SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN TASMANIA

INTRODUCTION

Literacy and numeracy are the essential foundation skills that allow young people to achieve at school, go on to further learning, and participate fully in society and work.¹ Parents and carers, as well as teachers, play a crucial role in supporting a child's learning.

An enduring goal of educational, economic and social policy in Australia is to improve the educational outcomes of children, increasing the likelihood that they will attain skills and transition into employment.² Students’ individual, economic and social circumstances can impede them from achieving their full educational potential.³

National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) testing was introduced in Australia in 2008 to identify whether all students have the literacy and numeracy skills that provide the critical foundation for their learning, and for their productive and rewarding participation in the community.⁴

For the first time, data from the Census of Population and Housing has been integrated with Tasmanian government school enrolments and NAPLAN data to produce a powerful new dataset that is capable of providing new insights on the role of parental and other socioeconomic characteristics on student achievement. This approach leverages more information from the combined dataset than is available from the individual datasets taken separately. Importantly, it also enables us to analyse specific population sub groups and to undertake analysis by small geographic regions.

This article demonstrates how the integrated dataset can enhance the evidence base for social, economic and educational policy in Australia.


DATA IN THIS ARTICLE

NAPLAN is completed by all students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9. This article looks at 2011 NAPLAN results for government school students in Tasmania that have been combined with various personal and socioeconomic characteristics collected in the 2011 Census, using data integration techniques.

NAPLAN scores for reading, writing and numeracy have been grouped by whether a student met the national minimum standards for their year level. The article presents the proportion of students whose NAPLAN score was below the national minimum standard, that is, the minimum performance standards in literacy and numeracy for a given year level below which students are at risk of being unable to progress satisfactorily at school without targeted intervention.⁵ Overall, in Tasmanian government schools in 2011, 7% of students scored below the national minimum standard in numeracy, 9% in reading and 15% in writing.

For more detailed information about data sources, definitions and linkage methodologies, see the Explanatory Notes tab.


WHAT ROLE DO PARENTAL CHARACTERISTICS HAVE ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

Children from one parent families are slightly less likely to reach national minimum standards

Children from couple families performed slightly better than children from one parent families on numeracy, reading, and writing:

• for numeracy, 6% of children from couple families scored below the national minimum standard compared with 9% of students from one parent families;
• for reading, 8% of children from couple families scored below the national minimum standard compared with 11% for children from one parent families; and
• for writing, 13% of children from couple families did not reach the national minimum standard compared with 19% of children from one parent families.

Students with at least one parent employed have higher NAPLAN scores

While a slightly higher proportion of children from one parent families scored below the national minimum standard for numeracy, reading and writing compared with children from couple families, whether or not their parents were employed had a far more significant influence on a child's NAPLAN scores.

Students from families where no parent was employed at the time of the Census were far more likely to score below the national minimum standard for numeracy, reading and writing. For example, 18% of students in couple families where neither parent was employed and 15% of students in one parent families where their parent was not employed did not meet the national minimum standard for reading.

Couple families where only one parent was employed had a slightly higher proportion of children scoring below the national minimum standard for numeracy and reading than one parent families where the parent was employed, and a slightly lower proportion for writing.

Couple families where both parents were employed had the lowest proportion of students scoring below the national minimum standard, with 5% not meeting the national minimum standard for reading, 4% not meeting the national minimum standard for numeracy and 11% not meeting the national minimum standard for writing.


Children of school teachers do well on NAPLAN

When looking at student performance by the most common occupations for parents of children in government schools in Tasmania, children of school teachers performed the best in reading with less than 2% of these students scoring below the national minimum standard. For numeracy, children of school teachers were also amongst the best performing groups with less than 2% scoring below the national minimum standard.

Children whose father was an Electrician tended to do particularly well in numeracy with less than 2% scoring below the national minimum standard, but not as well for reading with 7% below the national minimum standard.

Children with a mother working as a Checkout Operator or Office Cashier also tended to do well for numeracy with only 2% scoring below the national minimum standard, but comparatively poorly on reading with 16% below the national minimum standard.

In contrast, children whose mother was a Social and Welfare Professional (such as social workers, counsellors and psychologists) tended to do well on reading with only 2% below the national minimum standard, but not as well on numeracy with 4% performing below the national minimum standard.

Overall, children with parents in less skilled occupations such as Cleaners and Laundry Workers, Food Process Workers and Hospitality Workers tended to perform relatively poorly on both reading and numeracy.

PROPORTION OF STUDENTS BELOW NAPLAN NATIONAL MINIMUM STANDARD(a), BY OCCUPATION OF FATHER(b)

PROPORTION OF STUDENTS BELOW NAPLAN NATIONAL MINIMUM STANDARD(a), BY OCCUPATION OF MOTHER(b)

WHAT ROLE DO FAMILY AND HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS HAVE ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

Students in higher income households do better in NAPLAN

Consistent with children of employed parents having higher NAPLAN scores (particularly those in more highly skilled occupations), a strong relationship is apparent between household income and children’s NAPLAN results across reading, writing and numeracy.

In households with an income under $400 a week, more than one in ten children scored below the national minimum standard for numeracy compared with only one in forty children in households with a weekly income of $2500 or more. A similar pattern is apparent for reading and writing.


Children in larger families have poorer NAPLAN scores. Two child families lead the way

Children in larger families were more likely to score below the national minimum standard for reading, writing and numeracy. For example, more than twice the proportion of children in families with six or more children did not meet the national minimum standard for reading, compared with those in families with one child (20% compared with 9%).

