Reporting on Student and School Achievement

This research project provides further understanding of how schools and education systems can best meet the expectations of parents and the wider community for information about student and school achievement.

In order to reach this understanding, the project reviewed the relevant national and international literature; surveyed the policies and practices of Australian education systems; and met with Australian parents to ascertain their experiences, views and expectations. Based on the findings of the research, statements of best practice were formulated.

• 1. A Review of the Literature    
• 2. Policies and Practices of Australian Education Systems    
• The Views of Australian Parents    
• 3. Parent Views on Reporting about the Progress of their Children    
• 4. Parents Views on Information Provided about School Programs    
• 5. Parent Needs and Expectations for Information on School Achievement    
• 6. Best Practice in Reporting on Student and School Achievement    

1. A Review of the Literature

The information in this section was drawn from a study of previous research in Australia and overseas.

Information about School Programs

International research provides evidence for the view that parental encouragement and support for learning activities at home, and parental involvement in schools and classrooms, have a positive impact on children's learning.

To be active partners with schools, parents must have relevant information to enable them to support the learning of their children. The most common sources of information for parents are newsletters, parent evenings, conversations with teachers, and direct inquiries to schools.

Overseas and Australian studies have found that schools are more effective at providing information about 'social events' and 'activities' within the school and less effective in informing parents about teaching and learning processes and the curriculum.

Information on Children's Progress

Reports on student progress provide parents with information they require in order to support the education of their children. Written reports and parent-teacher meetings are the most common means through which parents receive this information.

Parents are very clear and consistent about what they want in student reports. They want to be:

• kept well informed about their children's progress;
• given information about achievement and progress in both academic and non-academic areas of learning;
• informed about both strengths and weaknesses of their children; and
• provided with pertinent and constructive advice about how they can support their children's learning.

Parents reported that both descriptive reports and those based on marks or grades, such as 'A', 'B', or 'C', etc., are common. They find strengths and weaknesses in both approaches. Regardless of the form that assessment takes, parents indicated a need for objective benchmarks or standards against which they can make judgements about the progress of their children.

There is emerging evidence that parents prefer their children to be involved in the assessment and reporting process through self-assessment and participation in parent-teacher meetings. Parents also want parent-teacher meetings to be more interactive and two-way, enabling them to share knowledge about their children with their teachers.

Information on School Achievement

The school achievement information reported most commonly to parents relates to student academic learning outcomes. In most countries such reporting focuses on the achievement of students in tests and examinations. There is considerably less focus on reporting on the affective and social development of students.

School reviews and inspections provide another means of reporting about schools. These are based on the professional assessment of experienced educators and take a holistic view of the school. Reviews commonly examine and report on student academic achievement, development in non-academic areas, the quality of learning, school efficiency, and behaviour and discipline. In some countries school review reports are public documents.

The research literature identifies a number of challenges in reporting about schools, including:

• capturing the complexity of schools and the multi-dimensional nature of student learning;
• ensuring the information in reports is objective and credible;
• ensuring reports are fair and take into account relevant differences between schools;
• presenting information on school achievement so that it is understandable to parents who may not have specialist educational knowledge;
• providing the information parents need to enable an informed choice of school; and
• ensuring that reports provide relevant information for parents to monitor quality and provide pressure for school improvement.

2. Policies and Practices of Australian Education Systems

The information in this section was compiled from information provided by government and non-government education systems across Australia.

Curriculum Standards

There is a pattern for state/ territory school systems to have publicly declared curriculum standards from the first to the eleventh year of schooling. The standards are in most cases derived from the nationally developed statements and profiles. In this report such approaches are referred to generically as criterion-based outcomes approaches.

There is variation across systems in the extent to which criterion-based outcomes approaches have been implemented. Where information on curriculum and standards is available to parents, parents must either explicitly request the information or rely on schools to provide it through information sessions.

Standardised testing and reporting programs also provide information about standards. Results of the tests are used at school and system level to assess changes in the level of student attainment over time.

Reporting on Individual Student Outcomes

Australian education systems report that the information provided formally to individual parents about the learning outcomes and progress of their children typically takes three forms: a written report, parent-teacher meetings, and, for some parents, reports on their children's performance in standardised tests.

The main focus of systemic reporting policies is on academic outcomes. The academic achievement of students is most likely to be reported in terms of either their attainment of specified learning outcomes or as letter grades, such as 'A', 'B', 'C', etc. Reports of special needs students are usually in terms of progress in achieving the goals of the individual plan for the child.

Systems generally acknowledge that non-academic outcomes, such as social skills and behaviour, may be the subject of comment in the written report, but gave no information to indicate that schools are provided with detailed advice about reporting on such outcomes.

Most systems encourage schools to provide opportunities for teachers to discuss written reports with parents in a face-to-face meeting. These meetings are held at least once a year but are usually conducted more often. In most schools, both teachers and parents can discuss the progress of individual students at any time, at the instigation of either party.

Reporting to parents on the outcomes of standardised tests is common across most State/ Territory systems, but less common for schools in the non-government sector. Such tests are mainly in literacy and numeracy in Years 3 and 5. The occurrence of similar tests at secondary school level or in other curriculum areas is less common, but state/ territory school systems are planning further development in this area.

Information on individual student examination results at the end of Year 12 is reported directly to students. Students are generally provided with results in the individual subjects completed. Results are typically based on a combination of school-based and external assessment, with a moderation process to ensure compatibility across schools.

Reporting on School Achievement

Most school systems that report on the achievement of individual schools typically do so through an annual report and, in some systems, an external review process. Some systems leave reporting entirely to the discretion of schools and others require schools to report against prescribed standards and benchmarks.

There is variation in the extent to which school annual reports are verified and audited. A small number of State/ Territory systems use independent auditors to verify the validity and accuracy of the information published by schools. No system in the non-government sector indicated that annual school reports are verified by independent audit procedures. There is variation in the level of access parents have to reports on school achievement.

There is significant variation among systems in how the learning outcomes of students at each school are reported to parents. In some cases the method of reporting is left to the discretion of individual schools and, in others, systems regulate how schools are to report this information. Few systems systematically report school-level profiles of achievement against externally established benchmarks or state/ territory achievement profiles.

Schools in some instances selectively release information about their achievements either as part of their marketing strategy to promote the school or in a general form as part of annual reporting processes. A small number of States/Territories publish comparative information on the achievements of schools in Year 12 examinations.

No system in Australia directly disseminates comprehensive reports on the profile of learning outcomes in schools to individual parents. Some systems have specific policies or regulations that prohibit the release of comparative information on the effectiveness and performance of schools in terms of student achievement.

Reporting to Parents on School Programs

Most schools determine their own approach to reporting the content and format of information provided to parents about the programs they offer. The most common publications are prospectuses, school handbooks, annual reports, newsletters, and course information. Schools also provide information through meetings such as open days and information nights.

The purpose of informing parents is usually to market the school, to inform parents of successes, and to enable parents to know what is happening and what is expected of them and the students.

Participation by Parents in the Development of Reporting Policies

All education systems across Australia report that it is the practice at system and school level for parents to be consulted over the development, implementation and improvement of school level reporting policies. Not all systems have policies formally requiring, requesting or encouraging this participation.

School Councils or Boards and other parent organisations are either consulted over school policies for reporting to parents or have responsibility for determining school policy in this area. When schools are reviewing their assessment and reporting policies they often also seek the views of the general parent body.

The Views of Australian Parents

The three sections that follow summarise the data collected from 364 interviews with 386 Australian parents and 16 group meetings involving a further 136 parents.

3. Parent Views on Reporting about the Progress of their Children

Parents place a higher priority on receiving information about their children's progress than any other type of information they receive from schools. The majority of parents express a degree of satisfaction with the information that they currently receive, although they also believe that the process could be made more effective.

Sources of Information

As in most overseas systems, Australian parents receive information on their children's progress through written reports (one to four times annually) from teachers, and through parent-teacher meetings. They also learn about their children's achievements through reports from external tests and examinations, work samples, tests that the students bring home from school and through homework and informal discussions with their children and with teachers.

The predominant focus of written reports to parents is academic achievement. Assessments are most often based on either a code or rating for achievement in each subject area. Frequently the report also includes a teacher comment on progress. Some schools translate reports into other languages for parents who do not speak English.

Parents view the parent-teacher meeting as a complement to the written report. It enables them to clarify information in the written report and discuss how their children's learning might be improved and supported at home.

