THIRD REPORT SEPTEMBER 2002
INQUIRY INTO THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC EDUCATION IN NEW SOUTH WALES
ISBN 1 875 699 59 7
SPONSORED BY: NSW TEACHERS FEDERATION & FEDERATION OF P&C ASSOCIATIONS OF NSW
INQUIRY PANELLISTS Kathy Esson - Senior Inquiry Officer Ken Johnston - Senior Inquiry Officer Tony Vinson - Chairperson
INQUIRY PERSONNEL Joan Brown - Inquiry Officer Greg Eliovson - Inquiry Officer (part-time) Trudy Wiedeman - Secretary
RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Neville Hatton - University of Sydney
Alan Watson - University of New South Wales
CHAPTER 8 SCHOOLS, COMMUNITIES AND SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE 1 PART ONE: SCHOOLS AND THEIR COMMUNITIES 1 - Parent participation in schools 1 - Schools as community learning centres 5 - Community supports for learning 7 - Value to Education in a Disadvantaged Community PART TWO: SCHOOLS AND SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE 12 - Resources for schools in disadvantaged areas 12 - Aboriginal communities and their schools 20 - Students from language backgrounds other than English (LBOTE) 24 CHILDREN IN CARE 26 GENDER 28
CHAPTER 9 THE INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IN MAINSTREAM CLASSES 31 BACKGROUND 31 THEMES EMERGING FROM SUBMISSIONS, SCHOOL VISITS, HEARINGS 32 - Support for assisting all students to learn and for the inclusion 35 of students with disabilities in mainstream classes - Concerns about the Funding Support program 36 - Specialist versus generalist teaching for students with disabilities 38 - Two illustrative case studies 39 - Numbers of Support Teachers Learning Difficulties (STLDs) 41 - Conclusions 42 FUNDING SUPPORT PROGRAM - RECENT TRENDS, FUTURE DIRECTIONS 42 BEHIND THE DISSATISFACTION WITH RESOURCES FOR FUNDING SUPPORT AND STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES 46 THE QUESTION OF ‘FULL’ INCLUSION 47 - The value of social inclusion 47 - Behavioural issues 51 OPERATION AND RESOURCING OF THE FUNDING SUPPORT PROGRAM 52 - Administration 52 - Need for more support / training for teachers of students with disabilities 53 - The role of teachers aides (special) 55 - Funding of the Funding Support program 57 NEED FOR MORE SUPPORT TEACHERS LEARNING DIFFICULTIES (STLDs) 61
CHAPTER 10 CONNECTING SCHOOLS AND TAFE 65 THE CONTEXT FOR CHANGE 65 VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND GENERAL EDUCATION 69 COORDINATION BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND TAFE 72 MODELS FOR COLLABORATION 75 WORK PLACEMENTS 78 CHANGING WORK ROLES 80 TAFE AND A 'SECOND CHANCE' EDUCATION 83
CHAPTER 11 TEACHER EDUCATION 88 INTRODUCTION 88 VIEWS PUT TO THIS INQUIRY 89 TEACHER SUPPLY AND DEMAND 92 - Teacher education entrants 92 COVERAGE OF CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT AND STUDENT BEHAVIOUR 95 PRACTICE PROFICIENCY AND MAINTAINING A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE 98 GUIDANCE DURING FIRST PROFESSIONAL YEARS 102 - Implications for New South Wales 104 CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 105
CHAPTER 12 GOVERNANCE 106 INTRODUCTION 106 VIEWS PUT TO THE INQUIRY 108 - Concerns about centralised decision making 108 - Leadership and advocacy by the DET 110 - Concerns about devolution of resources to districts and schools 110 - School level governance 112 THE TENSION BETWEEN CENTRALISATION AND DEVOLUTION 113 THE DET STATE OFFICE 117 DISTRICT OFFICES 128 SCHOOLS 131 - Community participation in school governance 132 - School staffing (teachers) 133 - School staffing (school administrative support staff) 138 - The school global budget 140
CHAPTER 13 INVESTING IN YOUNG PEOPLE AND OUR FUTURE: A TEN-YEAR PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE NSW PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM 143 KNOWLEDGE INVESTMENT 144 EDUCATION AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES 146 - General government expenditure 146 - Expenditure on education in New South Wales: public schools 147 - Comparison of state expenditures 147 - Budget consequences of NSW investing at national average/student 149 - Teacher/student ratios 150 - Funding from individuals 151 DISTRIBUTION OF THE PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN SCHOOL EDUCATION 151 - NSW Government expenditure on non-government Schools 151 - Direct Commonwealth funding to non-government schools 155 THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION 159 OPPORTUNITIES FOR RE-DIRECTING INVESTMENTS WITHIN THE EDUCATION SECTOR AND ACROSS SECTORS 161 - The School Student Transport Scheme 161 - Back to school allowance 164 - 25% per capita funding linkage 164 - Interest rate subsidies 166 - Saving across sectors 166 TEACHERS’ SALARIES 167 OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEIR COSTS 168 CHAPTER 8 SCHOOLS, COMMUNITIES AND SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE
