The purpose of collecting information should be to use it to help our children. Teachers collect information on a daily basis through formative(ongoing observations)and summative(testing) to inform where to next with their programmes to support children. Teachers are now spending time complying and not teaching, similarly administrators as well. The ones who suffer are the children. Accountability is always a part of teachers jobs, every day with their children, parents, school leaders. There are also norm referenced tools that were already in place before National Standards that were more accurate measures of how well individual children and our system was achieving. Readers may like to check latest PISA results where NZ performs so well internationally. Also they may like to view the latest report by the State Services Commission on the Ministry of Education and how well this organisation is performing and their ability to use the unmoderated information to resource and support schools. Readers may like to consider the amount of time, effort and energy going into this development and ask the question how is this helping children?

#9 you are confusing assessment with testing. e-asTTle (which covers both Maths and English- not just writing) in particular is a formative assessment tool. While the other tools you mentioned are normed, they are not National tests as schools pick and choose which tool they use also they all test mostly transferable broad skills eg reading comprehension not just specific knowledge eg subject verb agreement. National Testing generally tests specific knowledge someone has deemed children should know by a certain age- it is incredibly narrow and leads to a narrowing of curriculum and huge levels of disengagement for example NZ children show engagement levels of 80% in reading while students in Britain which has a narrow focus curriculum show an engagement level of 30% the level of students who leave unable to read appropriately is huge, they would probably be extremely grateful if they could achieve NZ's 1 in 7 ratio. e-asTTle is designed by the teacher using it so can cover a number of different features depending on what the teacher is looking for while it has been normed it could not be used as National Test as again it assesses mainly skills and some knowledge and it is not the same test used in every school at the same time.

Tolley is a thing of wonder. Her effortless rivaling of our lamest Ministers of Education has her easing past Chris Carter and eying the dizzying depths of Merv Wellington.

Essentially New Zealand primary schools already have a version of national testing with the widespread use of such assessment tools as Asttle (writing) PAT and STAR tests, and the numeracy diagnostic test (maths).

How are these not national tests? The tests are near identical depending on the child's cohort , most primary-aged students sit these tests, and results are produced.

Trav. You are 100% right. They bleat when they are treated like professionals expected to use their professional judgement and bleat when they are told what to do.

Good for Anne Tolley. She asked teachers to behave like professionals we could trust. Most of them do.

Like Nick #6 I listened to the Minister and education spokeswomen for the other parties discuss education policy this week. I can't believe this women has been left to run riot as she has. She spouted unsubstantiated, outdated facts and figures. She interjected when others were speaking and talked over them, acting like the school bully with an overinflated opinion of herself. She came across as patronizing to those she was debating with and to the public. One can only guess that she was intimidated to be sitting alongside well heeled education spokeswomen who knew their subject inside out. Apparently this is the first time she has ever fronted against the others - she usually sends a back bencher. Mrs Tolley is new to education stating herself that having once had her own children educated is her sole qualification for this portfolio. She's lucky she has Bill English telling her what to do and say. The fact that the ministry is now investigating ways to introduce specific assessments, because national standards are too waffly and subjective, leaves you wondering where the line is drawn between testing and assessment? If she does suddenly conclude, like the ministry have, that 'an assessment' is required to make the national standards reporting reliable I'm sure it will be bought in with the same speed and finesse that national standards have been. All the while she will be stating that they have a mandate to introduce national standards and make it work because they asked a sample of parents 'do you want to know where your child is at?'. Who would say no? They didn't ask how many of them already had that information.

Having listened to Anne Tolley recently debate the issues of National Standards with education spokespeople from the other main parties, I'm not surprised by the comments from many schools that she just doesn't listen. She spent much of the debate talking over the top of others, and shouting them down. She obviously works very hard at what she does, and is very single-minded in her approach. A great pity then that she doesn't have anything worthwhile to promote,or to be remembered for as a Minister of Education.

I am sorry, but the way in which Ms Tolley has insisted that National Standards have been foisted on, slapped over, whacked into and shoved through our primary school curriculum leaves me in no doubt whatesoever that this is simply round one of a grueling fight to wrest Public Education from the embrace of Education Professionals and put it firmly in the grip of commercial interests. The support offered to schools? Think this: a man beats his wife then gives her an icepack and says "Get on with it". That is the support, a ham fisted and inadequate psuedo-apology for forcing a poorly thought out, unscientific, unnecessary regime onto a school system staggering under massive curriculum and IT change. NO DEAL.

To Perry Rush,

If you (and your teaching staff) wish to retain a right to be viewed as members of a "profession", you need to front up and demonstrate your individual professed expertise (ie the very definition of being in a profession).

The more you expect standards to be fully prescriptive so that everyone is forced to the same conclusions, the less right you have to be considered 'professional'. I'd expect your 'profession' would revel in the opportunity to demonstrate you are still a legitimate profession, by taking the framework provided for National Standards, choosing from the range of recognised diagnostic and summative assessments, applying your Overall Teacher Judgement, and reporting your professional opinion to parents on their children's progress.

Your profession has been given a great opportunity to demonstrate you can still use professional judgement. Resist that opportunity at your peril because if your members fail to respond positively you will only become subjected to more and more prescriptive guidelines, until one day you will realised that you no longer have a right to be considered 'professional' - the stupid thing is that like accountants and various other professional bodies, you are arguing yourselves for more prescriptive standards that will remove your opportunity to make individual professional judgements - you're arguing a case against allowing Overall Teacher Judgement in reporting, but that's one thing that still gives you claim to a profession - you are arguing for the demise of your own profession. Take the opportunity - Be professional!

How can we have national testing if Anne Tolley keeps closing schools?