Issues in Reporting on Student Progress

Parents identified a number of concerns and improvements required in the reporting process:

• Parents consider there is a tendency, more common in primary schools, to avoid facing or telling hard truths. Parents understand how difficult it may be for teachers to convey 'bad' news, but nevertheless they indicate that they want a 'fair and honest' assessment, in plain language, of the progress of their children.
• There is a lack of objective standards that parents can use to determine their children's attainment and rate of progress. Many parents specifically asked for information that would enable them to compare their children's progress with other students or with agreed state/ territory-wide or national standards.
• Parents indicated they would like more interpretative and constructive reporting. Parents want something more substantial from reports than simple statements of achievement levels. They also want advice on what the report means in terms of the future learning goals for their child, and how parents can support their children's learning.
• Most systems that report test results to parents do not require schools to incorporate these results in their reports to parents. Parents expressed a degree of confusion when they receive test reports in one style and metric and school reports in another unrelated style using a different metric.
• Parents want more comprehensible reports when they are based on outcomes reporting. Some education systems have adopted criterion-based outcomes reporting approaches, but many parents are finding it difficult to understand the reports because of changes in assessment practices.
• Parents require more appropriate timing of reports. They indicated a clear preference for reports earlier each year when they are in a better position to support their children with any learning improvement. Parents appreciated reports during Term 1, where these were provided, and find that an end-of-year report is too late for any constructive use.
• There is a mistrust of computer-generated reports in the parent community. Parents indicate that they find computer reports to be impersonal and limited. Parents want reports that are tailored to their individual children.
• Parent-teacher meetings need to be more useful to parents. Parents are dissatisfied with meetings that are poorly organised and lack focus and purpose. They consider meetings of 5-10 minutes to be too limited to be useful and believe they are organised mainly for ceremonial purposes. The timing of most meetings does not encourage an interactive discussion.
• The detection and prompt reporting of learning and behavioural problems is of major concern to parents. Many parents are concerned that they had not been advised as early as they could have been of their children's learning problems.
• Parents would like an enhanced role for their children in the reporting process. Parents believe that their children are an integral part of the reporting process and seek to involve them in parent-teacher meetings as well as in other aspects of assessment and reporting.

4. Parents Views on Information Provided about School Programs

Parent interest and satisfaction in receiving information about whole school, grade-level or specific classroom programs are related directly to how relevant they are to their children's education.

Approximately two thirds of parents are satisfied with the quality and amount of information they receive. The remainder are either dissatisfied or only partially satisfied. Parents of primary students are much more likely to be satisfied than are those of secondary students.

The most common ways in which parents receive information about school programs include information sessions; school newsletters; and homework, diaries and communication sheets.

• Information days and evenings are provided more regularly to parents of primary school students and students in the first year of secondary schooling. Parents particularly value small and focussed group meetings that are practical in orientation.
• School newsletters are almost universally appreciated. They are the usual and most common means by which parents find out what is happening at their schools. The frequency of newsletters varies to a great extent and parents expressed satisfaction with this means of communication when it was more frequent.
• Homework, student diaries and communication sheets are valued because they enable an ongoing and regular interaction between children's schoolwork and work at home.

Other less common sources of information are school publications such as calendars, prospectuses and annual reports; school websites; informal discussions with teachers and other parents; and meetings of parent organisations. Parents who attend parent organisation meetings find them to be excellent sources of information. In some schools, meetings enable parents to contribute to school decision making.

Schools provide parents with information about school policies and activities; school curriculum information; and information about teaching and learning practices.

Parents identified the following issues about the information provided on school programs.

• Accessibility of information - few schools have a formal communication policy so that parents know exactly what they can expect to receive or how to get an answer to their question. Information may be provided in a piecemeal fashion or may not be readily available to parents on request. Accessibility is of particular concern to secondary school parents and parents who are less well educated.
• Parents' roles in the education of their children - parents in all schools want the opportunity to be consulted and to share in decision making about how they are informed and what they are informed about. They indicate that they may not always be able to contribute, but they want recognition of the fact that they have a role in school decision making and that they, not the school, are ultimately responsible for managing the education of their children.
• Need for more information on teaching and learning - parents want information that will assist their children at home, particularly if they are having difficulties with their learning. Information sessions are the main source of this information. Some sessions meet parent needs; others are said to be boring, repetitive and not specific enough to provide the information that parents find useful.
• The adequacy of information about subject choice - a prominent issue for secondary school parents. Parents often have difficulty in accessing sufficient information to enable them to adequately understand the implications of particular subject choices so as to provide appropriate guidance to their children.

5. Parent Needs and Expectations for Information on School Achievement

Parents make judgements about schools using their own criteria and utilising information from a range of both formal and informal sources. At present, most parents indicate that they rely almost entirely on informal sources as very little objective and reliable information is available in the public domain for either government or non-government schools.

Parent judgements about the schools that their children currently attend are based chiefly on their own interactions with schools and comments from their children and other parents. The majority of parents indicate that they are able to access the information they need on school achievement, but a large minority would like more, particularly more objective, information about the achievements of schools.

Parents use information about school achievement to:

• choose schools for their children;
• monitor the effectiveness of schools; and
• put pressure on schools to improve.

The primary purpose that parents cite for wanting to know about school achievement is to assist them to select schools for their children. Parents actively choose from among schools, particularly at entry to primary schooling and at the point of transition from primary to secondary school.

Parents also use information on school achievement to monitor how well schools are meeting the needs of children and to seek reassurance that schools are doing a 'good job'. Parents also want more information on how effective schools are in achieving their goals for students and want to know how well schools are meeting expected standards. Parents express concern that the information they currently receive is not objective, that is it is made available for self-promotion purposes, or that it is inadequate in other ways.

Parents are less likely to use school achievement information as a means for seeking to improve schools overall, though some parents are likely to seek improvement in relation to a specific issue. The issue about which parents are most likely to seek improvement is that of teacher quality.

Sources of Information

Parents rarely rely on one source alone. They collect information from various sources and assemble the pieces like a jigsaw until they have built up a picture of the school, or completed it to their satisfaction.

Personal contact through their own experiences, as well as information from other parents and from their own children have greater value for parents when judging a school than does written information provided by the school. Parents view the written information provided by schools as a form of marketing or as being provided for public relations purposes and tend to view it with some caution. Parents value information based on personal experience because they consider it reliable. Although they recognise that their experiences may be very subjective, parents indicate that they rarely misjudge a school.

Parents consider school success rates in standardised tests, external examinations and the profile of tertiary entrance scores, or equivalent, when assessing schools. They value this sort of information but rarely make judgements about schools on the basis of this information alone because:

• they have a much more complex idea of what a 'good' school is and of the school that is most appropriate for their child; and
• they are aware that schools all too frequently publicise only the results of high achievers and medal winners, which do not necessarily indicate how effective the school would be for their children.

Parents consider that media reports of schools are unreliable and can be misleading, although they read and utilise media reports as potentially interesting 'pieces' of information to add to the picture they build up about schools.

Parents rarely access official reports such as annual reports and school review reports published for schools, mainly because they do not know they exist or do not know how they could access them. Most official reports are written in a language that is inaccessible to parents.

From the information that they currently receive or glean, parents construct a number of indicators to inform them about how well the school their children attend is achieving. These include:

• whether their children are happy, motivated and appear to be achieving;
• the academic achievements of students at the school;
• the demand for the school as indicated by steady or increasing school enrolment, leading them to believe that the school must be doing something right;
• the school's achievements in non-academic areas such as extra-curricula music, drama and sport as well as performance in competitions; and
• the destination of students when they finish schooling and the later success of students following their school years.

The information that parents want to be able to access in choosing a school is varied. A range of school achievement information is required because parents have varied requirements and are rarely interested in a single aspect of performance. Parents believe that schools have a role in developing the whole child - which includes the academic, affective, social and physical development of children.

Parents want school achievement information to be provided in a format and in sufficient detail for them to assess how well children like their own are achieving at each school. In particular they want the information to tell them how children of average potential or with interests and abilities in a particular area are achieving in each school.

In essence, they want a multi-faceted consumer guide to the schools that are of interest to them. 'League tables' based on a single indicator are of little interest to them as they are far too narrow in terms of the information they provide. Hence, they are also viewed as presenting a partial and unfair picture of the comparative performance of schools.

Parents require access to information on a range of school policies as well as information about programs that are of particular relevance to their child or a focus or strength in each school they are considering.

In making a choice between schools, parents seek to obtain the best fit between the child and a school. Parents try to match their child's personality, interests and career aspirations with the programs and culture of a school. The most suitable school for a particular child can be one that caters for a narrow range of students or one that is effective in catering for a broad range of students, depending on the needs of the child.

Parents also want information about schools such as the nature of the climate and ethos of schools and the quality of teaching and learning.

6. Best Practice in Reporting on Student and School Achievement

This section provides statements of best practice in reporting to parents about the achievements and progress of their children and in providing other information about schools to parents that emanate from the findings of this research.

The statements of best practice have been derived from what parents indicate they require and on examples cited by them of current school practices that they value.

The practices cited embody the fruits of developments that have led to current best practice. These practices incorporate the insights and initiatives of all groups with responsibilities to ensure that educational provision is of the highest quality - teachers, administrators, parents, researchers, and other professionals in a number of disciplines.

• Chapter 1: A Review of the Literature    
  • Introduction    
  • Reporting about School Programs    
  • Reporting on Student Progress    
  • Reporting on School Achievement    
  • Conclusions and Discussion    
• Chapter 2: Policies and Practices of Australian Education Systems    
  • Introduction    
  • Contextual Background    
  • Current Policies and Practices    
  • Conclusions and Discussion    

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to review the educational research findings on the needs and expectations of parents and the wider community for information on school programs, student progress and school performance.