The previous chapter illustrated the important interconnections between schools and communities in rural regions by describing the role played by Warialda High School as a community-learning centre. This purpose of this chapter is to continue this theme by examining a range of practical efforts to strengthen the connection between schools and their communities.
There are powerful educational reasons for closer school and community relations. Learning outcomes improve when parents become involved in their children’s learning and when schools form close links with families. Young people are better able to cope with the challenge of learning when schools work together with community agencies to provide them and their families with social and educational support. Community involvement in socially and economically disadvantaged areas reduces the gap between the school and the local community. When this happens, teachers are more easily able to appreciate the subtle neighbourhood effects on their students’ learning and to develop teaching and learning strategies that are more responsive to local needs. Finally, as the Warialda case illustrated, schools that draw upon the rich array of learning resources in the wider community dramatically increase the educational opportunities for their students. These are strong arguments for re-thinking the relationship between schools and their communities and it accords with the view expressed by The Smith Family in its submission to the Inquiry:
The traditional place of the school in the community should be reassessed. Schools have to move away from being buildings where students are taken and become instead community hubs where networked linkages with vital community activities are promoted.
This chapter will contribute to this important reassessment. The first part, Schools and Their Communities begins by considering the advantages of parental involvement in their children’s schooling. It then proceeds to explore the possibility of schools serving as community learning centres in urban areas and towns with substantial populations. Finally, it discusses community supports for learning in particular localities. The second part, Schools and Social Disadvantage, also contains three sections. It begins with an examination of the educational resources for schools in disadvantaged areas. This is followed by an assessment of Aboriginal communities and their schools. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the educational support provided to students from language backgrounds other than English.
PART ONE: SCHOOLS AND THEIR COMMUNITIES
Parent participation in schools
The idea that parents should participate in their children’s schools is one of the most frequently asserted views about contemporary public education. It is claimed that when parents become involved in education their children learn
1 more effectively1. Parental attitudes become more supportive and this helps to improve students’ attendance, application and success. The legitimate scope of parental participation and how it can be reconciled with the increased professionalism sought by teachers are issues that deserve closer attention than they generally receive. One overseas study2 of teachers’ attitudes revealed their belief that when they are working with colleagues they think that they need to work with people, whereas when they are working with members of the community they need to work on them. The consequence, according to the study, is that:
The form of relationship in which parents are active or unquestioning supporters of what teachers do keeps teachers in a state of classical professionalism. This distances them, intellectually and emotionally, from the learning and lives of the increasingly diverse and demanding students they teach as well as from their families.
Throughout this report the facilitation of learning has been acknowledged as the teacher’s primary area of expertise and professional functioning. In accordance with this perspective professional advancement mainly focuses on acquiring advanced knowledge and skills in areas such as productive pedagogies, subject knowledge and the promotion of collegial learning, resulting in increased influence on school decision making. The word influence is preferable to authority because it better captures the element of persuasion that attaches to increased professional status and experience.3 So far as parents are concerned, participation can refer to a range of possibilities, from raising funds to being consulted about school affairs and their children’s progress, without exercising influence on educational matters, to a degree of parental empowerment where they influence the core business of the school’s educational practices.
