Are numeracy and literacy tests setting our kids up to fail?

A teacher shares her concerns

High stakes literacy and numeracy tests were introduced last year by the last Labour government. Initially, the tests were going to become mandatory next year but the government announced in April there would be a two-year transition period. 

Teens must pass each of the tests or specific NCEA standards before they can receive any NCEA qualifications.English and Media Studies teacher Tessa Prebble is in her 9th year of teaching. Here she explains why she worries these tests are setting our teens up to fail.

Every Tuesday lunchtime and Thursday after school, I sit down with a small crew of dedicated and increasingly desperate students who have yet to pass the literacy co-requisite tests. The desperation isn’t just theirs; it’s mine as well. I’m their English teacher. 

When students get to high school, their levels of literacy for both reading and writing are hugely variable. 

While some students are scoring the highest score in the Progressive Achievement Tests (PAT) screening testing, others are well below where you might expect in a year 9 student. This variety is the norm across the country.

This year was my first year to see my year 10 English classes sit the literacy co-requisites. After their first round of testing, about a third of my students had not passed the reading co-requisite and just over that number had not passed for the writing test.

Nationally, 58.7% of students passed the reading test, 55.7% passed writing, and just 46.5% passed numeracy. For Māori and Pasifika students, the results were lower: 46% of Māori students passed reading and 45% passed writing. For Pasifika students 37% passed reading and 44% passed writing. 

Watching my students realise they had failed these tests was heartbreaking. I tried to encourage them to see it as a practice and that they could sit them again at the end of the year. But it’s demoralising to see your peer group pass something and know you have to retake the test in a few weeks. Parents were also worried and many got in touch with me to find out what they could do next. 

I agree that literacy and numeracy need attention. The previous system, which saw students gain the literacy credits through their internal assessments in certain subjects, wasn’t giving a good indication of actual literacy levels. Testing for these essential skills is not a bad thing in and of itself.

But the way the tests are set up right now, doesn’t work and here’s why:

The tests achieve the opposite of what is intended

The price students pay if they cannot pass the tests not only doesn’t encourage students to work on their literacy and numeracy: it encourages them to drop out of school with nothing. For many students, the tests will achieve the opposite of what they intended, with students quitting school and losing out on literacy and every other benefit school has to offer.  

The tests are not testing what they claim to

If we want to test for literacy and numeracy, we need to be actually testing those skills, but the current testing requires other skills and knowledge that go beyond what is claimed to be being tested for. 

For example, the numeracy test requires a lot of literacy. The reading part of this test is beyond anything I had to do in school as a test of my numeracy. If a student is good at maths, but struggles with literacy, or is dyslexic, the barrier to showing their numeracy skills is huge. 

The reading test is flawed in multiple ways. It’s multiple choice, which only suits reading comprehension when the answer is clearly in the text. When it comes to other factors like the author’s purpose in writing the piece or questions which require inference, the multiple choice format is a terrible method. 

We teach our students about inference in secondary school English. We teach them that a reader brings themselves to a text — their life experiences, their culture, their beliefs. They combine this experience with the clues the writer has given them, and use this information to reach conclusions about what the text is trying to say. We teach them that if you can back up what you are saying with evidence, then you are right. 

If you can prove your inference through quotes and analysis, you are right. 

This test does the exact opposite.

Photo by Azzedine Rouichi

There are often two potentially right answers to a question, and when inference is involved, the student is being asked to read the mind of the examiner and choose the “more right” answer. When the culture of the examiner and that of the student don’t align, the student comes out the loser. 

I have an English and politics degree. I’ve worked as a writer and am halfway through my Masters of Education, where I am earning grades at A and A+ level. And yet, when I sit down with students to look at past exam questions from reading corequisite tests, I fairly frequently get one or more incorrect answers or cannot tell what the correct answer is. If someone like me, someone with half a master's who has worked as a writer, is getting questions wrong and can justify two answers with evidence from the text, then the exam isn’t testing literacy; it’s testing something else entirely. 

