Funding and the Future

The issue of school funding and the intricacies involved in funding for the public as opposed to the private sector is highly contentious in contemporary Australian society given the recent revelation of Prime Minister Gillard’s decision in regards to the Gonski review (a proposal for a new funding system for Australian schools). In alignment with the review the Labor government’s dedication to improving schooling and education across the entirety of our country is proposed to be achieved through increased funding for all schools, “We've said that, under our plan, funding for every school will continue to rise - and we mean it.” (Garrett, 2012). This funding will begin with a base amount, dependent on student enrolment, and then will be added to in relation to the schools location (for example if it is rural/remote), if it is particularly high in English as a second language students, is a relationally small school, and if it enrolls students from a low income/low socioeconomic background (additional funds will be distributed for schools with indigenous students as well as students with disabilities)(Cullen, 2012) and this can be attributed to the fact that over the course of her political career in Australia, Prime Minister Gillard has “always been a believer in needs-based funding” (Hawkes, 2010, 61), hence, funding goes to all, but extra funding is delivered to those deemed most in need.

A common criticism of the Labor party’s plan for education and school funding is the view that money will solve all our problems. The Gillard government projects ideas that in order to have an education system endowed with the  “best teachers, has access to the latest technology and can offer things like sport, art and other activities that help our kids get a well-rounded education”(Garrett, 2012), the large expenditure of Ms Gillard's $5.6 billion ‘education crusade’”,(Loader and Whatmore, 2012) is the only way to achieve these goals, which is criticized for basing itself in the fallible ideology that somehow “spending more money, doing what we have always done, only somehow ‘better’, will deliver better results.” (Loader and Whatmore, 2012).

The government’s plans are criticized as they are seen to view money as the main initiative needed to better our education system, but it is important to note that ‘better resources’ for example are not the only contributing factor to the children of Australia’s education. Teacher training is an important part of the governments plan for educational reform however there needs to be a closer examination of teaching as a role within society and how to better it’s image and how to inspire new generations into teaching. This is what will help to provide the ‘best teachers’ that the government is after.

Cullen, Simon 2012 ‘Gillard delivers school funding plan’ ABC News, 3 September, accessed: 20/10/12, URL: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-03/government-delivers-response-to-gonski-review/4239956

Garrett, P 2012, ‘An Australia with no school of hard knocks’, Herald Sun, 21 August, Accessed 21/10/12, URL:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/an-australia-with-no-school-of-hard-knocks/story-fndo317g-1226454421453

Hawkes, Tim, 2010, ‘Schol Funding’ Teacher: The National Eduation Magazine, August, accessed: 21/10/12, URL:http://search.informit.com.au.wwwproxy0.library.unsw.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=271651069587318;res=IELHSS>

Loader, David and Whatmore, Simon 2012 ‘Why it’s time for a class revolt’ The Age, 15 October, accessed: 20/10/12, URL:http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/why-its-time-for-a-class-revolt-20121012-27hw1.html#ixzz2AMmbVrqG

Social media in Education

Social media and education is an issue that is in the forefront of the education world’s mind as in some ways, “It's a controversial challenge and a welcome relief” (Rivero, 2011, 13).

21^st century education and schooling must not fail to understand the importance of ‘E-learning’ within a classroom as the trends towards heavier use of this kind of media are steadily growing.

Anti-social media rhetoric over the usefulness of sites such as Facebook and Twitter in the classroom centres primarily on ideas of possibilities for distraction/lack of learning and misuse by both teachers and students. Of course, introduction of these sites into the classroom opens up a world of viral complications, “Bullying becomes cyberbullying note passing becomes sexting, and social media becomes … a potentially huge liability to learning.” (Rivero, 2011, 14). However the possibilities for beneficial learning must be considerably examined and valued. Two main reasons for the inclusion of such sites in school based learning are well articulated by a teacher from Roosevelt High School in Minneapolis, United States of America, when she states that inclusion of such media in the classroom environment has “significantly increased engagement”, due to the fact that it catches the attention of the students and increases their participation in the lesson, as well as helping to prepare them for the way they will be expected to communicate in tomorrow’s digital landscape. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OxIz_3o3O0)

On top of that, as a literacy, social media informs the way that most students communicate in their daily lives “alongside text messaging and instant messaging” (Britland, 2012), embracing this kind of communication and bringing this out-side of school literacy into the classroom teachers can better scaffold their students inside of school literacies and skill-building as they have a more thorough understanding and interaction with the kinds of communicative mediums of their students.