When the latter is the case, both parents and teachers are viewed as “part of a participatory community with ‘external’ as well as internal participants”4. This communal arrangement requires that all participants operate not only with influence in their respective roles, but also with duties and responsibilities. It is possible for that division of labour to be built around continuing respect for the role of professional educators. This mutual relationship between parent and professional is succinctly expressed in the following statement5:
What we (parents) claim is a complementary role, where both parents and school staff learn together and reflect together on what is happening in our schools. We can help to build community support for the work schools are doing, and increase community regard for the people who work in them. .
1 Wolfendale, S., (1989) Parental Involvement, Developing Networks Between Home, School and Community, London, Cassell; Pugh, G., (1989) “Parents and professionals in pre-school services: is partnership possible,” in Wolfendale, S., op. cit. 2 Hargreaves, A., (2000) “Professionals and Parents: Personal Adversaries or Public Allies?” Prospects, Vol. XXX, No. 2, p.206 3 Bauch, P. A., Goldring, E. B., (1998) “Parent-teacher participation in the Context of School Governance,” Peabody Journal of Education, Vol. 73, No. 1, 15-35 4 Glatter, R., Woods, P., (1982) “Parental choice and school decision-making: Operating in a market-like environment,” cited in Bauch and Goldring (1998), op. cit., p.28 5 Morris, W., (1992) Parents and School Governance, An address to the annual conference of the Western Australian Primary Principals’ Association, June. Australian Council of State School Organisations INC, p. 6
2 A comprehensive partnership between teachers and parents is frequently seen as a productive ideal to be pursued. Not only is it advocated in the educational literature but it is also favoured by many parents and teachers encountered in the course of the present Inquiry. In the 1970s, parent-teacher collaboration received a strong impetus from the influential Karmel Report6. The views embodied in the Report were carried forward by a strong parent movement composed of well- educated, articulate parents who were prepared to challenge the isolation and unresponsiveness of the school. The Australian Council of State Schools Organisations (ACSSO) was a major force in advocating greater parent involvement in their children’s education and the promotion of the public school as an integrating force in the life of the community. As part of the Disadvantaged Schools Program and the Country Areas Program, parents or community members were required to be on local school-based committees to determine the needs of the school and develop submissions for funds to address local problems. In addition, funds from the targeted programs supported innovative community - school projects, such as the appointment of Community Liaison Officers, the establishment of community or parent centres on the school site, and parent support programs with a strong curriculum focus. In Canberra, a ‘School Without Walls’ was based on the idea that the curriculum should draw upon sites for learning within the broader community. Under the rubric of ‘open education’, a variety of schools attempted to renovate the curriculum through forms of community involvement.
However, few practical instances of broad teacher-parent collaboration have been encountered in the course of the present Inquiry raising the question of what obstacles get in the way. The Inquiry has met parents as volunteers in roles as varied as operating tuckshops and assisting with reading practice and supervision. Almost every P&C raises funds for purchases that range from computers, outdoor structures to protect students from sun and rain, textbooks and teaching aids, to specialist staffing and enhanced educational opportunities. A limited number of P&Cs immerse themselves in the management of the finances and the practical management of their schools. All of these activities are to be applauded, although parents are the first to say that they would prefer to be supporting developmental initiatives rather than providing basic requirements in their schools. However, few parents responded to the Inquiry’s questioning about their involvement in broader questions of educational policy and programming with indications that these core matters are part of what they seek to influence.
