Remedial and Support Teachers' Association
of Queensland

›› News

home | who we are | profiles | tips | reviews | news

(from QTU Special Education Policy)

4.4.2 Appraisement
The Department of Education calls its process of needs identification and program planning for students with learning difficulties/disabilities the appraisement process.

The QTU believes that the process could be improved if:

there was consistent and appropriate access to professional development and training in school time with teacher relief available;

flexibility in testing procedures was maintained;

attempts were made to reduce individual assessment time.

As yet, there is no process for secondary schools. When a process is developed it needs to be flexible enough to cater for the increased organisational complexity of a high school setting and the needs of adolescent learners.

The QTU's understanding of the process of implementation for appraisement was set out in an article in the Teachers Journal in February, 2000:

Appraisement Reference Group Report Released
The Department of Education has released the report of the reference group that reviewed the primary appraisement process for students with learning difficulties and learning disabilities in 1999. The reference group was constituted after the QTU made representations to the Department about the concerns being expressed to it by its members about the appraisement process.

School Responses
The reference group developed a questionnaire concerning the appraisement process and received 235 responses from schools. These responses indicated, in the words of the report, that "opinion on the appraisement tasks was varied and contrasting".

In regard to the usefulness of the appraisement tasks, 73 per cent of respondents rated them as "useful" to "very useful". A substantial majority of respondents said that they found the appraisement materials easy to understand and useful. However, 63 per cent of the respondents indicated that alternative assessment processes should be used instead of the tasks and 73 per cent considered the time needed to manage the tasks as too long. A major concern was the possible "negative effect [of] the time needed to administer the tasks " on the time available for teaching children.

Opinion on the manageability of the appraisement recording sheets was almost equally divided: "roughly half of all respondents found the recording sheets manageable or suitable, while the other half responded negatively". Opinion was also almost equally split on the descriptions of the program types and the adequacy of the data provided to make decisions about program types.

Purposes of Appraisement
The reference group recommended that the purposes of appraisement be clarified, namely:

to determine the educational program and special needs support which may be provided to help students with learning difficulties and learning disabilities access the curriculum;

to provide a consistent process by which systemic data can be collated on the number of students with learning difficulties and learning disabilities that attend Education Queensland schools.

Appraisement Processes
The reference group recommended that the current processes of initial identification, initial information collection and principal referral be retained but that other information collection processes be changed to allow STLDs the flexibility to gather information using a range of assessment processes, that is, "the appraisement tasks should no longer be mandatory ... what should be mandatory is the requirement that STLDs provide information about a student against the items in the appraisement summary sheets".

The reference group also recommended that current tasks be revised/rationalised to make them less time-consuming and that the "drop-back" model for literacy tasks be abandoned.

It was recommended that the current appraisement meeting process be maintained but that modification of the appraisement summary sheets should occur to make theses generic across Years 1 – 7 and to identify the core areas of learning that should be assessed for students with learning difficulties and learning disabilities. Furthermore, it was recommended that the descriptions of program types be revised to provide more explicit information and examples of how a student may fit into a particular program type.

In relation to the question of when a student should first be appraised, the reference group recommended that appraisement should occur when it is deemed appropriate or needed rather than at a set point in time.

STLDs
The reference group recommended that the nine STLD (Appraisement) positions should be continued into 2000. The group also noted the need for all STLDs, but particularly those in rural and remote areas, to have access to professional development and training. The group expressed the view that the role and standard work profile of STLDs should be reviewed particularly in relation to the responsibilities of STLDs to students with learning difficulties and learning disabilities.

Secondary Appraisement
The reference group identified the need for secondary appraisement processes to be consistent with and build on primary appraisement processes.

The Future of Appraisement
The reference group recommended that by the end of 2002, schools should have fully implemented appraisement for Years 1 – 7. It recommended the collation of appraisement data via an appraisement proforma in the student achievement module of the school management system (SMS). Data collection could mirror ascertainment collection dates with the first corporate download of appraisement data in November 2002. During 2000 work should be undertaken on the development of moderation processes.

According to Departmental officers, though the reference group has ceased meeting. "consultation" on appraisement will continue in 2000 and it will remain voluntary for schools for at least Term One. The future of secondary appraisement is being reconsidered in light of the outcomes of the primary appraisement review.

Copies of the primary appraisement report are available from the QTU Research Section on request.

John McCollow
Research Officer