VCAA Review Number 3, Part 2 is Out

As was reported all over the place, Part Two of the Blacher Review is out (PDF and embedded below, and Word). Previous posts on Blacher are here, here and here.

I have had no time to look at Part Two of the thing. Blacher’s eleven recommendations, whatever they mean, are listed below; reportedly, all have been accepted by the State Government, whatever that means.

UPDATE (23/09/25)

Meh. I’ve now had a quick read, and there are a couple sections worth excerpting (soon) and pondering. But, in brief, meh. If not worse.

******************************************************

1. Retain the VCAA as a Statutory Authority.

2. Strengthen governance focus of the Board on key reforms and refreshed oversight committees.

3. Clarify the VCAA’s relationship with the Department of Education.

4. Establish a sustainable VCAA budget.

5. Implement structural changes to strengthen accountability and refocus the organisation on critical capability uplifts.

6. Reset organisational leadership, capabilities and culture, commencing with a progressive spill-and-fill of senior roles.

7. Critically review and redesign operating policies and processes.

8. Continue strengthening examination processes end-to-end with a focus on stronger process management in the early stages and enhanced integrity controls.

9. Establish a clear technology roadmap with priority focussing on the most critical operational risks.

10. Reset external stakeholder relationships and strengthen the focus on external ‘customer’ needs.

11. Maintain an Independent Monitor for a further 12 months or until the Minister is satisfied that the VCAA has the systems and processes to undertake its functions effectively.

**************************************

UPDATE (23/09/25)

The key Blacher recommendations, at least for Marty and his fellow travellers, are 8 and 10. I’ll excerpt some key passages soon(ish). But there is one critical passage, which indicates that Blacher really doesn’t get it.

Sub-recommendation 8.1 reads,

8.1 Create a single point of accountability for each examination

Fine. It would be good to know that the buck will stop somewhere. Then, in fleshing out this sub-recommendation, Blacher notes,

There also continue to be a significant number of staff, without subject matter expertise, who have examination sign-off responsibilities.

Tell me about it. But, yes, fine again. But then, after emphasising the desirability but difficulty of arranging for “a single exam ‘owner’ with subject matter expertise”, Blacher suggests a will-do-for-now plan:

In the interim, the VCAA should draw on the expertise of all its staff including examination development managers, curriculum managers and panel chairs to fulfill this role.

Jesus, Yehudi. Do you really not know what got us into this mess in the first place? Are you really not aware of the level of “expertise” of the panels and chairs?

Blacher really does not get it. Demonstrably, he has no real clue about the fundamental lack of expertise within and orbiting VCAA. In fact, there are reasons to be at least a little hopeful about mathematics exams, even if idiocy and gratuitous nastiness persist. But Blacher’s report is perpendicular to the problem and the efforts, already made and those that must be made in the future, to fix it.

***********************************************

UPDATE 25/09/25

Below are what I regard as the key parts of the key recommendations, 8 and 10. I’m not convinced that Blacher will do much if any good, and, if it distracts VCAA reform to be on structure rather than quality, it could make matters worse. But if Blacher is to do good, I think it will be based upon the concerns below, some of which resonates and some of which is decidedly off-key.

Recommendation 8 – Continue strengthening examination processes end to end with a focus on stronger process management in the early stages and enhanced integrity controls

…

8.1. Create a single point of accountability for each examination

…

There … continue to be a significant number of staff, without subject matter expertise, who have examination sign-off responsibilities.

This risk would best be ameliorated by having a single exam ‘owner’ with subject matter expertise accountable for signing off each examination – their sign off assuring that all appropriate experts have had input into the examination, the examination reflects the study design, final reviews have been conducted for errors, and the examination reflects a high-quality process.

The transition to identifying people who can fulfil the 2 roles of single exam owner and subject matter expertise may take several examination cycles. In the interim, the VCAA should draw on the expertise of all its staff including examination development managers, curriculum managers and panel chairs to fulfill this role.