Why is this so? The general answer provided by research and experience elsewhere is that developing effective parental participation cannot be achieved merely by fiat but needs to be actively encouraged and managed. Research indicates that parent collaboration is dependent upon teacher invitation and requires active facilitation, for example, by organising genuine conversations around curriculum and teaching methodology.7 In poorer areas, teachers may be inclined to view parents as being ‘hard to reach’ but studies have established that this need not be the case once the parents know more about their potential role, rights and responsibilities in the education of their children8. Australian researchers have come to similar conclusions. They have found that when parents are given the opportunity to contribute to important school decisions - and not just be token participants in social activities - they are strongly motivated to contribute9. The essential requirement is
6 Interim Committee of the Australian Schools Commission, (1973) Schools in Australia report, Canberra, AGPS (The Karmel Report) 7 Ibid., p.29 8 Blackledge, A., (1995) “Minority Parents as School Governors in Chicago and Britain: empowerment or not?” Educational Review, Vol. 47, N0. 3, 309-317 9 Evers, C. W., Chapman, J. D., (1995) Educational Administration, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, p.267
3 that parents should become more knowledgeable about schools, how they operate, and be aware of key educational issues in order to interact effectively with teachers. Time and effort need to be invested in building trust among stakeholders, and in some localities training workshops involving mixed-role stakeholders have been part of a serious effort to establish the foundations for effective parental participation10.
Another important lesson has been that parental involvement in decision-making, instead of being a freestanding component of a school’s organisation, needs to be an advanced step in a multi-layered series of home-school partnerships11. The first level involves participation in school social events, performances and general meetings involving the rudiments of school organisation. The second level seeks to integrate parents more fully into the day-to-day life of the school as volunteers. Level three involves parents in school governance and management. This latter stage should start with tasks that are relatively conflict free enabling teachers and parents to get to know and respect one another and become participants in a collaborative enterprise. These management pathways that have resulted in some school systems achieving the authentic involvement of parents in managing core educational issues, are worthy of consideration within the New South Wales system.
The Report of the Management Review (Scott Report) in 199012, while not advising the mandatory introduction of a School Council in every New South Wales school, recommended that school renewal plans should include initiatives to encourage the formation of a School Council. Among other intended functions, Scott believed the talents and resources of the local community could be coordinated to examine departmental policies and implement and assess school renewal plans. These intentions certainly required parental and community intervention in the educational business of schools. For example, the report spoke of the need to “ratify the non-core curriculum of the school in the context of available professional resources”. At the time these views were expressed (at the beginning of the 1990s), devolution to schools was the flavour of the month in every system in Australia and in the UK, New Zealand and the US13. The enthusiasm for School Councils was strong in New South Wales in the early 1990s - the number grew from four in 1989 to 750 by 199214 and had reached 1,537 by 199815. In the light of these statistics, it is surprising that School Councils hardly figured in submissions to the Inquiry or the discussions held with parents and school executives16.
The wisdom of having such arrangements and the benefits to be derived by way of enhanced parental support for students’ learning, still apply. A later chapter on Governance sets out some of the conditions that need to be met if School Councils are to work effectively. What as a community we should have learned from recent history is that more is involved than ministerial decree or the adoption of an ‘off the- shelf’ structure. The form of association within which the collaboration takes place, like so many other aspects of the organisation of public education, needs to take account of local circumstances. Frequently, there will be a need to build the scale of interaction from simple involvement to authentic participation, in the ways described
10 Cavarretta, J., (1998) “Parents are a School’s best Friend,” Educational Leadership, May, pp.12-15 11 Drake, D. D., (1995) “Using the Comer Model for Home-School Connections,” The Clearing house, May/June, 313-316 12 Report of the Management Review: New South Wales Education Portfolio, (1990) School-Centred Education, Sydney, pp. 76-77 13 Morris, W., (1992) op. cit., p.3 14 Sharpe, F. G., (1992) restructuring School Education in New South Wales, Australia, 1988-1991,Hong Kong, Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration, August, p.14 15 DET Annual Report (1998), p. 132 16 The role of School Councils will be discussed further in Chapter 12 that deals with governance in NSW Education.
4 earlier in this chapter. The absolute number of people who participate in serious decision-making is not the sole measure of success in this field. In the course of its fieldwork, the Inquiry was privileged to observe ten Aboriginal women exchanging views on current and prospective educational measures with the local principal over a meal in their community centre. The tone was serious, the issues substantial and the trust evident. In another town, Aboriginal parents hungered for the same opportunities for serious discussion with teachers. They wanted that discussion to take place on their home territory but complained that the only time a teacher ever visited was to report some failing by one of their children. They had never had the opportunity, they commented, to express their ideas on the scope and purposes of education.