The review was undertaken in a context of increased opportunities for parents to make a choice as to which school their child will attend, increased devolution of authority to schools - placing pressure on schools to respond to community needs and expectations, and requirements for schools to be more transparently accountable, to authorities and to the community, for the quality of their educational services.

This chapter considers the literature on:

• parent involvement in education, its forms and subsequent impact on student learning;
• information provided to parents about school programs in general, as well as the level of parent satisfaction with the depth and type of information received;
• parent needs and expectations for information on their children's progress, from formal and informal sources; and
• reporting to parents and the community at large about school performance and the issues that such reporting raises for policy and practice.

Reporting about School Programs

Rationale for Better Informed Parents

The rationale for encouraging parents to be active partners in the education of their children is built on research findings that show parental encouragement and support for learning activities at home, and parental involvement in schools and classrooms, have a positive impact on children's learning (Coleman et al., 1966; McDill & Rigsby, 1973; Leichter, 1974; Lightfoot, 1978; Epstein & McPartland, 1979; Marjoribanks, 1979; Epstein, 1983, 1987; Mortimore et al., 1988; Bastiani, 1993; Munn, 1993; Yap & Enoki, 1994; Griffith, 1996). High levels of parental involvement have also been shown to be strongly related to increased student motivation (Mortimore et al., 1988; Munn, 1993).

Parent involvement is a term used to describe the various processes of parental and community input to schooling. Fullan (1991) distinguished between parent involvement in instructional and non-instructional contexts. Instructional involvement relates to parent activities that provide assistance in the classroom or with learning activities at home, such as homework. Non-instructional involvement refers to participation in decision making, governance and community-school relations. Instructional involvement by parents has direct benefits on the learning outcomes for their children (McGaw, 1992).

Epstein (1987) has disaggregated the processes involved in effective parent involvement into the following components:

• parenting practices and home conditions that support the learning of children in school;
• assistance with learning activities at home;
• monitoring student progress and student programs;
• involvement at the school - including assisting with and attending school activities; and
• contributing to decision making and advocacy through organisations such as parent associations, and school councils.

An Australian study of school effectiveness sought views about the roles that parents have in effective schools (McGaw, 1992). Parents indicated the following roles, in order of importance:

• taking an active interest in the learning of their children;
• being actively involved in schools;
• communicating with schools; and
• participating in school decision making (McGaw, 1992).

Research on the participation of parents in governance and decision making provides no evidence of a direct relationship between the degree of parent involvement and student learning outcomes. It does, however, provide evidence of a number of indirect benefits, such as increasing the resources for the school as well as individual benefits for the parents who participate through the enhancement of their planning and management skills (McGaw, 1992).

A particular aspect of parent involvement that is explored in a number of recent studies is the concept of parents as complementary educators or partners, with teachers, in the learning process. Parents as partners, with a shared sense of purpose with teachers, provide the basis for improving student learning (Tomlinson, 1991; Wolfendale, 1993; Bastiani & Doyle, 1994; Macbeth, 1995; Crump, 1997; Martin et al., 1997).

Drawing on the work of Pugh (1989) and Wolfendale (1989), Bastiani (1993) lists the central characteristics of effective parent-teacher partnerships in education as follows:

• sharing of power, responsibility and ownership, though with each party having different roles;
• a degree of mutuality, that begins with the process of listening to each other and that incorporates responsive dialogue and 'give and take' on both sides;
• shared aims and goals based on a common understanding of the educational needs of children; and
• commitment to joint action, in which parents, students and teachers work together.

Broadfoot (1990) argues that, to be respected as partners, parents must have relevant information to enable them to support the learning of their children. She indicates that there "is a gap between what parents say they want to know and what they get" (Broadfoot, 1990: 98).

Sources of Information

A study by Martin, Ranson & Tall (1997) analysed parental responses in relation to

the quality of information schools provide and the extent to which schools and parents have a shared understanding of the information. The study examined the views of over 30,000 parents in Scotland. It found that the most common sources of information were newsletters, parent evenings, conversations with teachers, and direct inquiries by parents. Hughes et al., (1994) also concluded that newsletters, parent evenings and casual conversations were the major means by which schools communicated with parents - findings supported by McGaw (1992).

Parent Satisfaction with the Information Received

The Scottish study (Martin et al., 1997) found that the information provided to parents by schools was focused on 'social events' and 'activities within the school'. There was less focus on information about the core educational processes of teaching and learning, the curriculum offered, and homework strategies (Martin et al., 1997). As a result parents perceived schools to be unwilling to share information about the fundamental processes of teaching, learning and the curriculum (Martin et al., 1997), a finding supported by other research in the UK (Broadfoot, 1990; Hughes et al., 1994) and Australia (Crump, 1997).

Hughes and his colleagues explored parental perceptions about what was happening in schools within the context of reforms taking place in England and Wales in the period 1988-1994. The research found that:

• most parents knew very little about what was happening in their child's school; ° parents wanted to know considerably more about curriculum and assessment, what their child was learning in the core subjects of English, Mathematics and Science, and what would happen at key stages; and
• much of the information communicated by schools was found to be of limited value to parents (Hughes et al., 1994).

Hughes concluded that parents want information about core educational processes - what their children are doing and how they are getting on - and that this is not clearly communicated to parents in a routine and effective way. The view that parents need and expect information that assists them to understand what schools are doing is reinforced by research from a number of sources in Australia (McGaw, 1992), Canada (Anderson & Bachor, 1993), the UK (Glatter et al., 1997) and the US (Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1992; Diffily, 1994).

A research study conducted to investigate school-home connections in a group of New South Wales government primary schools revealed also that parents did not receive the information that they expected from schools (Crump, 1997). The research investigated the home-school relationship overall, rather than specific information needs of parents. Both teachers and parents indicated that home-school relationships were a high priority, but despite the best practices of some staff, "both active and silent parents feel excluded from the information flow" (Crump, 1997: 42). The findings from this research support the conclusion of Martin et al. (1997) that many schools are reticent in sharing information about the most significant aspects of learning regarded as fundamental by parents.

Crump (1997) concluded that the reason parents are not more equal partners in the information flow is that school-to-home communication does not cover the information desired by parents. He found that the deep-rooted and often non-negotiable authority and power exercised by schools was at the heart of the problem. Schools' predominant perspective of the role of parents is that they are expected to adhere to and reinforce school values, a point made also by Munn (1993) and Woodhead (1995). Munn went further in asserting that parents who challenge school values and demand more from schools are often typecast by schools as 'problems'.

Analysis of the findings from Quality Assurance reviews in New South Wales schools (NSW Department of School Education, 1995) found that parents have little knowledge of the curriculum in most Key Learning Areas at either primary or secondary levels and would prefer to be better informed. Parents reported that the most effective way of gaining further information about school programs was by involving themselves as classroom helpers.

The NSW report also noted that parents want information about school policies on matters such as welfare, finance, management and administrative matters. The report concluded that:

[a] change in culture is needed in many schools to accommodate the needs of parents. This cultural change includes a shift in the relationships between schools, teachers and parents - wherein responsiveness to the parent community becomes more prominent. Schools need to continue to develop strategies for meeting the needs of parents for information in ways that they have not done previously. (NSW Department of School Education, 1995: 4)

A source of parent dissatisfaction identified by Martin and his colleagues in their Scottish study arose from the lack of willingness of schools to communicate information on subjects that might be open to interpretation of failure on the part of the school - in particular, matters relating to discipline, lateness, and absence. Parents expressed satisfaction with the information they received about aspects of schools such as cleanliness and safety, communications about parent evenings, social events and activities in schools, and in the promptness of schools' responses to their inquiries. Although satisfied with the promptness of responses to their inquiries, parents indicated that schools often did not provide the information or explanations they had sought (Martin et al., 1997).

Differences between Primary and Secondary Schools

Only one study (Martin et al., 1997) has analysed differences in satisfaction with the information received by parents from primary and secondary schools. It found that primary schools were perceived by parents to be better at providing information on teaching strategies and activities within the school, as well as general information about school activities. Parents with children in primary schools felt involved in developing a shared understanding with teachers about homework. Secondary school parents perceived themselves to be less knowledgeable than primary school parents about how they could help their children with learning at home. The study found, however, that secondary schools were more effective than primary schools at communicating information about the curriculum and matters of discipline to parents.

Responding to Language and Cultural Differences

Considerable numbers of parents do not speak English and require reporting and communication processes to be specifically adapted to their needs (McGaw, 1992). Inadequate understanding of the cultures represented in school communities and other social and cultural differences is a major impediment to successful school-home communication in some cases (Delpit, 1991; Tomlinson, 1993; Manning, 1995; Holden et al., 1996; Cummins, 1996, Cahill, 1996).