8.2. Further clarify accountabilities and input requirements in the examination development process

An ongoing point of tension, which appears to have been exacerbated by the significant process changes recently undertaken, is the lack of clarity for different roles in examination development. Attempts to remedy this have sometimes been met with passive resistance and, as deadlines draw near, many have reverted to previous practices. This has created variations in how decisions are made across different examinations. The risk of conflicting views on who is empowered to make decisions is that it can create delays in examination timelines.

This Review recommends that role clarification includes, as a minimum, these points of accountability:

• examination development managers are accountable for ensuring that all necessary steps in the process are undertaken, including critical checking and sign-off steps, and that timelines are maintained

• curriculum managers are accountable for ensuring that the examination conforms with the study design at all substantive development stages – not just the beginning and end

• editors are accountable for language conventions and accessibility.

…

8.3. Improve panel recruitment and onboarding processes

The panel recruitment and onboarding process is often where challenges begin in the examination development process.

Panel recruitment is a large-scale appointment process with significant implications for the examination development process. While implementing a refreshed hire-to-retire process with the structure outlined previously, it is recommended that the process addresses the following areas.

Panel appointments should normally be for 3 years

…

We have been advised that some panel chairs were reticent to give feedback to other panel members but then expressed surprise at reappointments of less well-performing panellists. Feedback for panel members and for chairs is an important opportunity to cultivate the skills of panel members.

Improve the management of the talent pool of panels

The ability to fill panels with suitably qualified members without real or potential conflicts of interest is an annual challenge for the VCAA. In some circumstances, the pool of available candidates is low. This is particularly the case in some small studies with relatively few teachers, given the requirement that panel members are not currently teaching VCE subjects but are familiar with the curriculum.

While this is true for some cases, and curriculum managers and exam development managers report the need to ‘rely on individual networks’ to ‘tap applicants on the shoulder’, this Review recommends that the VCAA pursue more opportunities to act more systematically to cultivate a talent pool for each subject.

Advertising of roles is done through a blanket process on the VCAA’s Sessional Staff Management System and utilising other forms of mass communication. A better targeted communications approach could include more active recruitment steps such as regularly engaging with peak bodies to identify suitable prospects, personalised approaches to teachers currently teaching VCE subjects to ensure they are aware of the opportunity when taking parental or other leave, and cultivating partnerships with universities to identify suitably qualified academics.

The VCAA should also have a ‘pipeline’ way of managing talent more deliberately. High-performing assessors should be identified and flagged as future candidates for examination panels. Currently, there is an external perception that opportunities to be employed by the VCAA can only be attained by being ‘tapped on the shoulder by your network’.

…

Improve panel onboarding processes

…

8.4. Reset timeframes in the examination development process, including strong commitments to achieving key milestone dates

…

8.5. Address security and integrity weaknesses in the examination development process, including conflict declarations and information handling

…

8.6. Revise the special provisions process to streamline handling

…

Recommendation 10 – Reset external stakeholder relationships and strengthen the focus on external ‘customer’ needs

10.1. Create systemic mechanisms for identifying and responding to issues raised by teachers and other stakeholders

The VCAA is an organisation that is rightly proud of its expertise. However, a consistent theme in many of the public submissions we received was that external stakeholders are viewed as impediments rather than important partners in the delivery of educational outcomes to students.

‘We think of collaboration as consultation… and treat consultation as a tick-box exercise before [we] can do what [we] want.

’VCAA staff workshop

The VCAA’s current senior management has acknowledged that it needs to improve the way it engages with stakeholders including other public sector agencies, representative bodies and industry groups. It should:

• deepen its understanding of who its stakeholders are by, for example, developing and maintaining a register

• establish a framework for how it will engage with these stakeholders in relation to different topics. The IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation may be a useful tool to categorise different levels of engagement depending on the topic

• adopt a mindset of genuine interest and curiosity in the input of others

• communicate with stakeholders by clearly outlining how their input was used in decision-making.