Schools as community learning centres
Another community-relevant role for schools derives from the altered nature of learning and knowledge production in a rapidly changing global world. A recent UNESCO Report (1996)17 argued for diverse and complementary institutions to support learning throughout life, in a range of learning environments. Changes in the labour market and the nature of career and occupational skill has meant that there are few guarantees that school leavers will enter permanent, full time employment. In addition, increased life expectancy means that education may play a greater role across the life span. Individuals increasingly will be called upon to enter and re-enter learning networks for exchanging and producing information and knowledge. In addition to the obvious connections with working life, the core notion is that education is linked to life and occurs in a rich diversity of formal and informal sites.
The challenge is for schools to become centres of learning for the whole community, and to think of communities or regions as learning networks of which schools are a vital part. The account in the previous chapter of Warialda High School’s involvement in its region shows that it has embarked on becoming a centre of learning for the whole community with a range of programs covering career preparation and up-skilling, as well as cultural pursuits. The Inquiry has recommended that the DET and the Strengthening Communities Unit of the NSW Premier’s Department support Warialda High School, and schools in three other country regions, to undertake community capacity strengthening projects, support local economic initiatives and strengthen bonds within their communities.
However, the importance of schools as community learning centres is not restricted to small country towns and the Inquiry is keen to develop schools with equally permeable boundaries in larger communities. It is time to begin to make a reality in both rural and urban population centres of ideas like ‘life-long learning’ that have graced many a report on the public education system over the years. In embarking on this course the Inquiry is conscious of the many previous occasions on which similar proposals have been hailed as desirable but seldom given practical effect, even to the point of cautious experimentation. Part of the explanation for this has been the excessive valuing of uniformity in educational practice and the dominance in New South Wales of centralised and highly prescriptive curricula.
It is more than time that New South Wales undertook a modest pilot project in which educational advantage is taken of the stimulus of schooling being closely connected to its community, and the community drawing upon and contributing to the learning
17 UNESCO (1996) Learning: The Treasure Within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty First Century, Paris, UNESCO Publishing
5 resources of its school. Provided an appropriate degree of attention is paid to prescribed curricula, this approach can be both stimulating and secure from the point of view of the student’s career. In Chapter 2 it was shown that the adoption of engaging pedagogies and the employment of local problems and materials of relevance to students has not entailed any loss of academic rigour. There is every reason to believe that students of all backgrounds will profit from the approach, with socially disadvantaged young people being among those most likely to benefit.
The practical realisation of this aspiration depends on the attainment of several of the interlocking recommendations contained in this report. In Chapter 2 the idea of a Pedagogy Clearinghouse was proposed as an efficient and effective means of exchanging professional practice knowledge and experiences. The same chapter recommended forms of financial and other professional development support that are needed to undertake the tasks described below. In Chapter 5 it was recommended that a number of student welfare roles be introduced into 20 schools on the basis of clearly defined strategic priorities. One of those priorities was the integration of schools with their communities. This goal matches the present intent and the cost of pursuing it has already been allowed for if three of the 20 project schools discussed in Chapter 5 are aligned with the present focus on schools as community learning centres in towns and urban centres with substantial populations18.
When it comes to the choice of locations in which to pilot the projects, there is much to be said for integrating social initiatives in education with parallel initiatives being taken by other branches of state government. This is especially true of locality-based endeavours, which represent a relatively new locus for government policy and are still in an early stage of refinement. Several of the Inquiry’s earlier recommendations concerning pre-schools (Chapter 3) and rural schools as community education centres (Chapter 7) suggested linkages with the work of the Strengthening Communities Unit within the NSW Premier’s Department. Another current government initiative, and one that articulates with the ‘schools as community learning centres’ proposal is the Priority Regional Communities Project, an initiative of the NSW Human Services Chief Executive Officers Group with the Department of Housing as the lead agency. As the name suggests, the Project is focused on communities that suffer high levels of social exclusion and disadvantage. It aims to develop partnerships within the community to identify priority issues and develop responses that improve services and build community capacity. The approach emphasises community involvement as the basis for local reflection and education. These ambitions are highly consistent with the flexible school structure and program recommended for the schools as community learning centres pilot projects. Steering Committees for the currently being established Priority Regional Communities Project exist in three localities, Nowra, Mt Druitt and Clarence Valley and the Department of Education and Training is represented on all three Committees.
