessment must be ‘based on cooperation and success rather than competition and failure’.
Given Australia’s adoption of a care-share-grow and non-judgemental approach to assessment (where grading and ranking students is stressful, inequitable, and unjust), it shouldn’t surprise anyone that despite the additional billions invested standards have either flat-lined or gone backwards.
One of the reasons students in Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan, and China consistently outperform Australian students in international tests like TIMSS, PISA, and PIRLS is because students are tested regularly and pressured to achieve the best results.
Unlike in Australia, where the first time students face a formal examination is Year 12, students in Asian education systems are tested throughout primary and secondary school. Teachers also set high expectations, competition is common, and there are rewards for success.
Instead of making excuses, as the AEU does, by arguing that educational success and failure is dependent on gender, ethnicity, and class – stronger performing education systems expect all students to do well.
These education systems, when compared to Australia, also have an academically rigorous curriculum, effective classroom practice, and involve motivated teachers who are experts in their subject. The school climate is also one where there are no excuses for failure or under performance.
Instead of criticising Year 12 examinations and arguing that it is wrong to pressure students to achieve a strong ATAR, maybe it’s better to treat education like sport. A situation where stress can be positive and competition and winning are celebrated.
Dr Kevin Donnelly taught for 18 years and experience includes being a Year 12 examiner and a member of the Victorian Board of Studies.