Educators and policy makers “should be taking advantage of this medium to advocate for education” (Kidwai, 2010, 8) and use it to help students learn how to use it not just for posting pictures of friends or networking, but using sites like Edmodo “Facebook of education…Users can post classroom materials; share links and videos; and access homework, grades, and school notices. Users can also Store and share blogs, pictures, documents, and presentations” (Rivero, 2011, 14), to help aid their education in an engaging, interactive and forwardly useful way, ”the investment in it is vital to their future” (Kidwai, 2010, 8).

Britland, Matt 2012 ‘Social media for schools: a guide to Twitter, Facebook and Pininterest’, The Guardian, 26 July, Accessed: 19/10/2012, URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/teacher-network/2012/jul/26/social-media-teacher-guide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OxIz_3o3O0

Rivero, Victor 2011 ‘Tools for Learning: We're talking social media in education’ Internet @ schools, p 12-15.

Kidwai, Sabrina 2010, ‘Classroom Connection: How to mobilize students using social media’ Techniques - Association for Career and Technical Education, vol. 85, no.3

Schools, teachers, the market and culture – Education in Australia

The growing trend in recent years of low-level academic achievers entering into the teaching profession is a worrying phenomenon. Statistics released in May 2012 indicate that “Education was the least popular course for school leavers with the highest university entrance scores, with only 5 per cent of offers made to students with an Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank (ATAR) above 90.05.”, and  “Almost 22 per cent of offers in education courses were made to students with ATARs below 60, including almost 7 per cent of offers to students who scored below 50” (Millburn, 2012). This kind of candidature of teachers implicates that the ones entrusted to educate the future mini-Australians are in fact, not necessarily the brightest, or the most academically skilled persons, resulting in a growing fear of under-educated or poorly educated students – and the snowballing of worsening teacher standards. The Australian government is facilitating a number of ways to combat this phenomenon as part of the recently revealed National Plan for School Improvement.

The idea of performance-based pay as a way to combat this trend and provide incentive for passionate, dedicated and skilled teachers is rife with ideas of commodification as salary based motivation for better quality teaching is a prime example of the way that education as a societal facet is being marketed and commodified into a business.

Marketization refers to the commodification of schooling into the market, by way of schools “importing expertise from marketing and fundraising experts, developing marketing plans, establishing sponsorship/fundraising committees and undertaking advertising programmes”, (Kenway and Bullen, 2001,123), thus entering themselves into the capitalist business market. Therefore rather than viewing marketisation simply as the promotion of individual schools, it can be broadly examined at the marketing of education as a whole. Given the candidature for graduate and undergraduate teachers, the use of financial incentive to inspire a better quality teaching culture by the government is allowing for the commodification of teaching and schooling, across sectors of public and private nature. By previously not individually rewarding the hard-working, passionate teachers the profession needs, “our most experienced teachers are tempted to move to the education bureaucracy or into school principal positions to increase their earnings, or worse to leave teaching all together” (ALP Gillard ‘Fact sheet’, 2012), thus leaving education in Australia in dire circumstances. Therefore initiatives such a performance-based pay where teachers are rewarded for their individual effort, as well as other forms of marketization such as the recent competition launched by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Federal Minister for Education Peter Garrett, searching for ‘Australia’s Favourite Teacher’ (Go Teaching, 2012) are actually evidence of commodification of culture – the government is aiming to create and market a culture of valuing education and teaching. The increasing focus, funding and promotion of education in Australia has been highly publicized but the ideas of education as a culture being marketised in such ways has yet to be thoroughly examined for educational implications on the future of our teachers and schools – will performance based pay alienate teachers in less-advantaged schools who will find it much more challenging to achieve the results the bonus requires, or will this kind of incentive serve to encourage school-leaver to view education more seriously as a prospective profession, no longer being deterred by the poor salaries they can expect for most of their careers post-graduation. And further, will the hunt for ‘Australia’s Best Teacher’ inspire students to aspire to be like their teachers, or will it be viewed as a cheap political stunt to win favour by the politicians in power?

