A Review of School Accountability in Australia. Dr David Gurr, Dr Lawrie Drysdale, Ms Helen Goode The University of Melbourne [email protected] Published as:
Dr David Gurr, Dr Lawrie Drysdale, Ms Helen Goode
The University of Melbourne
Gurr, D. (2007) Diversity and progress in school accountability systems in Australia, Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 6(3), pp. 165-186.
The information has been gathered through searching of publicly available Education Department websites (2005, 2006, 2007), discussions with department representatives, and through comparison with a review undertaken in late 2004 by a company associated with Professor Peter Cuttance (Radii, 2004).
All but one of the states have systems in place that meet contractual accountability obligations, although New South Wales and Western Australia have systems that are limited in the quality of data generated, and in South Australia there is not strong linkage between the review process and contractual obligations.
In all but the Northern Territory, moral accountability is also evident at a systemic level. In New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland meeting the needs of the school community seems to have heightened emphasis.
Only two states have the potential for schools to engage in professional accountability.
Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory have systems that allow individuals in schools to reflect deeply on school education.
These systems encourage this through an external, independent review component that supports and challenges schools.
The systems are not comprehensive (for example, neither mandates reflection based upon classroom observations although it is an option in the ACT), and the Victorian system is a low-cost program that limits the amount of discussion available.
Differentiated review process