Reporting on Student Progress

Parents require reports on their children's progress to provide fundamental information that supports parents in making decisions about the education of their children (McGaw, 1992; Hughes et al., 1994; Martin et al., 1997). In particular, they want information that will assist them in supporting their child's learning at home (Broadfoot, 1990; Anderson & Bachor, 1993; Hughes et al., 1994; NSW Department of School Education, 1995; Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996) and will reassure them of the educational progress of their child (NSW Department of School Education, 1995; Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996).

Variety in the Provision of Information on Student Progress

Written reports and parent-teacher meetings are the most common means through which parents receive information on their children's progress. Broadfoot's (1990) research in New Zealand found that parents strongly support this aspect of reporting. Informal meetings and telephone calls from teachers, student diaries, examination results, samples of work annotated with teacher comments and corrections, and the examination of their child's workbooks and homework are other ways that Australian parents gain information about progress at school (McGaw, 1992; NSW Department of School Education, 1995; Deschamp, 1996). A study of parents in Western Australian government schools found that parents "value a variety of ways of reporting" (Deschamp, 1996: 10).

What Parents Want in Terms of Frequency, Timeliness and Format of Reporting

Parents want regular and more frequent written reports than they currently receive (Broadfoot, 1990; NSW Department of School Education, 1995). They also want flexibility in arrangements for making formal and informal contact with teachers (Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996). Parents express a clear need to be advised immediately if their child's learning or behaviour becomes a concern. They do not want to wait to be advised through the next formal report, if they can take action at an earlier time (McGaw, 1992; NSW Department of School Education, 1995; Deschamp, 1996).

The format, structure and clarity of written reports is a source of dissatisfaction for some parents, especially when there is a lack of consistency within a school or across different years as to how and when information is presented or reported. Parents indicate that they need help to interpret the information contained in reports (NSW Department of School Education, 1995). Broadfoot (1990) found that many reports are couched in language that has a high 'fog rating'.

What Parents Want to Know from Reports

Parents are very clear and consistent about what they want in terms of the substance of reports on their children's progress. They want to be:

• kept well informed about their child's progress (Martin et al., 1997);
• given information about a range of different aspects of achievement covering all curriculum areas as well as information on social development and behaviour (Broadfoot, 1990; Anderson & Bachor, 1993; NSW Department of School Education, 1995; Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996; Deschamp, 1996);
• informed about strengths and weaknesses (providing details of positive achievement only is not what either students or parents want, because it is not viewed by them as constructive) (Broadfoot, 1990; Anderson & Bachor, 1993; Deschamp, 1996); and
• provided with diagnostic assessments and constructive advice about how they can provide support for their children's learning (rarely available in current reports) (Broadfoot, 1990; Deschamp, 1996).

Parent Views on Reporting Children's Progress

Methods of assessing and reporting on student achievement are contentious matters among parents. Two distinct forms of reporting are common, narrative reporting, and reporting using grades and marks.

Parents indicate the following areas of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with narrative reporting of student progress:

• They are satisfied with the detail of narrative reports. They believe they receive more information about their child from narrative reports than from other types of reporting (Diffily, 1994; Deschamp, 1996).
• They are dissatisfied with narrative reporting when it is uninformative, vague, and ambiguous (Anderson & Bachor, 1993).
• They view narrative reporting as informative when it not only describes what the student has achieved, but includes evaluative comments about the level of achievement and expected levels of achievement (Anderson & Bachor, 1993).

Other aspects of reporting provide marks or grades to indicate the level of a student's achievement. Parents indicate that this form of reporting:

• is more reliable than narrative forms of reporting because it is less dependent on individual teacher skill (Anderson and Bachor, 1993);
• enables parents to understand the level of achievement of their child in a comparative sense (Anderson and Bachor, 1993);
• is not useful where parents are unsure what the grades refer to or do not mean the same thing in different contexts (Hughes et al., 1994);
• can be a motivating factor for students, especially older students (Anderson and Bachor, 1993); and
• is not appropriate for students who are constantly failing and may be less useful in the early primary years (Anderson and Bachor, 1993; Hughes et al., 1994).

In addition to formal assessments of achievements, parents want and value anecdotal comments that provide additional information. Anecdotal comments are used by parents to assess how well the teacher "really knows" the student (Anderson and Bachor, 1993).

Parental Need for Standards

The limitations of grades by themselves to provide parents with information about student progress was detailed in a study by the US Office of Educational Research and Improvement (1992). The research compared parents' satisfaction with the quality of their child's schooling with the child's subsequent mathematics achievement. It found that most parents believed that their child's school was effective in preparing them for high school and college because the children had been receiving high grades - 'A's and 'B's - even if they subsequently had low levels of achievement in mathematics in college entrance exams. The report found that the letter grades did not accurately inform parents about their child's achievement level because most students receive high grades. It concluded that parents require external standards against which to assess the performance of their child and their child's school. Broadfoot (1990) too found that reports need to make greater reference to external standards. The need for standards against which teachers and parents can assess student learning is supported by educational administrators.

...we must establish very specific and clear standards defining what we expect every child to know, to understand and be able to do at each level of schooling... (Boston, 1997: 3)

Research undertaken in NSW found that parents would like to access more information on their child's progress relative to the progress of students in other schools and assessments of their child's achievements comparative to their previous achievements (NSW Department of School Education, 1995). They also wanted more information about their child's ranking or level (Anderson and Bachor, 1993; Diffily, 1994).

Parents express a desire for objective benchmarks or standards against which they can make judgements about their child's progress. They believe independent standards would provide relevant information in forming a judgement about how well their child is achieving (Anderson and Bachor, 1993). Whilst some parents believe that grades, such as 'A', 'B', 'C', etc., can meet this need, others prefer alternative reporting strategies such as those based on a common set of clearly defined descriptors of levels of achievement (Anderson and Bachor, 1993).

In the Australian context, the 'statements of outcomes' now in common use were developed to meet multiple objectives, one of which was to provide parents with a common framework for interpreting reporting about student learning outcomes. A report of Australian parent organisations (Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996) identified both potential advantages and pitfalls in the use of such outcome statements. They have a potential to recognise student achievement and locate that on a learning continuum. However, they could also have the impact of breaking down the assessment of achievement into "a myriad of disconnected parts" in which the significance of the learning could be lost (Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996; McGaw, 1996).

The Role of Students and Parents

The participation of students in reporting to parents has emerged in the literature as a key topic. Broadfoot (1990) reports that her New Zealand study found parents want reporting to be based on collaboration with students, while Anderson and Bachor's (1993) study reported that parents and students appreciate the inclusion of students in parent-teacher meetings.

Parents indicate that a more constructive process for improving learning can be achieved when the process of reporting is two-way and parents share knowledge about their child with the teacher (Broadfoot, 1990; McGaw, 1992; Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996).

Parent-school dialogue to support student learning should cover parent participation in the development of school reporting processes (Broadfoot, 1990). Australian parent organisations consider an active parent role in developing and implementing reporting policies to be a key principle in the effectiveness of reporting practices (Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996).

Reporting on School Achievement

The Extent and Nature of Reporting on School Achievement

Student achievement in individual schools

The achievement level of students at individual schools is the main type of school performance information reported to parents. In many countries such reporting focuses on the achievement of students on the basis of tests and examinations of learning outcomes in the cognitive domain with considerably less focus on the affective and social outcomes.

In England the average achievement score in each school is provided to parents. Further, the Parents' Charter (DES, 1991; DFE, 1994) requires that comparative performance tables (' league tables') of examination and national curriculum test results be published for schools. In addition to the information on student performance, other information on the improvement of schools and the rank of schools is published for various categories of schools. League tables have proved to be controversial and have drawn considerable comment in the media, although a government survey has reported that they have been well-received by parents (DFE, 1994). Whilst examination results and test scores are the main performance measures reported in the UK, there are plans to report also on the basis of teacher-based national curriculum assessments in the future (Goldstein & Spiegelhalter, 1996).

Public reporting of test results is a common occurrence in the United States (US) where more than twenty-eight States include school-level test scores in public reporting on school performance (Elmore et al., 1996). The Stanford Achievement Test, a normed multiple choice test, is commonly used across the US, but some systems have designed more complex assessment standards, such as those linked to state curricula.

In Kentucky, schools are held accountable for specified performance standards in the areas of reading, writing, mathematics, science, social studies, arts and humanities, practical living and vocational studies. The standards are aligned with the state curriculum. Student achievement is assessed against these standards through examinations that require students to provide complex open-ended responses to questions and portfolio assessments of collections of student work. Similar assessment methods are used in Maryland to test reading, writing, language usage, mathematics, science and social studies. No student is assessed on all six parts of the examination system, as the purpose is to evaluate school rather than student performance. The assessments of student achievement are used to calculate a School Performance Index which is published for each school.

The New Zealand government and a number of Australian education systems have implemented systemic testing programs for reporting to parents about the achievements of their children. A small number of Australian systems 1 also make available a profile of student achievement in individual schools.

