What a result rests on
Every narrative or persuasive piece gets a score and a reason on each NAPLAN criterion, and the feedback is written from that marking, with one next step. If your school switches it on, teachers can adjust a score with a reason, and the original marks are kept. This page is about reading those results and acting on them; the marking itself has its own page.
From feedback to a revision
Students find a strength in their feedback, choose one useful change and write a second draft.
Class patterns for the next lesson
See class strengths and shared needs. Follow a pattern back to the writing, then decide what to teach next.
Interpreting results
AI feedback is a starting point. Teachers bring the context and judgement.
The right criteria for each genre
Narrative and persuasive writing use their respective NAPLAN criteria. Other genres use adapted criteria. Look at the criterion-level feedback alongside the writing, rather than the total alone.
Using a published rubric does not make a Writing Boost result an official NAPLAN result or predict a student’s NAPLAN proficiency level. Writing Boost is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by ACARA.
Teacher review, at every step
Read the original work before drawing a conclusion from its feedback. For handwritten work, teachers compare the editable transcript with the original page and correct recognition errors before submitting it for marking. A transcription error can change the evidence being assessed.
When a suggestion seems wrong, return to the sentence and criterion involved. Consider whether the response has missed an idea, misunderstood the task or treated an intentional choice as an error. Use your judgement to guide the student.
- Check that the task, genre and submitted text are the intended ones.
- Find a strength the student can point to in their own work.
- Choose one manageable revision and ask the student to explain their choice.
- If a result needs investigation, contact support with the task and criterion involved. Ask for a suitable way to share student work.
Comparisons with context
The teacher criterion comparison uses the Writing Boost year-level cohort within the same writing genre. It is a platform reference, not a nationally representative benchmark. In System Leadership, comparisons of system-task results concern the connected system and its participating schools.
Revising the same piece shows how a student responded to support. A later, comparable task can offer a different view of what they apply independently. Keep both pieces, and the conditions they were written under, in view when you discuss progress.
The evidence behind a result
Rubric alignment, agreement with expert markers and improved learning are different claims. On agreement: we checked Writing Boost against 52 officially marked NAPLAN scripts it hadn’t seen before, and 98% of its criterion marks were within one point of the official mark (adjacent agreement). For the full evaluation, including where the marking disagrees most, ask us.
