Is The Naplan A Psychological Test Why Or Why Not

Question 1: Is the NAPLAN a psychological test? Why or Why not? The Australian Psychological Association (APS) defines a psychological test as the measure of characteristics and abilities of an individual including aptitude and intelligence (â€Å"Australian Psychological Society: Psychological testing, 2016). As educators are increasingly building competence in psychological fields involving assessment properties, test administration, interpretation and statistics (Bowles et al., 2016), administration of tests such as the National Assessment Program in Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), an annual assessment for students in years 3, 5, 7 and 9 which utilises psychological principles is becoming more commonplace. Unlike psychological tests†¦show more content†¦According to Cohen, Swederlik and Sturman (2013) the psychometric soundness of a test is evaluated through its validity, which ensures the test is measuring what it claims to and reliability, which ensures accuracy of the measure across different times and people. While the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACRA) presents information regarding the informed checks and balances in place for drafting and monitoring the NAPLAN, such as quality assurance, trials, expert advice, common scales, and difficulty equating (Reliability and Validity of NAPLAN, 2010), there remains a lack of data regarding testing of the specific psychometric elements of the tool. When addressing the reliability of the NAPLAN it is important to consider the restricted number of test items included, and how this minimises the test scope and impacts on very high and very low achievers (Howes, 2013). While the move to an online format will help address some of these, there remains a belief that the test goes against what is recognised as effective assessment practise due to an inconsistency with what is being measured and what is being taught within school curriculum (Facchinetti, 2013). It is contended that NAPLAN items are more strongly based on commonsense or traditional views which can shape the results rather than providing an accurate insight into the learning of individuals or the