In addition to academic achievement data, governments publish a variety of other indicators of school performance. In England, published performance information also includes truancy and post-school destination data, while in Maryland the School Performance Index (SPI) encompasses attendance rates in middle schools and attendance/ retention rates in secondary schools. Attendance and graduation rates are published in school performance reports in Philadelphia.

The need to provide comprehensive information to parents has been accepted, but not yet widely implemented, by educational administrators in Australia.

...we must provide regular, comprehensive and understandable reports to parents on the outcomes of schooling, using hard data on student and school performance; and we must report publicly... to governments and the community on the effectiveness of [schools]. (Boston, 1997: 3)

School review reports

Another form of reporting about schools has also been in place at various times since the inception of schooling in many countries. This has been based on the professional assessments of one or more experienced educators who have been required to make a judgment about the quality of each school. Inspections, or school reviews, in various forms take a holistic view of the school and examine and report on school processes as well as student achievement data.

School inspections in England and Scotland and school reviews in New Zealand assess the performance of schools against a range of performance indicators. These include standards of achievement, quality of learning, school efficiency, behaviour and discipline, and student development in non-academic areas (England); student attainment, the quality of teaching and learning, school development planning, and responsiveness to parents (Scotland); school administration, curriculum management, student support, the achievement of sub-groups, personnel management and financial management (New Zealand) (Cuttance, 1998a).

In all three countries the reports from these processes are public documents available to parents and the wider community. Parents in England are encouraged to use the reports to compare the performance of schools in their local area (DFE, 1994). In Scotland all parents receive a summary of the published report and may obtain the full report on request (McGlynn and Stalker, 1995).

The review system in Australia most like the overseas models just described was that operating in New South Wales government schools between 1992 and 1995 (Cuttance, 1995). These reviews of school quality analysed data on student achievement and gathered data on the quality of teaching by observing lessons, interviewing teachers, parents and students and consulting school documents. Parents were interviewed as part of each review and the reports were public documents.

The Victorian State school system currently has a review system, which prescribes a broad range of information on which judgements about school performance and effectiveness are made. The information is collected by the school, which provides a report which documents and evaluates its achievements. The data and the self-assessment are subsequently reviewed by an external verifier who makes a professional judgement about the achievements of the school. The report, written by the external verifier, is available to parents (Department of Education, Victoria, 1997).

School review systems are not well-established in the United States (Wilson, 1995). However, in an effort to balance the focus on the quality of teaching and learning and test outcomes, some States in the US are implementing new forms of inspection involving classroom observation, feedback and assessment of the quality of teaching practice (Elmore et al., 1996).

Prospectuses and annual reports

Each year every school in England is required to publish a prospectus that describes its achievements and the courses it provides. The prospectus must present information on the school's results in public examinations and National Curriculum tests and compare them with national and local results. Schools are also encouraged to explain the aims and values of the school, their approach to teaching, and arrangements for programs such as sex or careers education. Free copies of the prospectus are available to parents (DFE, 1994).

Additionally, parents in England are provided with an annual report from the governing body. Legislation requires these reports to include specified information on student achievement, truancy, post-school destinations of students, and school budget (DFE, 1994).

Many Australian schools issue prospectuses and annual reports to their parents and communities. No Australian system mandates that schools must issue a comprehensive prospectus of the type described above for England. Many Australian systems require schools to produce an annual report, although there is significant variation in the required content and the quality and accuracy of the information reported.

Key Issues in Reporting about Schools

1. Capturing the complexity of schools

Research indicates that performance indicators of school performance, such as test results and retention/ attendance data needs to be interpreted carefully in making reliable judgements about the quality of learning (Barber et al., 1994; Goldstein & Thomas, 1996; Goldstein & Spiegelhalter, 1996; Rowe, 1996). Simple summary information cannot describe the complexity of school performance (Nuttall et al., 1989; Goldstein & Spiegelhalter, 1996). Public reporting systems need to focus on the broad objectives of schooling and the multi-dimensional nature of school performance. (Barber et al., 1994; Rowe, 1996).

Parents possess a clear and distinctive model of a 'good school', which is based on wide-ranging criteria. This model of a 'good school' includes a high level of teacher professionalism, a broad curriculum, a safe and secure environment, strong leadership, parental involvement, effective communication, well-maintained facilities and adequate resources (Martin et al., 1997).

Research findings about the variation in student achievement indicate that about half of the variation is attributable to differences in the achievement-related capacities and dispositions of students. Of the remaining half, approximately four-fifths is attributable to differences due to the effectiveness of classrooms - teaching programs, etc. - within schools, and the remaining fifth to differences between schools (Cuttance, 1998b).

The challenge in developing strategies for reporting on the achievements of schools is to describe the substantial variation that is attributable to educational processes within schools, in addition to the variation in achievements between schools. The core issue is how to capture both the multi-dimensional nature of achievement and the variation in the impact of individual schools in reports on school performance.

School inspections and review models based on qualitative and quantitative data provide the most common mechanism for reporting that takes account of the complexity of schools. The English and Scottish inspection systems (Matthews and Smith, 1995; McGlynn and Stalker, 1995) assess both school processes and student outcomes in a number of areas. The professional judgements of school performance in such processes draw on information from a range of sources, usually including interviews, classroom observations, and data on student achievement.

Reviews of Victorian schools consider student achievement data on both teacher-assessed curriculum outcomes and externally assessed tests. These data are reported against both 'like-school' and state/ territory-wide benchmarks. The data assessed goes beyond cognitive outcomes to include parent and staff assessments of aspects of school management and environment; student attendance, enrolment, and accident and injury information; teacher leave; and school professional development. State benchmarks have been established for non-cognitive as well as cognitive data (Department of Education, Victoria, 1997).

US education systems generally utilise a narrower range of indicators than those described above for UK and Australian schools. Wilson (1995) notes that in America the indicators that are most trusted are those based on student achievement test results. Achievement testing is generally either standardised (normed) or criterion-based.

The advantage of standardised testing is that results can be compared nationally and the testing process is relatively straightforward. A disadvantage in using standardised tests for assessing school performance is that they may not be designed to assess the particular curriculum which is taught in the schools concerned (Rowe, 1996). To overcome this problem, some US States, such as Maryland and Kentucky, have developed assessment and reporting systems based on the outcomes specified in local curricula.

The most common non-cognitive indicators used in school reporting in the US include attendance, drop-out, and truancy rates and post-school destinations (Ramirez & McClanahan, 1992). The methodology for assessing school performance in terms of more substantive non-cognitive aspects of school performance such as affective and social development of students is not as well developed as that for cognitive development (Barber et al., 1994; Cuttance, 1998).

2. Ensuring the objectivity of reports

Secondary schools in England view the independence of inspectors as essential to the aim of public accountability (Matthews and Smith, 1995). School reviews in New Zealand are undertaken by staff of a separate government authority. Some Australian systems utilise external validation procedures to assure quality. In Victoria, the self-assessments produced triennially by government schools are validated by external verifiers. The validation of reports on school performance in other States/ Territories is undertaken by school system administrators, hence lacks the independence from management of the systems in place in Victoria, England and New Zealand.

Wilson (1995) reports that some question the validity of quality reviews by 'experienced practitioners', even if they are undertaken independent of school and system management and consider that assessments based on student outcome data are more valid.

The notion that an experienced practitioner could judge the quality of what actually happened in a school in a manner that would support a national accountability scheme was utterly foreign (to Americans). Observations of schools were considered anecdotal information (Wilson, 1995: 93).

School review models address this issue by themselves having a quality management and assurance system which includes detailed guidelines and criteria for making judgements (OFSTED, 1992; McGlynn and Stalker, 1995), training, and stakeholder evaluations of the review process.

Indicators of school performance based on public examinations are generally viewed as reliable and objective, although the validity of the interpretation of such data is challenged by some constituencies (Rowe, 1996).

3. Ensuring fairness

The need for fairness in reporting school performance information has been the subject of substantial discussion in the literature. The publication of 'league tables' in the UK has been criticised for creating 'winners' and 'losers', and for not taking into account differences between schools (Rowe, 1996). Findings in Kentucky that baseline scores for schools were highly correlated with socio-economic status were interpreted as indicating the need for fairer ways to report school performance than publish raw data on student achievement levels (Elmore et al., 1996).

Two approaches can be used to maximise fairness in the use of school performance information. The first is to explicitly take account of contextual information to adjust student test results for pre-existing social and educational differences among students (Cuttance, 1992; Education Review Office, 1998). One approach to assessing the contribution schools make to the achievement of students - value-added' - is to use statistically complex models to estimate the effect of individual schools. (Barber et al., 1994; Rowe, 1996; Goldstein & Spiegelhalter, 1996).

The simpler approach is to publish school performance information in a way that supports valid comparisons with other schools serving similar populations of students (Barber et al., 1994; Rowe, 1996). Reporting the performance of individual schools against the performance of other schools serving similar populations is used in Victoria (Office of Review, 1997b; Department of Education, Victoria, 1997) and has recently been introduced in Queensland.