To fulfil this ‘community learning centres’ brief, the schools would be encouraged to develop innovative forms of curricula,19 pedagogy and school organisation to accommodate a wider diversity of students and joint youth-adult activities. There would be weaker barriers between pre-school, primary and secondary divisions; school facilities would be shared with community groups, and strong links
18 The Inquiry notes that the DET lists five public schools as Community Schools. The distinctive quality of these schools is that they are Kindergarten to Year 12 schools and are described as being Central Schools in urban and metropolitan areas. They bear no relationship to the schools as community learning centres concept proposed by the Inquiry. 19 Over and beyond those prescribed for pre- and post-compulsory schooling.
6 would exist with other educational providers. Young people would be exposed to a variety of work experiences and learning environments outside the school. They would perform an active role in undertaking worthwhile and valued activities in building community. The schools would have autonomy to develop their own particular mix of services and activities to suit local needs.
Recommendation 8.1: That three schools be established as community learning centres within the regions designated as sites for Priority Regional Communities Projects, as discussed in the text. The schools should pilot flexible learning programs long described as necessary to meet contemporary needs but seldom implemented in practice. The services provided for school aged pupils as well as youth and adult members of their communities should be documented and evaluated ‘in- house’ and in collaboration with the local Reference Group of Community Stakeholders within each Priority Regional Community Project.
Community supports for learning.
A recent OECD publication (OECD 2001) sketched out a number of scenarios for the future of public schooling20. One of the scenarios described public schools of the future as vibrant, innovative community centres that served not only as social anchors in their neighbourhoods, but as a focus and force for community re- vitalisation. The community oriented school would lay down a strong foundation of knowledge, skills, and values as a basis for life-long learning, while at the same time becoming a hub for a range of programs in further and continuing education and training. The image was of a school finely tuned to its community, giving due weight to the social purposes of education alongside the benefits that accrued to individuals. The Inquiry has this image in mind in recommending the piloting of the schools as community centres project in the previous section. As the OECD report points out, this particular model builds upon a long-standing tradition that has sought to strengthen the relationship between schools and their communities. The arguments for such an educational strategy have ebbed and flowed, and so too have the practical interventions to achieve closer relations between school and community.
The recent revival of interest in the relationship between the community and school has come about through the convergence of several strands of thinking and policy development. An influential theme has been that social capital, the glue that holds communities together, has weakened as societies have become increasingly individualistic, fragmented and culturally diverse21. Social cohesion, or rather the lack of it, has been found to be associated, among other social problems, with mental
20 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), (2001) What Schools for the Future? Schooling for Tomorrow, Paris, OECD Publication Service 21 Putnam, R., (1995) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York, Simon and Scghuster
7 illness,22 child maltreatment,23 health,24 crime,25 and unemployment26. It is important however to state that for good reasons, Australian governments, including to its credit the NSW Government, have adopted a policy of community strengthening and building social capital, particularly in localities that are socially disadvantaged27. The currently being established Priority regional Communities Project referred to in the previous section is a case in point.
Public schools contribute to social cohesion. They accept students from a wide diversity of social and cultural backgrounds and in partnership with other community associations and agencies, create stable social networks of solidarity between families of different types. As one writer has commented, “Because schools’ location patterns are pervasive and residence-based, and because sociability is made easier through children's connections, schools can become the platform for a variety of neighbourhood issues”28. Thus schools are well placed to take part in the current revival of place as an arena for social policy initiatives, as was the case in Australia and New South Wales in the 1970s. The earlier manifestation appeared in the guise of ‘community development,’ while the somewhat broader goals today are more frequently described as community capacity building. The intention is to strengthen the capacity of residents and neighbourhood organisations to work towards sustained change.
