Reports suggest private schools may be sidestepping NAPLAN's intended purpose, manipulating participation to paint a rosier picture of student performance. This alleged practice, where lower-achieving students are reportedly withdrawn from the national assessment, casts a shadow over the data's integrity and raises questions about its use in educational admissions and public perception.

A study from UNSW Business School has pointed to a sector-specific trend, with private institutions more inclined than their public or Catholic counterparts to adjust their testing pools. This involves the withdrawal of students, a tactic that appears to have escalated since the 2010 launch of the "My School" website. The research indicates that poorly performing students are disproportionately affected by these withdrawals, while absences and exemptions have remained relatively static. This strategic adjustment could significantly skew the perceived academic standing of these schools.
Read More: California AB 1454: New law changes how reading is taught in schools from October 2025

The "Misuse" Debate
The integrity of NAPLAN results is further complicated by concerns that some schools are employing the scores as a de facto entrance exam. Stephen Gniel, chief executive of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), has publicly decried this practice, particularly among non-government schools and select-entry government schools in other states. While some schools maintain NAPLAN is just one piece of information used in admissions, used to identify students needing additional support, Gniel is aware of its application in enrolment processes. Independent Schools Victoria chief executive Rachel Holthouse has acknowledged that NAPLAN is one of many measures used to gauge student learning, with some claiming results are not determinative for entry but rather for understanding support needs.

Questioning the Measure Itself
Beyond the alleged manipulation and misuse, fundamental questions linger about NAPLAN's efficacy. Experts like Professor Jim Tognolini, Director of the Centre for Educational Measurement and Assessment at the Sydney School of Education and Social Work, view NAPLAN as a limited snapshot. He suggests that daily interactions between teachers and students provide a far richer and more nuanced understanding of progress. Critics have long argued that NAPLAN contributes to student stress, narrows the curriculum, and promotes a focus on high-stakes testing over genuine learning, failing to demonstrably lift overall academic achievement.
Read More: Great Barrier Reef Coral Loss Highest Ever Recorded in 2026
Historical Context and Ongoing Criticism
The National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) has been a fixture in Australian education for 17 years. Despite its longevity, its purpose and impact remain subjects of intense debate. Enduring criticisms include its tendency to limit teachers' professional practice, generate unhelpful school rankings, and encourage a formulaic approach to skills development, particularly in writing. The assessment also coincides with significant cultural and religious periods for some students, such as the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, presenting additional pressures and requiring careful consideration for individual student needs.
Read More: Ranipet School Gets New Open Auditorium Built With ₹9.7 Lakh