4. Distinguishing school effectiveness from school performance

Understanding the difference between school effectiveness and school performance is critical to assessing schools fairly.

School performance is defined as the average level of achievement of students in the school in the particular domain assessed, [eg. mathematics]... School effectiveness is defined as the relative level of performance of a school [for students of different backgrounds and levels of prior achievement] in a particular area of assessment (Cuttance, 1998: 6).

In Kentucky, where schools receive incentive rewards for their effectiveness in meeting school improvement targets, schools serving disadvantaged communities are as likely as those in more advantaged communities to be effective. It is important that both the performance and the effectiveness of schools be assessed and reported. Focussing on performance only fails to recognise and reward schools that have lower performance principally because their intake of students had lower levels of achievement prior to their entry to those schools. Conversely, focussing only on effectiveness runs the risk of institutionalising lower expectations for groups of students who have the lowest levels of achievement (Elmore et al., 1996).

Concerns have been expressed that the publication of information about the performance and effectiveness of schools will be misused because the public will not understand the difference between 'performance' and 'effectiveness' (Barber et al., 1994). Models of reporting on schools that provide information for each individual school and allow a comparison of achievement for 'like' groups of students across a system or groups of schools provide the basis to evaluate both performance and effectiveness. Alternatively, 'value-added' measures can be used as indicators of the effectiveness of schools (Cuttance, 1992).

The 'like-school' groupings used in some States are based on socio-cultural characteristics of students (eg. social disadvantage, non-English speaking background), which are relatively weak determinants of student achievement. Hence they represent only a small part of the impact of student characteristics on achievement. A much stronger impact is found for prior levels of achievement. That is the impact of socio-cultural characteristics on the achievement of, say, Year 12 students is considerably less than the impact of say, their prior level of achievement at entry to their secondary schooling (Hill, 1995).

The validity of grouping students and schools into 'like-groups' is highest when the student characteristics that have the most impact on student learning outcomes are the basis for allocating schools to comparable groups.

5. Public confidence in reporting

School performance information needs to be presented in a form that parents can easily understand (Barber et al., 1994). The public reporting of school performance information which is both valid and fair is technically complex (Rowe, 1996), yet if the public does not understand how performance measures are determined, it will affect their confidence in the system (Elmore et al., 1996). Systems have a responsibility to disseminate information about the procedures used to determine school performance (Rowe, 1996).

The Kentucky and Mississippi accountability systems use formulas and calculations that are not clearly understood by parents. Elmore and his colleagues noted that confusion was particularly strong among parents who had difficulty in adjusting from norm-referenced standardised tests to criterion-based outcomes assessments. Parents found it difficult to understand the new assessment terminologies and expressed the need for some linkage to past systems to assist their understanding of the new developments (Elmore et al., 1996).

The clarity, integrity and rigour of reporting is of paramount importance if the public is to have confidence in them. Early school reports in New South Wales, for example, were described as "semi-fudges and shadow plays akin to a puppet show" and a "vague-up" (Reported in The Sydney Morning Herald, 2/ 4/ 98).

6. Reporting as a basis for choosing a school

The Parents' Charter (England) states that the purpose of performance tables is to help parents choose schools and colleges for attendance by their children. With the increased role of market models in the public sector, the provision of information to support efficient and effective choices is of greater importance (Munn, 1993; Barber et al., 1994; Highett and Marsland, 1998).

Parents seek to ensure the best fit between the educational needs of individual children and the provision on offer from schools.

...school characteristics which are conducive to a particular conception of 'success' for one child may be quite different from those which are conducive to the same conception of 'success' for another child (Adler, 1993: 56).

There are indications that parents are influenced more by information about discipline and the general reputation of the school than by educational considerations (Adler,1993). The choice of school may involve finding a satisfactory alternative to the 'local school' rather than making an optimal choice from a wide range of possible schools. Information about schools must address a broad and diverse range of aspects of provision and performance if it is to satisfy the wide range of needs of parents in choosing a school.

7. Reporting as pressure for school improvement

Most education systems that report on school performance, for example England, Scotland, Kentucky and Mississippi, have school improvement as an explicit goal of reporting (Matthews and Smith, 1995; McGlynn and Stalker, 1995; Elmore et al., 1996). Public reporting about schools provides pressure for schools to improve.

Public reporting energizes parents and other community members to pressure schools for higher performance, particularly when data show differences in performance among schools that are roughly comparable in the public's eye (Elmore et al., 1996: 67).

Pressure from parents is part of a broad approach to school improvement in which systems and schools set improvement targets established on the basis of performance information. For example, in Scotland, a follow-up inspection is held within 18 months of the original inspection and the subsequent report made available to parents. The follow-up report is a "powerful motivator" for schools to achieve their improvement targets (McGlynn and Stalker, 1995: 17).

The English inspection process, by identifying strengths and weaknesses and assisting schools to tackle their weaknesses, has twin functions of improvement and accountability. There is much evidence that school inspections in England have a direct impact with schools establishing action plans and achieving improvement targets within months of the inspection. The improvement targets focus on school processes (such as revising syllabuses, improving management, or raising teaching standards (Matthews and Smith, 1995). Schools are also required to set annual improvement targets for student learning outcomes (Department for Education and Employment, 1997). As in Scotland, there is a requirement for schools to report to parents on implementing a program of improvement to achieve their inspection targets (Matthews and Smith, 1995).

In Maryland, the School Performance Index (SPI) is calculated annually based on student achievement results. Change in performance is determined using the current SPI less the average of SPI of the previous two years. The intention of the program is to measure school improvement (Maryland State Department of Education, 1997). In Kentucky, school improvement is assessed annually, with schools receiving incentive payments determined by the level of improvement (Steffy, 1993; Elmore et al., 1996).

8. Conflicting outcomes of public reporting

The publication of information may in some cases have a negative effect on improvement efforts, particularly where there is conflict between the use of an indicator for accountability purposes and its use for improvement purposes (Barber et al., 1994; Australian Council of State School Organisations & Australian Parents Council, 1996).

The public reporting of school performance data in the US has been "very powerful in attracting public and press scrutiny" (Elmore et al., 1996: 78) and interest, but school performance information can be sensationalised. The Kentucky accountability system is based on how well schools are progressing toward a standard. The press reanalysed this information to rank the performance of schools in the State (Elmore et al., 1996). Value-added indicators and comparing schools with 'like-schools', are strategies that can be used to reduce the misuse of such data (Rowe, 1996; Goldstein & Spiegelhalter, 1996).

The popular literature has focused on the negative impact of reporting on underperforming schools. The impact of public reporting on schools performing at higher levels is not well-documented, though acknowledgment of "those schools which are doing outstandingly well" (Woodhead, 1995: 13) is a goal of school reporting systems (Elmore et al., 1996).

No Australian education system reports school performance information in a way that enables schools to be compared across a range of indicators - although performance in Year 12 examinations is published for some systems. More generally, information about an individual school is only released to members of the school community, and in a way that does not allow direct comparisons with other schools.

It is difficult for parents to assess information about the performance and effectiveness of schools in both the government and non-government sectors in Australia. On occasions this paucity of access to such information has led to the press giving considerable attention to incomplete and sketchy data when it has been made available. The Sydney Daily Telegraph Mirror story of the Mount Druitt High School HSC class of 1996 is a case in point. Although many saw this press coverage as destructive, it did have the impact of causing the New South Wales Department of Education to take concerted action to improve the performance of the school concerned (Laughlin, 1997).

9. School performance information as a form of assurance and accountability

Public information on school performance is required if the process of accountability for the use of public funds is to be transparent. In Australia, all but a small number of non-government schools, in addition to government schools, receive a significant proportion of their recurrent income through State/ Territory and Commonwealth government funding. 2 

Governments, business, and community leaders are more willing to ease regulations and leave decisions in the hands of teachers and principals when schools report regularly and clearly on results (Herrington, 1993). As well, the public needs such information as assurance to monitor their investment in public education (Kirst, 1990; Gaines, 1991; Herrington, 1993; Barber et al., 1994; Rowe, 1996).

Parents also require performance and effectiveness information to assure themselves that they have made an appropriate choice of school (Broadfoot, 1990). Parents consider that they have a right to access information relevant to the education of their children (Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1992; Herrington, 1993; Crump, 1997).

10. Variation in what is reported to parents

There is considerable variation in the type of information that parents and the public receive about school performance. In England, The Parents Charter (DFE, 1994) requires that all parents receive:

• regular reports from independent inspectors;
• performance tables for all local schools;
• a prospectus for all local schools; and
• an annual report from the school their children attend.

This information is considerably more comprehensive than that available in most other systems. As discussed earlier, parents in the United States have access in most systems to public information on school performance based on student achievement in tests or examinations.

Within Australian education systems there is substantial variation in what parents receive in the way of reports on school performance. In most systems they have access to an annual report produced by each school and in many instances to a prospectus. Very few systems provide parents with school reports based on independent review or inspection and only one requires schools to report student outcome information in a way that provides a valid assessment of the performance and effectiveness of schools.