Go Teaching, 2012 ‘Australia’s favourite teachers named’, Go Teaching – Great teaching jobs for great teachers, 8 October. Accessed: 20/10/2012, URL: http://www.goteaching.com.au/australias-favourite-teachers-named/8521/

Gillard, Julia 2012, Reward Payments for Great Teachers: Performance Pay Fact Sheet, Australian Labor Party

Kenway, J. & Bullen, (2001). Consuming children: Education-Entertainment-Advertising. Buckingham: Open University Press. Chapter 5: Designer schools, packaged students.

Milburn, Caroline 2012 “Why our best teachers are worth $150,000”, Sydney Morning Herald, 21 May, Accessed: 20/10/12 URL: http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/why-our-best-teachers-are-worth-150000-20120518-1yvyg.html#ixzz2AM7ruzRd

"Tolerance: Great…now what?”

Tolerance, what is it? Well, for starters it’s a complex, confused, completely contradictory concept. Right. According to Brown, “Tolerance has never enjoyed a unified meaning across the nations and cultures that have valued, practiced, or debated it” (Brown, 2008, 3) and this can certainly be true of the ‘tolerance’ found in 21^st Century Sydney Australia. I firmly believe that there are 2 main ideas of tolerance floating around in the public consciousness: the government’s projection and definition, and the reality.

Tolerance to me is the most simple and basic form of acceptance of some kind of difference usually seen as undesirable, or even more plainly ‘coping or putting up with something you don’t like’. Acceptance too can be whittled down to this very same idea of a basic level of acknowledgement and an agreement to consent begrudgingly or not). These bare and some may say cynical ideas of such terms are a stark contrast to the multiculturalism based ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’ preached by the Australian government. Put upon a golden pedestal, upon a fluffy white cloud is our nation’s idea of tolerance: a harmonious, love-based ideal centred on the happy and peaceful acceptance (there’s that word again…) of difference. Hmm. According to Brown, “To remove the scales from our eyes about the innocence of tolerance in relation to power is not thereby to reject tolerance as useless or worse.  Rather it changes the status of tolerance from a transcendental virtue…a resituating that casts tolerance as a vehicle” (Brown, 2006, 11). Tolerance as a vehicle, an interesting concept, but can it be employed within out contemporary society?

 Looking at examples from around Sydney, it’s hard to view tolerance in either this overly positive way or as a vehicle, as in some cases, it barely seems present at all. The opposition to the building of an Islamic school in Camden in 2007 was for a number of reasons – some logistic (traffic concerns for example) however others were more focussed on the diversity in religion/culture that the school would bring to the area. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj4CaYRb014&feature=related)

Now, within the comments made by residents of Camden in this video, particularly interesting were the ones regarding “Australian values”. Given the money, time and effort the Australian government has put into fostering a sense of multiculturalism and attempts at peaceful ethnic/cultural diversity within Australia, it seems ludicrous to hear opposition to an extension of this diversity based in the grounds that the presence of Muslim people is objectionable to ‘our’ “Australian values”, and taking away ‘our’ “democratic rights”. Linking reactions like this to the recent race demonstrations in Sydney and the severe backlash against the Muslim community, the idea of tolerance as the sweet and cheerful ideal underpinning our multicultural society is barely reconcilable. In terms of culture, evident is a scarily ‘intolerant’ society, in the basic sense of the word. The implications for this intolerance upon education within Australia is daunting, as initiatives such as Harmony Day don’t seem enough to induct in schooling to combat the reactions within our greater society. Now that we as a nation have babbled on about tolerance, and acceptance, it is time to actually put into practice some of which we are babbling, which leads us to this, Tolerance: Great…now what?