Interestingly, children from families with two children performed better than those from families with only one child on all three domains. In families with two children, only about 7% of children were below the national minimum standard for reading, 5% for numeracy, and 12% for writing. Older and younger siblings in these families were equally likely to score below the national minimum standard.


Children in crowded houses tend to have lower NAPLAN scores

By looking at the age and sex of people in a household and the relationships between them, it is possible to determine whether there are sufficient bedrooms in that dwelling to reasonably house the occupants without being crowded.

Children in crowded dwellings tended to have lower NAPLAN scores than children living in dwellings where no extra bedrooms were needed. For example, 16% of children in crowded households scored below the NAPLAN national minimum standard for reading compared with 8% of those where there were no extra bedrooms needed. Children living in houses with one or more spare bedrooms tended to do slightly better still, with only 7% below the national minimum standard for reading.


Children of renters tend to score lower in NAPLAN

Consistent with the other indicators of socioeconomic status presented in this article, children of homeowners tended to do better on NAPLAN than renters, particularly those in public housing. Less than 5% of children whose home was owned, either outright or with a mortgage, scored below the NAPLAN national minimum standard for numeracy. Students in a household renting from a state or territory housing authority fared the worst, with 17% of these scoring below the national minimum standard for numeracy. Children living in dwellings rented from other landlord types, including through housing co-operatives or community groups, also had relatively high rates of children scoring below the national minimum standard.


Children with no Internet connection have poorer NAPLAN scores

While the majority of children live in a dwelling with broadband internet access, children in households with no internet connection fared more poorly on numeracy, reading and writing. Eighteen percent of children in households with no internet connection scored below the national minimum standard for reading compared with 7% of those who did have the internet at home.

There was a slightly smaller proportion of children in households with a Broadband connection who scored below the NAPLAN national minimum standard compared with those with a dial-up or other type of internet connection.


Students in households with no motor vehicle fare worse in NAPLAN

Consistent with other indicators of socioeconomic status, students in a household with no motor vehicle were considerably more likely to score below the NAPLAN national minimum standard for numeracy, reading, or writing compared with those living in households with one or more vehicles.

For numeracy 16% of children in a household with no motor vehicle scored below the national minimum standard compared with 8% of those in a household with one vehicle. For reading, these figures were 19% compared with 10%, and for writing they were 27% and 16%.

Children living in households with two or more motor vehicles were slightly less likely to score below the national minimum standard than children in one car households.



HOW DO PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS RELATE TO STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

Children with a disability have lower NAPLAN scores, particularly boys

In addition to a range of family and household characteristics, the Census also collects a number of personal characteristics that are not currently available in the NAPLAN data. One of these data items is a measure of severe or profound disability known as 'core activity need for assistance'. This identifies those people needing help or assistance in one or more of the three core activity areas of self-care, mobility and communication because of a long-term health condition, a disability or old age. It should be noted that students with significant disability which severely limits their capacity to participate may be exempted from sitting the NAPLAN tests.⁶ Nevertheless, the integrated data shows that both boys and girls with a need for assistance with a core activity score more poorly on the three NAPLAN domains than those who don't require this assistance.

For example, 29% of boys with a need for assistance with a core activity achieved below the national minimum standard for reading, around three times the proportion of those without a need for assistance (10%). Similarly, 21% of girls with a need for assistance did not meet the national minimum standard for numeracy, compared with 6% of those without a need for assistance.



LOOKING AHEAD

A wealth of personal, parental and socioeconomic information is available on the Census that is not currently collected as part of NAPLAN testing. Through integrating these two datasets, the Census data items become available to help understand and explain differences in literacy and numeracy performance between different groups, without the additional burden, cost and complexity of collecting them directly from students, parents or teachers as part of the NAPLAN testing process.

Using Tasmanian government schools data, this article has demonstrated that there is an important relationship between socioeconomic factors, such as family composition, parental employment, income, housing and number of motor vehicles, and NAPLAN scores. There is a consistent trend for children from households with better socioeconomic circumstances to perform better in NAPLAN, confirming that socioeconomic status and parental characteristics are a significant factor in student performance. Until now, the potential factors that could improve performance for students from potentially disadvantaged backgrounds have not been able to be comprehensively explored due to data limitations and availability.

Maximising the value of existing administrative data by integrating it with data from the Census, using data linkage techniques, particularly if undertaken at the national level, has the potential to substantially enhance the evidence base for social, economic and educational policy in Australia in a cost effective and efficient way without increasing the burden on the general public.

There is considerable scope for further analysis in this area. Particular areas of interest might include analysing the impact of various factors on student achievement and outcomes including student mobility and the factors that are associated with high performance amongst disadvantaged students.


ENDNOTES

1. Australian Government Department of Education, Literacy and Numeracy <http://smarterschools.gov.au/literacy-and-numeracy> (Accessed 18 July, 2014)
2. Australian Government Department of Education, School education <https://www.education.gov.au/school-education> (Accessed 18 July, 2014)
3. Productivity Commission, Reducing educational disadvantage
<http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/116664/12-schools-workforce-chapter9.pdf> (Accessed 18 July, 2014)
4. ACARA, NAPLAN - The Tests <http://www.nap.edu.au/naplan/the-tests.html> (Accessed 15 July, 2014)
5. ACARA, Standards <http://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/how-to-interpret/standards/standards.html> (Accessed 15 July, 2014)
6. NAPLAN Student Participation <http://www.nap.edu.au/naplan/school-support/student-participation.html> (Accessed 9 July, 2014)