Conclusions and Discussion

On the basis of the literature surveyed for this review, it is evident that parents and schools have different perspectives on their roles in the education of children. Schools view their role as that of educational providers and expect parents to support them in that role. From the type of information that parents want to receive from schools, however, it is clear that they see themselves as managers and facilitators of the education of their children. They therefore require information that will enable then to support learning and make well-informed educational decisions for their children.

It is for this reason that parents are asking for more information about schools, particularly in terms of teaching and learning. In regards to reporting on individual student progress, most schools have procedures in place that are capable of meeting parent expectations. Parent satisfaction or dissatisfaction with reporting processes, however, depends on the effectiveness with which individual schools implement reporting policies.

Parents expect that they will receive reports on their children from schools that provide:

• regular assessments of progress on a range of academic and non-academic outcomes;
• information about their child's academic achievement levels in relation to an external standard;
• advice about improvement goals for the child and strategies that they can use to support their child's learning;
• an opportunity to discuss their child's learning in a face-to-face meeting with the teacher, and in many cases with the child present; and
• immediate notification from the school if their child's learning or behaviour in not progressing in line with expectations.

Less is known about the information parents want or expect about school performance and effectiveness. The literature provides only indirect evidence about what parents want to know. For example, information on school examination and test results is used by parents in the UK and the US.

The public reporting of school performance and effectiveness information based on student achievement in external tests and examinations is common practice in the UK and the US. The information is not always provided in such a way as to enable direct comparisons of schools, though comparative information is commonly available. The purpose of providing information is to encourage school improvement and raise standards; provide an informed basis on which parents may choose a school for their child; and to contribute to accountability processes.

The most common forms of reporting are the publication of the profile of student achievement in schools and other indicators such as attendance, and the publication of school review reports.

A number of issues arise from the research literature on reporting about schools. In essence these are captured in the following questions:

• Who determines what information parents or the public have access to?
• What information do parents require and in what form?
• How can the information be provided to the public in ways that ensure its validity and fairness?
• What is the most appropriate means of providing access?

There is considerable evidence from research on school systems overseas about the provision of information on school effectiveness and performance of schools, however, there is a lack of Australian research in relation to the following:

• the information parents utilise in choosing a school;
• the impact of information provided to parents on school improvement; and
• effective strategies for providing information to parents about schools.

Information provided to parents needs to focus explicitly on school performance and effectiveness across a range of areas. Parents express a need for information that will allow them to match the needs of their children with the most effective environment for their learning. They also need information to monitor school performance and effectiveness so as to support and manage the education of their children.

The provision of information in many school systems is not yet sufficiently comprehensive or accessible for parents to feel that they are confident about their choices and for them to monitor the continuing effectiveness of the schools they have chosen for their children. The evidence suggests that information on the performance and effectiveness of schools in Australia is not as comprehensive or publicly accessible by parents as it is in many school systems in the UK and the US. There is a substantial gap between the information that parents say they require and the information available to them in the public domain.

Chapter 2: Policies and Practices of Australian Education Systems

Introduction

This chapter surveys the policies and practices of Australian education systems in relation to the reporting of student and school achievement. The information on which this report is based was provided by education systems in Australia. All systems were surveyed.3 Each State/ Territory government education system and seven Catholic systems provided information. The Northern Territory Department of Education reported that its response covered government and non-government schools. The independent sector was not surveyed, as it does not form a school system. The cooperation of the systems that responded is appreciated and acknowledged.

Systems were asked to provide responses about the following areas of policy and practice.

• The information provided by schools to individual parents and the community about the learning outcomes of their children.
• The information provided by schools about their educational programs and how successful they have been in achieving their goals for students.
• The type and range of information provided publicly by school systems about curriculum standards and the achievements of students - including information made available for particular sub-groups of students.
• The participation of parents, at school and system level, in the development, implementation and improvement of reporting policies.

Contextual Background

The report should be read in the context of changes across Australia in the assessment of student learning outcomes, school accountability and reporting processes.

Outcomes and Standards Frameworks

Education is a state/ territory-level responsibility but pressures for a national framework led to the Australian Education Council (AEC) forming a Curriculum and Assessment (CURASS) Committee to develop collaboratively national curriculum statements and profiles. These were completed in 1993. Subsequently the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), which replaced the AEC, referred the materials back to the States/ Territories for implementation.

The Curriculum Statements and Profiles for Australian Schools are organised around a learning continuum for primary and secondary schooling. The key concepts of the various approaches adopted by State/ Territory systems are:

• curricula defined for each Key Learning Area (KLA) and based on outcomes rather than content;
• a continuum of learning across grades; and ° curricula divided into a number of levels, each of which approximates to two years of schooling.

Such curriculum statements have been expressed in Victoria as the Curriculum and Standards Framework and in Western Australia as the Outcomes and Standards Framework. In South Australia they are known under the original name of Curriculum Statements and Profiles. For the purpose of this report any state/ territory-based derivative of the original Curriculum Statements and Profiles or curriculum frameworks using similar approaches will be referred to as criterion-based outcomes. One state system is implementing an outcomes approach based on State syllabus documents. The term 'criterion-based outcomes' will also be used to refer to this model.

The Key Learning Area (KLA) concept is evident in most state/ territory curricula. For example, the Victorian framework includes English, Mathematics, Science, Technology, Studies of Society and Environment, The Arts, Health and Physical Education, and Languages Other Than English, and in Western Australia they are basically the same but Technology is called Technology and Enterprise. Most States/ Territories have Key Learning Areas that are the same or similar to these. The number of KLAs used in various systems range between six and eight. In some States/ Territories the KLA approach is not applied to the last two years of schooling.

Standardised Testing

A second major trend that has emerged in Australia over the last decade is the introduction of systemic standardised testing. Such tests are conducted most frequently in Years 3 and 5 in literacy and numeracy, but also occur in other years. In New South Wales and South Australia these tests are called the Basic Skills Test, in Victoria the Learning Assessment Project (LAP) and Queensland has a system referred to as the Year 3 and the Year 5 Tests.

From 1999, primary school tests will move towards common approaches and similar timing to enable reporting against national benchmarks. It is expected that some States/ Territories will report individual student benchmark performance to parents.

Tests of this type, whether Year 3, Year 5 or some other grade level, will be referred to generically in this report as standardised tests.

Quality Assurance Systems

The third national trend relevant to this report is the implementation of quality assurance processes in school systems. Such developments are not as strong as the previous two developments noted above and vary in rigour. These processes chiefly revolve around schools establishing goals and targets and then reporting publicly on their achievement through an annual reporting process. In a small number of cases the quality assurance component involves some form of external independent verification of the school's evaluation and limited general public or local reporting, but most systems fall short of these standards.

Current Policies and Practices

Curriculum Standards

There is a pattern for government school systems to have publicly declared curriculum standards established from the first to the eleventh year of schooling (Year 10).4 In most States/ Territories, a statutory body responsible for curriculum development, such as a Board of Studies, sets such standards. The standards are in most cases derived from the nationally developed statements and profiles referred to earlier. The standards are expressed as criterion-based outcomes standards expected at each 'stage' of schooling.

All government education systems have adopted criterion-based curriculum outcomes, founded generally on either the national statements and profiles or State/ Territory variations of them. There is variation across systems, however, in the extent to which criterion-based outcome approaches have been implemented, particularly in the extent to which the outcome statements and standards have been made explicit across all KLAs. Some systems have had criterion-based outcomes in place for all KLAs for three years or more. Others have a longer time frame for the completion of this process and are still in the early stages of implementation. In some instances the 'learning outcomes' are being expressed through individual syllabus documents rather than through KLAs. In some States/ Territories schools report to parents against these standards and in other States/ Territories reporting does not relate to such standards.

The linking of criterion-based outcomes to specific stages of schooling makes the standards explicit. Some systems have also been able to, or are in the process of, establishing external benchmarks of achievement against the standards. These allow student achievement levels to be compared with the learning outcomes appropriate to the age and the achievement levels of other students across the State/ Territory.

At their most sophisticated, such benchmarks - which are currently only established in English literacy and Mathematics - allow schools, parents and students to evaluate their performance overall, and the performance of sub-groups of students, against an external indicator.

Systems consider that their standardised testing and reporting programs also provide information about standards. They use the results, at school and system level, to determine whether the level of student performance is improving. Some States use this information to identify students requiring additional support.

Catholic systems have adopted one of two approaches to the specification of educational standards and the assessment of achievement. Either they have linked student outcomes directly to the curriculum standards approach of the statutory curriculum body in their State/ Territory, which is common, or they have linked directly to the nationally developed Statements and Profiles. A small number of Catholic systems also participate in standardised testing programs conducted by the States/ Territories.

The information on curriculum and standards in each system is available to parents, but in most cases parents must either explicitly request the information or rely on schools to conduct appropriate information sessions.