Engagement with schools and students

Our first report highlighted the inadequacy of communications with schools during the 2024 examination problem. Both submissions and peak body engagement attested to the operational toll on schools as well as the emotional toll on principals, teachers and distressed students from the lack of timeliness and transparency in the VCAA’s communications.

…

One important avenue to rebuilding trust will be resetting how the VCAA communicates with schools in the future.

Communication with schools – particularly during the high-pressure examinations period – should follow a set of basic principles:

• communicate early with accurate information

• be clear about when the next set of communications can be anticipated

• provide guidance for addressing student and parent concerns – for example, that there are established practices for making sure that examination outcomes are fair

• involve stakeholders in shaping communications as much as possible – consider establishing a trusted advisory committee of principals and teachers to test and refine messaging

• provide equitable channels for follow up, ensuring that no stakeholder has privileged access to additional information than others.

This should be captured in a communication policy and form part of a crisis management protocol.

Engagement with teachers and subject matter associations

A consistent theme from some external stakeholder feedback, particularly teacher submissions, was the lack of consideration and responsiveness demonstrated by parts of the VCAA when engaging with them.

Stakeholders used many different words to describe the attitude, but we summarise it as ‘command-and-control’. Teachers particularly felt that the VCAA has been indifferent to the realities experienced in classrooms and the challenges posed by certain changes to the curriculum that have significantly added to teacher workload.

Internally, it has been recognised by some VCAA staff that consultation with external stakeholders is often undertaken as a mandatory exercise rather than an openness to using the feedback for making substantive changes. In any setting, but especially against a backdrop of a teacher shortage, the VCAA should demonstrate that it recognises and considers the experiences of teachers who deliver the curriculum day to day.

‘The audit process makes me feel undervalued and when teachers are in short supply, VCAA need to be giving more support through the development of curriculum… It is disheartening when we are not trusted as professionals.’

Public submission

…

The VCAA has a ‘consultation register’, to which any teacher can sign up, to provide feedback on draft study designs. However, to date, this register has not been widely utilised. Future revisions to this approach should consider how the VCAA can simplify the process of feedback (for example, allowing all teachers to provide open-ended feedback) and promote it more widely, drawing lessons from other jurisdictions such as NSW.

More routinely, the VCAA should establish thresholds for the internal review of curricula based on teacher feedback. There is a range of options available to the VCAA in responding to feedback ranging from issuing supplementary guidance and sample materials to clarifying how some learning areas would apply in a classroom setting or bringing forward a revision of the subject. There also needs to be a more consistent standard for engaging with teachers to provide them support. When this Review surveyed curriculum manager workload, feedback indicated that, while some curriculum managers spent a large proportion of their time responding to teacher queries, others saw it as not being a material part of their workload.

An orientation towards ‘customer service’ needs to be part, but not all, of the many roles in the business, particularly curriculum managers. The Board and CEO should play an essential role in setting the tone for enhanced customer service.

10.2. Seek to broaden the diversity of backgrounds and experiences of staff appointed to the VCAA

Teacher submissions and the experiences of some VCAA staff attest to a disconnect between how the VCAA conceptualises what should be taught in schools and the realities of teaching in different environments – specifically those schools with fewer resources, such as regional schools and those in lower socioeconomic areas. This is not only relevant to curricula development, but the entire support system that the VCAA makes available to teachers – from planning support, teaching resources and sample materials to engagement pathways for teachers who may lack access to peer support, conferences and other mechanisms.

…

The VCAA’s key objective is to enable Victorian students to attain an education that meets a global standard. This should sit alongside the aspiration that every student has the best opportunity possible to learn: an objective that requires the VCAA to fully understand how curricula and examinations come to life in different teaching environments and learning experiences. This means recognising that not all teachers are able to attend conferences or purchase commercially produced teaching resources. Improving the VCAA’s channels of communication and support materials can help fill these gaps.

…