The exam doesn’t give any space for the student to justify their choices. It’s simply right or wrong, even if the answer you gave could be justified according to the text. If you’re neurodivergent and see the world differently, it’s harder still. As a teacher, it’s very hard to teach the skill of reading the mind of the examiner. It leaves teachers and students feeling powerless. 

The tests require general knowledge that many kids won’t have 

In addition to a lack of nuance, the reading test requires a certain level of general knowledge and cultural knowledge. I sat down with a student to look at a piece about Steven Adams, the basketball player. In the article, Adams referenced Barack Obama. One question asked why Obama had been mentioned. The options included answers like “because of his skill at public speaking”, and “because he was a great American president." Now, I knew the right answer was to do with his public speaking. I’ve watched Obama speak and knew this was what the question was getting at. But if you were a 14-year-old with not much awareness of the world, or say a president who left power in 2017 when you were seven years old, then you could quite easily get this question wrong. 

We shouldn’t be penalising students for not having this knowledge when that’s not what the test is supposed to be assessing. 

Another question explained a scenario where the student was told they had stained their Aunty’s carpet and she was due home in a couple of hours. They had to choose what to do next. The options included a link which would lead to a quote for carpet cleaning, another option had at-home, DIY carpet cleaning ideas, and another still had a product which would be shipped from overseas. This question involved a lot of nuance that might not be obvious at first glance. 

First of all, do 14-year-olds know how business quotes work? Did you when you were 14? Do they know when they get a quote they aren’t getting the service completed straight away, but at a later date? If they don’t understand how quotes work, and why should they, this option could trick them. 

In addition to these, the question is assuming the student wants to have this fixed so they don’t have to tell their Aunty about the stain. The question has assumptions loaded into it about the student’s morality and sense of right and wrong. What if the student decided they would get a quote, apologise to their Aunty when she got home and promise to pay for the cleaning service? 

To me, that’s a valid option, but not according to the test. 

The test can unfairly discriminate against tamariki new to Aotearoa

These questions have the potential to be discriminatory and racist. If you are new to New Zealand, or the culture of the examiner doesn’t match your own, the concepts, knowledge and values framework might be completely foreign to you. 

We are already letting down Māori and Pasifika students with our education system. This kind of racist testing which privileges one cultural capital above another, just further entrenches those gaps and leaves some students unable to gain any qualification. They’re punished for not fitting the majority. That’s not literacy, it’s assimilation in disguise. Assimilate or fail. 

Photo by Jeswin Thomas

I believe in raising literacy and numeracy rates. I believe in their importance. But I also believe that students, and adults for that matter, have skills and talent beyond the written word and numbers that we put some much importance on. 

At my kura, we have students who excel in music, who go on to Jazz school before they even reach year 13 because they are that good. We have students who create award-winning garments in the World of Wearable Arts. We have students who create art that their teachers pay top dollar for at our school’s art exhibition. We have students who lead our Māori Performing Arts rōpū with mana, leadership skills, undeniable talent, and dedication. Are these skills not important? 

Are we OK with saying that if you cannot pass these three tests, your other skills and hard work mean nothing? 

Do we honestly think it’s fair to say that the photography portfolio you slaved over for months means nothing without these 20 credits? 

Do we value these tests so much that they come at the expense of students staying in school? 

It seems entirely feasible that a student could achieve Level 3, studying music, art, and media studies, but their dyslexia prevented them from achieving the literacy co-requisites. Couldn’t they walk away with a Level 3 qualification without literacy? Wouldn’t that be fairer than having them leave school with no qualification or recognition of their hard work, skills and effort?

If we don’t find some balance to this system, students will come to the conclusion that school isn’t for them and will drop out with nothing. And I can’t blame them for coming to that conclusion, because the message we are giving them with these tests is that there is one way to succeed and if you’re not able to do that, education isn’t for you. 

I don’t want to be part of that education system. I don’t want that for my students. I don’t want that for my daughter when she starts school. 

I have told my students repeatedly how much I don’t like these tests. I have tried to show them that they are more than their test results demonstrate. I will continue to show up for my students who have failed to do everything I can to get them through. I will continue to sit with them on Tuesdays at lunchtime and on Thursdays after school.

But for some it’s not going to be enough and that’s not good enough.