By tapping into the resources of civil society, governments hope to strengthen social cohesion and active citizenship, particularly in areas of social disadvantage. In mid- 1995, the NSW Departments of Education and Training, Community Services and Health collaborated to fund and manage a two-year pilot program to establish four inter-agency school community centres (Chertsey, Coonamble, Curran and Redfern). In 1998, the Department of Housing joined the management group and the following year Kelso and Kempsey West Public Schools joined the program. The purpose of the scheme was to support families with children from birth to eight years of age and to strengthen communities through inter-agency collaboration. In 2001, the program was integrated into the Families First initiative and the school
22 Leighton, D. C., Harding, J. S., Macklin, A. M., Macmillan, A. M., Leighton, A. H., (1963) The Character of Danger, Psychiatric Symptoms in Selected Communities, New York, Basic Books (especially Chapter XIII); Freeman, H., (1994) “Schizophrenia and City Residence,” British Journal of Psychiatry,Vol. 164 (Suppl. 23) 39-50 23 Garbarino, J., Sherman, D., (1980) “High-Risk Neighbourhoods and High-Risk Families: the Human Ecology of Child Maltreatment,” Child Development, Vol. 1, 188-198; Krishnan, V., Morrison, K. B., (1995) “An Ecological Model of Child Maltreatment in a Canadian Province,” Child Abuse and Neglect, Vol. 19, No. 1, 101-113 24 Brunner, E., (1997) “Stress and the biology of inequality,” British medical Journal, Vol. 314, 1472- 1476; Roberts, E. M., (1997) “Neighbourhood social environments and the distribution of low birth weight in Chicago,” The American Journal of Public Health,Vol. 87, April, 597-603; Kuawachi, I., Kennedy, B., (1997) “Why care about income inequality,” British Medical Journal,Vol. 31, 1037-40 25 Coulton, C. J., Korbin, J. E., Su, M., Chow, J., (1995) “Measuring Neighbourhood Contact for Young People in an Urban Area,” American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 1, 5-33; Taylor, R. B., (1997) “Social Order and Disorder of Street Blocks and Neighbourhoods: Ecology, Micro- ecology, and the Systemic Model of Social Disorganisation,” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 34, No.1, February, 113-155 26 Wilson, W. J., (1987) The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, The Underclass and Public Policy, Chicago, University of Chicago Press; Massey, D. S., Shibuya, K., (1995) “Unravelling the Tangle of Pathology: The Effect of Spatially Concentrated Joblessness on the Wellbeing of African Americans,” Social Science Research, 24:352-366; Vinson, T., Abela, M., Hutka, R., (1997) Making Ends Meet, Kings Cross, Uniya Research Report No. 1 (Uniya Jesuit Social Justice Centre) 27 Victorian Government, Growing Victoria Together – Innovative State. Caring Communities, http://www.growingvictoria.vic.gov.au/textonlybooklet.htm; NSW Premier’s Department, community buildersNSW-Strengthening Communities Unit,http://www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/site/govinfo/71.html 28 Carnoy, M., (2001) “ Work, Society, Family and Learning for the Future,” in OECD (2001), op. cit., 119-134
8 community centres that were established are now operating with a strengthened focus on community development. Seventeen School and Community Centres now operate on school sites.
Families First works through a coordinated network of government and non- government services (NSW Health, Community Services, Age and Disability, Education and Training and Housing) to provide wide-ranging support for families raising children. The goal is to build the human and social capital within communities by increasing skills, enhancing capacities and motivation, and changing attitudes and values. At a practical level, the programs aim to increase the quality of social supports for families and individuals, widen economic opportunities and improve the quality of community resources, such as housing, education and civic amenities. The program has a broad range of objectives including better functioning families; children better prepared for beginning school; increased parental participation in schooling; the development of child-friendly communities; and a reduction in child abuse and juvenile and adult crime. A new initiative flowing from Families First, Primary Connect, is building on the experience of Schools as Community Centres to do just this. Coordinators in the first four school sites will work with parents, schools and community agencies to address issues identified through community consultation.
