Are we making education count in remote Australian communities or just counting education?

John Guenther October 2012

Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation

Goals: 1. To develop new ways to build resilience and strengthen regional

communities and economies across remote Australia.

2. To build new enterprises and strengthen existing industries that, provide jobs, livelihoods and incomes in remote areas.

3. To improve the education and training pathways in remote areas so that people have better opportunities to participate in the range of economies that exist.

Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation projects

• Regional economies • Population Mobility and Labour Markets • Enduring Community Value from Mining • Climate Change Adaptation and Energy Futures

• Enterprise development • Aboriginal Cultural Enterprise • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Economies • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Tourism Product • Carbon Economies in Remote Australia • Plant Business • Precision Pastoral Management Tools

• Investing in people • Pathways to Employment • Interplay Between Health, Wellbeing, Education and Employment • Remote Education Systems

http://crc-rep.com/research

4

Remote Education Systems sites

The discourse of remote education

• The rhetoric of ‘disadvantage’ • The rhetoric of poor outcomes • The rhetoric of remote schooling

6

Disadvantage

• Disparity • Gap, and closing the gap

• Lower school attendance and enrolment rates; • Poorer teacher quality (though no data are offered on this

one); • A lack of Indigenous Cultural Studies in school curricula (again

no data to support this); • Low levels of Year 9 attainment; • Low levels of Year 10 attainment; and • Difficulties in the transition from school to work

Overcoming Disadvantage Report But what of the richness of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture? And where are the celebrations of achievement?

7

Poor outcomes

Results for Indigenous students in very remote Australia are extremely poor. The majority of Indigenous students in very remote Australia currently do not meet the national minimum standard in reading, writing and numeracy. (FaHCSIA 2009:, p. 15)

(ACARA 2011) But how should we define ‘success’ in remote

schools?

8

Remote schooling

• Improving attendance • Improving teacher quality • Improving teaching and learning (pedagogical)

quality • Curriculum and reporting to national standards • Stronger school-community partnerships • Stronger accountability and choice

.

9

Analysis of NAPLAN results in very remote schools

10

Year 3 reading in very remote schools v

School attendance

Year 5 numeracy in very remote schools v

Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage (ICSEA)

Attendance vs NAPLAN Year 3 Reading Score, 2011 all very remote schools (n=119)

11

Moderate relationship

Attendance vs NAPLAN Year 3 Reading Score, 2011 very remote schools >80 per cent Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander students (n=70)

12

Weak relationship

ICSEA vs NAPLAN Year 5 Numeracy Score, 2011 all very remote schools (n=121)

13

Strong relationship

ICSEA vs NAPLAN Year 5 Numeracy Score, 2011 very remote schools >80 per cent Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander students (n=73)

14

No relationship

What does this then mean?

This analysis suggests that for very remote schools with mainly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students: • Strategies that work to increase attendance will not

necessarily result in improved educational outcomes (based on NAPLAN).

• Strategies that address disadvantage which are designed to improve educational outcomes (based on NAPLAN), will not necessarily work.

15

More questions than answers

• Why does the relationship between ICSEA, attendance and NAPLAN hold true for all remote schools but not for those with mostly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students?

16

Bush Mechanics

17

Some propositions

? Measurement meaning ? Culturally laden concepts ? Individuated way of administering NAPLAN ? Unrealistic expectations of ‘progress’ ? The supply side drivers of ‘improvement’ vs demand side

motivators for ‘improvement’; ? Definitions of ‘improvement’ differ in supply and demand

side of remote education; ? Socio-cultural factors, language, ontologies,

epistemologies, axiologies and cosmologies ? Coercive (or voluntary) interventions result in resistance

18

What could work, what might be abandoned?

× The positioning of remote students as ‘disadvantaged’ × Punitive instruments are not working and should be abandoned; × Attendance as a proxy for school performance in remote schools Alternative measures of school performance; Definitions of success that reflect local aspirations; Redefinition of a quality teacher and what it means to teach effectively; × Assessment against national curriculum standards; ? Assumptions about the outcomes of school-community partnerships The field of remote education is ripe for radical innovation; × Instruments of accountability.

19

But NAPLAN still has a place and should not be abandoned

Contact

John Guenther john.guenther@flinders.edu.au 0412 125 661 Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation http://www.crc-rep.com

20