Narushima, Yuko; Senescall, Rebecca 2007, ‘Backlash over new Islamic school’, Sydney Morning Herald, 6 November, Accessed: 18/10/2012, URL: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/11/06/1194117995331.html

Brown, W. (2006). Regulating aversion: Tolerance  in the age of identity and empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Brown, W. (2008). Regulating aversion: Tolerance  in the age of identity and empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

A Reflection of My Own Experiences of Culture and Identity in Relation to Education – Week 10, ‘Racialisation’

 Racism and multiculturalism are two issues within contemporary Australian society that are extremely provocative in nature. In my experience, there are two kinds of multiculturalism, that which the government and tourism industry promotes, and that which actually happens. With a strong focus on ‘love’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘understanding’, the Australian government strives to project an image of cultural and racial harmony in Australia that transcends pre-conceived notions of difference and ‘otherness’. The reality of the multicultural interactions that underpin most of our society though are actually much less stylised and forced, rather naturally occurring and indeed quite as ordinary as interaction at the grocery store – this is ‘everyday multiculturalism’.

            Coming from Newcastle, NSW, where the cultural diversity rate at my school was about a 3 out of 10 and the open-mindedness a whopping 2, multiculturalism and the government’s idyllic projections are somewhat of a myth, given that there wasn’t really the biggest forum for cultural exchange. Moving to Sydney however, in my work at a private drama academy based in schools around the inner west and eastern suburbs, the diversity skyrockets to at least a 9 or a 10, and the forum for multiculturalism is opened up to not just what the government speaks about, but to the reality.

            The idea of schools as “ideal sites for the regular and continual cross-cultural exchange that characterises micropublics” (Ho, 2011, 606), that is put forward by Ho is one which seems to me, a perfect way to synthesise our reality with our governmental aims.

            Schools can be an interesting way to facilitate the growth of understanding and acceptance of other cultures that the government wishes for, given that children will be participating daily in the cross-cultural exchange that characterises multiculturalism, but it also satisfies Ho’s assertion that before we can learn to ‘love’ and live in harmony with one another, there has to be the base acceptance and ability to cope with difference, termed “mutual recognition” (614) which relates to the “simple acknowledgement of the legitimacy of the other’s presence within a social space” (614) as the children are with one another daily, regardless of whether they’re participating in culturally educative or harmonising activities.

            Ho’s differentiation between these two strains of multiculturalism is where I draw my strongest ideas of multiculturalism within education in Australia and my greatest understandings of my own experiences of it. Schools do indeed need to be utilised to their full capacity in order to promote harmony, (which despite my reservations regarding the governments methods, I certainly do hope to achieve within our country), however it needs to be recognised that this is without a doubt a very long-term goal. Opposite to my experience as a student in Newcastle, as part of the significantly white majority, my teaching experience in Sydney, as a part of an extremely ethnically varied society, has lead me to believe the practice of acknowledging diversity within our schooling systems is well under way, however there is a strong focus on recognizing and celebrating difference, whereas I feel that if there were less a focus on difference and more of a focus on recognising the similarities that all people share, then it would better integrate Ho’s mutual recognition as the first step towards our governments harmonious ideal.

Ho, C., 2011, ‘Respecting the presence of others: School micropublics and everyday             multiculturalism’. Vol 36 no. 6, Journal of Intercultural Studies, pp.603-619

School Choice - “Public vs Private vs…Home?”

