❓ A parliamentary question regarding WA's performance against literacy and numeracy targets under a national partnership agreement, and the distribution of reward funding. The Minister's response defends WA's ambitious targets and explains the reasons for not fully meeting them in the first year.
AnsweredQoN 755Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT ON LITERACY AND NUMERACY — REWARD FUNDING
I refer to the announcement by Hon Peter Garrett, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth, on 28 June 2011 that WA was to receive only $11.2 million in commonwealth reward funding pursuant to the national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy, and to the maximum reward payment of $21.6 million referred to in the implementation plan that WA could have received in 2010–11 if agreed reform targets were met. (1) Why did WA fail to meet its own goals for 2010–11 set pursuant to the national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy? (2) Does the partial reward money paid to the state government under the national partnership agreement go to each participating school or to the Department of Education? (3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER
I refer to the announcement by Hon Peter Garrett, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth, on 28 June 2011 that WA was to receive only $11.2 million in commonwealth reward funding pursuant to the national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy, and to the maximum reward payment of $21.6 million referred to in the implementation plan that WA could have received in 2010–11 if agreed reform targets were met. (1) Why did WA fail to meet its own goals for 2010–11 set pursuant to the national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy? (2) Does the partial reward money paid to the state government under the national partnership agreement go to each participating school or to the Department of Education? (3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(1) Why did WA fail to meet its own goals for 2010–11 set pursuant to the national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy? (2) Does the partial reward money paid to the state government under the national partnership agreement go to each participating school or to the Department of Education? (3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(2) Does the partial reward money paid to the state government under the national partnership agreement go to each participating school or to the Department of Education? (3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(1) Why did WA fail to meet its own goals for 2010–11 set pursuant to the national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy? (2) Does the partial reward money paid to the state government under the national partnership agreement go to each participating school or to the Department of Education? (3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(2) Does the partial reward money paid to the state government under the national partnership agreement go to each participating school or to the Department of Education? (3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(3) When does the minister expect the goals set for 2010–11 pursuant to the agreement will be met? (4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(4) Will the goals set for the 2011–12 agreement be met? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The last question we were given is a little different from what the member has asked, but I think the intent is the same. (1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
(1)–(4) The national partnership agreement on literacy and numeracy requires the state to set short-term targets. The targets are set in collaboration with the Catholic and independent sectors. The goal of improving literacy and numeracy for all students is a long-term goal and one that schools continuously work towards. Several factors contributed to the state receiving 52 per cent of the funding for 2010. Firstly, the schools commenced the support and improvement initiatives agreed under the national partnership in February 2010. The NAPLAN tests used to measure student achievement and determine the level of reward funding were held in May of the same year. In other words, the testing was conducted only three months into a two-year long national partnership, so students had only very little exposure to the improvement initiatives of their schools. Secondly, the state set challenging targets to signal high expectations to our schools. Western Australia’s improvement initiatives required 25 per cent of students to meet the targets compared with significantly smaller percentages of students set by many other states; for example, New South Wales set only four per cent of students. Western Australia also set targets aimed at real improvements over the base year of 2008 for the measurement of rewards, whereas Queensland, for example, set targets that effectively required maintenance of the level of student achievement. In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
In its report on the first year of the national partnership agreement 2010, the Council of Australian Governments Reform Council recognised the variation in the level of ambition between states and territories as well as the way targets had been set, and recommended greater transparency and consistency in the way targets are expressed and measured. As a consequence, for the second year of the national partnership agreement, Western Australia, along with all states and territories except New South Wales, revised its targets in line with the criteria provided by the Australian government. It is anticipated that after 15 months of intervention and support—that is, the time between the inception of the national partnership in schools and the second NAPLAN of progress against the targets—these targets will be achieved. The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
The reward money will be paid to the Department of Education, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in Western Australia. It should be noted that funding not paid to the state in the first year of the national partnership will be rolled over and added to the pool of funds available for WA in the second year.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.