Merilyn Gladys Carter

Who Pays for Standardised Testing? A Cost-Benefit Study of Mandated Testing in Three Queensland Secondary Schools.

This paper reports on an Australian study that explored the costs and benefits of the National Assessment Programme, Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) testing, both tangible and intangible, of Year 9 students in three Queensland schools. The study commenced with a review of pertinent studies and other related material about standardised testing in Australia, the USA and UK. Information about NAPLAN testing and reporting, and the pedagogical impacts of standardised testing were identified, however little about administrative costs to schools was found. A social constructivist perspective and a multiple case study approach were used to explore the actions of school managers and teachers in three Brisbane secondary schools. The study found that the costs of NAPLAN testing to schools fell into two categories: preparation of students for the testing; and administration of the tests. Whilst many of the costs could not be quantified, they were substantial and varied according to the education sector in which the school operated. The benefits to schools of NAPLAN testing were found to be limited. The findings have implications for governments, curriculum authorities and schools, leading to the conclusion that, from a school perspective, the benefits of NAPLAN testing do not justify the costs.

Generating benefits and negotiating tensions through an international doctoral forum: A sociological analysis

Workshops and seminars are widely-used forms of doctoral training. However, research with a particular focus on these forms of doctoral training is sporadic in the literature. There is no, if any, such research concerning the international context and participants’ own voices. Mindful of these lacunae in the literature, we write the current paper as a group of participants in one of a series of doctoral forums co-organised annually by Beijing Normal University, China and Queensland University of Technology, Australia. The paper voices our own experiences of participation in the doctoral forum. Data were drawn from reflections, journals, and group discussions of all 12 student and academic participants. These qualitative data were organised and analysed through Bourdieu’s notions of capital and field. Findings indicate that the doctoral forum created enabling and challenging social fields where participants accrued and exchanged various forms of capital and negotiated transient and complex power relations. In this respect, the sociological framework used provides a distinctive theoretical tool to conceptualise and analyse the benefits and tensions of participation in the doctoral forum. Knowledge built and lessons learned through our paper will provide implications and recommendations for future planning of, and participation in, the doctoral forum series and similar activities elsewhere.

Crossing International Boundaries through Doctoral Partnerships: Learnings from a Chinese-Australian Forum

International forums for doctoral students offer a fertile context for developing strategic partner-ships between higher education institutions, as well as for building the intercultural capacity of early career academics. However, there is limited research investigating the benefits of international doctoral forum partnerships. This paper presents learnings from a recent international doctoral forum held in Beijing, China and attended by doctoral students and academics from Beijing Normal University (China) and Queensland University of Technology (Australia). Drawing on qualitative case study method and a model of boundary crossing mechanisms, we identify the beneficial outcomes of the forum. We describe how the forum arose from a strong ongoing partnership between the Education Faculties of Beijing Normal University and Queensland University of Technology. We then identify how, at the institutional and individual level, international doctoral forum participants can be challenged and benefit in four areas: collaboration, intercultural capacity, academic enhancement and program development. Implications for engaging successfully in international doctoral forum partnerships are also discussed.