            School choice and identity is an interesting idea as it can be looked at as ‘the chicken or the egg’ – Does school choice inform identity, or does identity inform school choice? To me, that question is utterly unanswerable – they’re both delicious. Oh yes, and in answer to the other question, school choice and identity are inextricably linked in ways that demonstrates the relational and processual nature of identity (Hopkins, 2010, 6; Hall, Neitz and Battani, 2003, 40). Given that our identity is constantly evolving and developing, and that it is determined not only by what we are, but also what we are not, it stands to reason that school choice plays a substantial role in our development as human beings, but also, that our development as human beings is largely a result of our school choice - herein lies the confusion.

            Identity in relation to public and private schooling is old news, so what happens when we add home schooling to the mix? There has been a growing trend amongst Australian parents in recent years to select this less thought of third option in the school sector debate. Society asks “why?” to parents who home-school their children and the most common answers are funnily enough not related to “no uniforms, no homework and no need to drop-off or pick-up” (MacGibbon, 2009) rather more focused around the individual and intimate nature of this kind of education as “it must always be a child-centered decision to home school, not parent-centered” according to Andrew Martin (associate professor and educational psychologist at the University of Sydney) (MacGibbon, 2009).

            By not having to make this important and undeniably path-changing decision for their children between simply the public sector, which is seen as a socially negative choice, and the competitive and expensive private sector, parents are able to reclaim some of their traditional moral and guiding authority (MacGibbon, 2009), as well as help their child to carve their unique and individual path of identity in the safe (some may say sheltered) home environment.

            Given, this kind of environment can be seen as an incentive for some parents to choose home-education in order to benefit their child’s identity formation, however it can also be seen as one of the major criticisms. The relational nature of identity leads us to understand ourselves as products of and responses to things that we are not, therefore without exposure to the varying identities found within schools (both public and private!) how can children expect to fully develop their identity? Home-schooling and identity is definitely a tough nut to crack as not only can it be seen as a good choice purely for its ability to tailor specifically to the individual identity of a child (the way that they “fit” into society and their surroundings) but for the same reason it can be seen as detrimental and limiting. Chicken or the egg – school choice and identity – who gives meaning to who?

Hall, J.R., Neitz, M.J. & Battani, M., 2003, Sociology on culture. London: Routledge. Chapter 2: Culture, self and society

Hopkins, P.E. 2010, Young people, place and identity. London: Routledge. Chapter 1:             Introduction

MacGibbon, Ainslie 2009, ‘The schooling choice we love to hate’, Sydney Morning Herald, 22 June, accessed 9/10/2012 Url: http://www.smh.com.au/national/the-schooling-choice-we-love-to-hate-            20090621-csln.html#ixzz2AJW7jZpn

Charter for a brighter future

Noel Pearson

The Australian

November 28, 2009

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/charter-for-a-brighter-future/story-e6frg6zo-1225804731679

For many Indigenous Australians public school education is their only option, many of these families live in isolated, low socio-economic pockets of the country and are naturally fed into the local public school. So what happens when the public system continues to fail these students? This failure is occurring in what Lane (Aboriginal researcher from South Australia) calls the embedded population, that is families living in the passive welfare world (The Australian, 2009). This includes most if not all-Indigenous groups in the Cape York area and other remote communities where traditional language and cultures are still strong.

                                                 

In 2009 the Rudd Government made education for disadvantaged children a particular focus of the Labor parties educational reform agenda but Noel Pearson who the director of the Cape York Institute for Policy and Leadership and says “For two decades I have witnessed the cycle of public revelations of failure, followed by the announcement of new policy frameworks and budgetary allocations. More experienced Aboriginal leaders have witnessed this Groundhog Day for three or four decades now. But these cyclical policy commitments have never led to sustained solutions” (The Australian, 2009).

