Mullaly expressed concerns over the stress associated with ATARs, noting that it often prevented students from achieving expected outcomes. The AEU’s submission to a federal review of the education system highlighted declines in student wellbeing and engagement in 2021, surpassing those seen during the height of COVID disruptions in 2020. A state survey of teachers and principals revealed that 46 percent believed NAPLAN greatly contributed to stress and anxiety in students, with 81 percent stating that the annual assessment had a negative or no effect on student outcomes. The union called for the replacement of NAPLAN with assessments that are more suitable and advocated for the professional judgement of teachers to be prioritized over ranking students and schools. They suggested using NAPLAN reporting to identify and address growing equity gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged students.
A group of principals from public and private schools also urged for the replacement of the ATAR with a system that evaluates students based on both academic and personal achievements. They criticized the ATAR for its narrow representation of students at the end of their 13-year educational journey, arguing that it does not reflect who they are or what they can contribute to society. Scrapping the ATAR was seen as potentially disadvantaging less affluent students in the competition for university places and further widening the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. The Education Department was contacted for comment on these issues.
The Victorian branch president of AEU, Meredith Peace, criticized NAPLAN for being originally intended to test progress within the system but having evolved into a tool that pits schools and students against each other, causing significant damage. The union’s submission to the inquiry called for the government to replace NAPLAN with more appropriate assessments that prioritize the professional judgement of teachers. They suggested using NAPLAN reporting to address equity gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged students rather than ranking schools and students against each other. The negative impact of NAPLAN on student stress and anxiety was highlighted by the findings of a state survey of teachers and principals, with a significant proportion stating that the assessment had a detrimental effect on student outcomes.
Experts cautioned against the complete abolition of the ATAR, warning that it could make competition for university places less fair and further advantage affluent students. They emphasized the need for a system that evaluates students based on both academic and personal achievements to create a more equitable university entry process. The current emphasis on the ATAR as a single number to represent students after years of schooling was criticized for its limitations in capturing the full range of student abilities and contributions to society. School-leavers were said to be let down by the current assessment and university entry methods, with calls for a more holistic approach to evaluating student success. Critics argued that scrapping the ATAR could exacerbate existing inequalities in the education system and disadvantage less affluent students in accessing higher education opportunities.