Reporting on Student Progress

The information provided formally to individual parents about the learning outcomes and progress of their child typically takes three forms:

• A written report which is prepared one to four times annually, though twice annually is the norm.
• Oral reports, usually through the means of a parent-teacher meeting.
• Reports, at selected Year levels, of the child's performance in standardised tests.

Formal written reports and parent teacher meetings are the most common reporting combination used in Australia. This pattern of reporting is common to all education systems and across all 13 years of schooling. The report and meeting are typically interrelated - the meeting generally providing an opportunity to discuss the information provided in the written report. There are differences among school systems as to whether systemic policies and guidelines inform such school practices or whether decisions about reporting policies are at the discretion of the school.

Government school systems typically publish policies and guidelines for assessment and reporting. Common principles espoused in these documents indicate that practices should:

• be integrated into teaching and learning practices;
• be aligned with relevant curriculum documents - usually through a focus on reporting against specified curriculum outcomes;
• be fair, valid and comprehensive;
• value teacher judgements;
• be based on an appropriate range of assessment methods and strategies; and
• convey useful and meaningful information.

Students are frequently involved in assessing and reporting on their own achievement. No system provides any guidance on this policy, but a number of systems encourage the practice. Whilst student involvement in self-assessment is more common than in reporting, some schools have advanced practices in which students report to parents on their own self-assessment, select work samples to be part of the report to parents and, more commonly, take part in parent-teacher meetings.

Written reports

Reporting on academic outcomes is the predominant focus of systemic reporting policies, which are based on four different assessment frameworks:

• Assessment and reporting against criterion-based outcomes standards.
• Assessment and reporting in terms of outcomes achieved.
• Reporting achievement in curriculum areas as either letter grades, such as A, B, C, etc. or some similar criterion, usually with an accompanying general comment.
• Reporting progress against an individual plan for the student.

Criterion-based outcomes approaches vary in their complexity and rigour and in the extent to which they are mandated as policy. In its most complex manifestation there is a requirement that schools report to parents on the attainment level of each student against specified curriculum outcomes. Such approaches may also report student achievement against the state/ territory average or state/ territory benchmarks.

Some systems encourage schools to use an outcomes approach based on curriculum documents for the State/ Territory or, in some instances, directly on the nationally developed Statements and Profiles.

Systems that do not require schools to report against criterion-based outcomes indicated that individual schools decide such policy. In a small number of instances, systems reported that schools use a 'subject and content-covered' reporting process whereby individual achievement levels in various subjects are indicated by comments or letter grades.

A small number of systems made specific mention of the practices of schools in reporting on the achievements of students with special learning needs. Such reporting was usually against the specific program developed for each individual student.

It is common practice in many systems for student work samples to form part of the formal report to parents. The teacher may annotate these samples. The work samples are used to provide tangible evidence of the student's achievement of certain outcomes or skill development.

Systems generally acknowledge that non-academic outcomes, such as social skills and behaviour, may be included in written reports to parents, but such reporting is likely to be the initiative of individual schools.5    

Despite the Australia-wide pattern of regular written formal reports, frequently with similarities in the reporting framework, no system prescribes the format that written reports should take. Schools design the format and layout of the reports to parents. Many systems indicated that they encourage consultation with parents in the development of the style and format of reports.

Parent-Teacher meetings

Most systems encourage schools to provide opportunities for teachers to discuss written reports with parents in a face-to-face meeting. These meetings are held at least once a year but are usually conducted more often. Systems did not detail the purpose of the parent-teacher meeting other than noting, in some instances, that the general purpose was to discuss the content of the formal written report.

One system that was more specific reported that the parent teacher meeting...

...enables parents to provide teachers with information about their child. It also allows teachers to discuss issues of importance about students and the learning outcomes they intend to cover.

Systems report that it is a common practice for teachers and parents to discuss the progress of individual students at times other than the formal parent-teacher meeting. Parents can make a formal meeting appointment or may discuss their children informally with teachers in the course of their interaction with the school. Many systems indicate that schools are to advise parents that they can seek an meeting at any time to discuss the progress of their child.

Schools may instigate an meeting with a parent outside of the formal reporting processes. This practice is less common and is usually an urgent response to a student not progressing at the rate expected or not behaving satisfactorily.

Reporting on standardised tests and external exams

Reporting to parents on the outcomes of annual standardised tests is becoming increasingly widespread. Such tests are mainly in literacy and numeracy and at specified Year levels.

Five out of the eight government systems require schools to report to parents on the literacy test results of students sitting an external test in Years 3 & 5, or the equivalent grade level for the system. In a smaller number of States/ Territories the standardised test includes mathematics/ numeracy and can include an additional curriculum area. There are also examples of similar tests being conducted at the secondary school level, though this occurs in only a minority of systems.

Under the National Literacy and Numeracy Plan governments are implementing full cohort assessment of student achievement across Australia in Grades 3 and 5. Parents will receive a report of their child's level of achievement in relation to an outcomes standard and, in some cases, national benchmarks. They will also be provided with a report detailing specific areas of skill.

Some governments are planning State/ Territory testing at one or more year-levels in KLAs other than literacy and numeracy. For example, Queensland is planning to assess upper primary and lower secondary students in 1999 in Health and Physical Education and in Science.

Information on individual student exam results in end of secondary schooling credentialling processes is reported directly to students by statutory bodies in each State/ Territory. Students are generally provided with their results in individual subjects. Assessment is typically based on a combination of school and external testing, with a moderation process to ensure comparability of standards between school and external marking.

In most States/ Territories students who are seeking to undertake further study also receive a score for tertiary admission purposes. A tertiary body such as Universities Admissions Centre (UAC) in New South Wales or Tertiary Institutions Service Centre (TISC) in Western Australia prepares this score. In New South Wales this is called a Universities Admission Index (UAI), in Victoria and Western Australia it is a Tertiary Entrance Ranking (TER), while in Queensland it is called an OP (Overall Position).

These scores are variously determined but students are most commonly ranked from 1 to 100 with 100 the highest score. In Queensland students are ranked from 1 to 25 with 1 the highest rank. There is variation from State-to-State in the composition of the cohort on which the tertiary ranking is based. Some States/ Territories base it on the cohort who sit the end of secondary school examination, others have recently moved to base tertiary entrance ranking on the cohort who commenced secondary schooling.

Reporting on School Achievement

Systems that make information on school achievement publicly available indicated that they do so to:

• inform parents and the public;
• enable schools to compare their results with the state/ territory-wide profile;
• monitor standards and plan interventions where appropriate;
• provide valid information on which to base resource decisions;
• provide an informed basis for improvement initiatives;
• build public confidence; and
• meet accountability requirements.

Most school systems that report on the achievement of individual schools typically do so through an annual report and, in some systems, external review processes. The reports are often restricted in circulation to the school, the School Council, and system authorities. In some instances a summary report is provided to all parents with the full report available on request.

The systems that have been most pro-active in setting policies and procedures for reporting on school achievement are in the government sector. Catholic systems generally do not intervene in determining how schools report to their communities. They indicate that monitoring school achievement is typically undertaken as part of school registration or accreditation processes and that they also report under Commonwealth accountability requirements by contributing to the Annual National Report on Schooling in Australia and through other processes.

Overall school achievement

Most systems have an expectation that schools will report against the specific aims and objectives set out in their school development plan, school charter or similar documents.

Across systems, however, there is a wide range of approaches by which schools report on their own performance and effectiveness. Some systems leave it entirely to the discretion of schools, the case in most non-government systems; some report against targets that individual schools establish for themselves, the most common State/ Territory system model; and others report against established standards and benchmarks, in addition to their own locally developed goals.

Systems that have implemented formal planning and reporting frameworks provide detailed descriptions of the requirements of schools. Examples include the Directions for Education initiative in Tasmania and the Schools of the Future program in Victoria. A key feature of these systems is the articulation of overarching goals or objectives and the implementation of educational programs to achieve these goals and objectives. The time span for the implementation of programs by schools is typically three years, with annual progress reports.

The audience for the planning and reporting documents is the school community. The school plans with and for its community and accounts to them via an annual report. In essence, such annual reports provide an evaluation of how well the school is achieving its academic and non-academic goals for students. In practice the reports from schools serve a dual purpose of accountability to both the school system and the school community.

About half the school systems have an integrated planning and reporting framework. Most are quite specific about what is to be included in the planning and what is to be reported in the school's annual report. In addition to providing contextual information, the annual report is expected to provide an assessment of the school's success in achieving the goals, objectives and targets identified in the linked planning document.

Some State/ Territory systems prescribe areas of achievement that schools are required to report on. For example, one system requires its schools to report on the following: improving student performance, teaching and learning, leadership, managing staff, the learning environment, and interaction with the school community. Another requires reporting on occupational health, safety and welfare, performance management, skills of staff using technology, and literacy and numeracy initiatives. A third system mandates reporting on literacy, numeracy, behaviour management and information technology.

At its most rigorous, such reporting covers prescribed areas with transparent standards or benchmarks against which schools are required to make judgements about their performance. In Victoria, for example, the school environment area of the annual report require