The focus now should be on the implementation of charter school reform within Australia, it’s a formula that was implemented in North America nearly 20 years ago and that has proven to close the educational gap between ‘historically excluded racial and ethnic groups’ (Wells, 1999). Like American, Australia’s public education system seem to be grounded in what Wells (1999) describes as a narrow Western based understanding of merit (pg. 177), that is “one best system”. But while children from wealthy ‘white’ families were receiving the most challenging education, poor student of colour were left with an education that prepares them only for menial jobs (Kozol, 1991). Its this kind of inequality in the system that sparked comments from Pearson:

“To those who say that there are green shoots and glimmers of success and examples of hope, I'm sorry I can't take my focus off the glass 90 per cent empty, rather than being thankful for the glass 10 per cent full. Because I know what that 90 per cent empty translates into when those beautiful children who miss out on the social justice ticket become adults, jail, ill-health and early death” (The Australian, 2009).

Although Charter Schools still meet with a great deal of resistance with Australian unions, the hope is that with the continuing failing of current systems the case for a new reform will only gain momentum. The improvement of indigenous education will have a fold on effect to other areas such as employment, housing and health and until this is addressed successfully there will continue to bet yet another ‘great’ unjust bestowed upon the Indigenous Australians.

Noel Pearson (2009) The Australian

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/charter-for-a-brighter-future/story-e6frg6zo-1225804731679

‪ Kozol, J (1991) Savage Inequalities: ‪Children in America's Schools, Harper Perennial: USA.

Wells, A.S., Lopez, A., Scott, J. & Holme, J.J. (1999). Charter schools as postmodern paradox: Rethinking social stratification in an age of deregulated school choice. Harvard Education Review, 69(2), 172-204 http://hepg.metapress.com/content/K34475N478V43022

Amanda Blair explains her decision to send her four children to a public school

Education Editor Sheradyn Holderhead

October 05, 2012

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/amanda-blair-explains-her-decision-to-send-her-four-children-to-a-public-school/story-fndo471r-1226489484446

While many white Australians are fleeing the public school system it would appear for the same motivations that drive White Flight (Ho, 2011) are the exact reasons some Australians are staying put or opting to change to the public education system.

In an article published in the Helald Sun 2012, radio personality Amanda Blair explains her decision to send her four children to a public school, like many Anglo Australians Ms. Blair was fortunate enough to have a choice in school selection and initially opted to send her eldest to a Catholic Primary School but once she heard Premier Jay Weatherill, who was Education Minister at the time, speak about the innovations in the public education system, the "penny dropped"( Herald Sun, 2012).

Aside from believing in and wanting to support the initiatives that the public system was offering, she said another key reason behind the move was that being part of the local school connected the family to the diverse local community. "We want our children to have an understanding of diversity - ethnic, social and religious - and our school provides that” (Herald Sun, 2012). As Wilkinson et al. (2004) put it:

“Public schools with diverse student bodies are more likely to be effective in teaching tolerance and respect for difference. For this reason, investing in the public sector is liable to be a far more cost effective way of achieving social objective” (Pg. 73).

For Amanda Blair and many other Australians the decision to stay put in the public system may derive from the need for ‘cross cultural exchange’(Ho, 2011) and these interactions are more likely to occur in ‘micropublics’ (Ho, 2011) such as public schools. As Professor Tony Vinson commented, while chairing the Vinson Inquiry into the Provision of Public Education in New South Wales in 2002, public education has ‘‘aspired to be a force for social cohesion, for building mutual understanding between people of different ethnic, religious, vocational and socio- economic backgrounds’’ (Ho, 2011 pg. 606).

It would seem many parents are attracted to public education because of greater diversity and responsiveness to the needs of the local community (Herald Sun, 2012), Gravielatos (2006) even describes public schools as ‘‘the crucible within which democracy was formed and upon which a vibrant, socially cohesive future is dependent’’. Fostering ‘everyday multiculturalism’ (Ho, 2011) is imperative to ensure an equality mindset within our younger generation.

                                    

Sheradyn Holderhead (2012) Education Editor: Herald Sun

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/amanda-blair-explains-her-decision-to-send-her-four-children-to-a-public-school/story-fndo471r-1226489484446

Christina Ho (2011): Respecting the Presence of Others: School Micropublics and Everyday Multiculturalism, Journal of Intercultural Studies, 32:6, 603-619