Implicit in the capacity building model is the notion that government agencies working within the human services sector need a collaborative approach to service delivery and community development. In the 1990s, the catchcry in New South Wales government circles was a ‘One-government approach.’ The aim was to overcome the piecemeal and disjointed services rendered by different government agencies and community organisations through the integration of those services29. A number of different means of achieving the desired integration have been tried. In locations where there are complex social and economic problems that have been unresponsive to other measures, the Premier's Department has adopted a place management model to achieve outcomes30. The specially appointed place manager has authority and resources to bring together the various state government agencies, and invite the participation of community organisations, local groups, business representatives, local government and relevant Commonwealth agencies to develop a common set of strategic goals and joint actions to address community problems.
Features of the place management policy and the previously described role of the school as a suitable platform for community capacity building have been combined in a project based in Windale, in Southern Newcastle. Launched in 2000, the project is of a scale and intensity to afford a real opportunity for assessing whether communities with a history of inter-generational disadvantage can be ‘turned around’ and children and young people given a solid educational foundation for life. The research capacity for making that assessment has been built into the project, a brief description of which follows. The District Superintendent who is a major player in the project, prepared the following summary late in 2001:
29 Community organisations are frequently reliant these days on government funding having been sub- contracted to perform duties previously directly provided by governments. 30 Community builders NSW, (2001) Place management – fad or future, a paper given to the Institute of Public Administration (NSW Division) by Martin Stewart-Weeks, www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/building_stronger/place/place.html
9 Value to Education in a Disadvantaged Community
Historically, the suburb of Windale in Southern Newcastle has been designated as a disadvantaged community. In 1999 a report Unequal in Life31 identified Windale as one of the most disadvantaged communities in New South Wales on nine measures, one of which was education. The Hunter Community Renewal Scheme is a NSW Government initiative designed to work closely with local groups and residents to identify major problems and then devise and implement responses to them. To drive the community renewal process in Windale a Directions Group was established under the leadership of NSW Health. A critical issue for the success of the Directions Group was that Regional Managers, who had the power to make decisions and allocate resources, made a commitment to the Windale scheme.
Prior to the development of the Directions Group, many agencies had worked tirelessly to support the Windale community. Despite the best efforts of numerous government departments and community workers over many years to improve the quality of life, people in Windale continued to experience significant social and economic hardship. The reality of this support was that efforts were uncoordinated and in many cases duplicated. The Directions Group had key membership from Health, Housing, Department of Community Services, Police, City Council and Education - all of whom had a vital interest in the wellbeing of the Windale community. Education is thought of as the “cement” that glues the services of these many diverse agencies together.
There have been many instances of support for the school community as a result of the interagency approach adopted in Windale. Hunter Health has supported the school in many innovative ways. For example, a joint DET/Health initiative has seen the development of a pilot behaviour program for anger management for five Year 1-2 children. This involves a multi-level approach on the school site with a teacher working with parents, a community facilitator and psychologist from Windale Health. There has been a quantifiable improvement in student behaviour. A health nurse is on site one day per week, increasing access to health services locally and developing positive relationships with the school prior to enrolment. Most recently Aboriginal Health Services have agreed to work out of the school, a most significant development for the Aboriginal community of Windale. Several families have been provided with further levels of support, which would be difficult to access without the interagency approach.
The Department of Housing has decided to attempt to locate families with young children closer to the school for ease of access. The Windale School community has developed a very close working relationship with the local Department of Community Services Office, with many positive outcomes for the school and the community. Police in the Lake Macquarie Local Area Command have provided a high level of support both formally and informally for the school in times of need. A much closer relationship between students and local police has resulted in a greater level of respect and cooperation.
Through the school the Department of Sport and Recreation has funded a program to target young mothers to increase their levels of social contact and physical fitness. This activity is now so popular that the program is filled within one day. A joint project through Lake Macquarie City Council, Landcare and the School Environment Committee has funded the redesign and redevelopment of the school grounds to include quiet areas and fields to support a positive learning environment. Community
31 Vinson, T., (1999) Unequal in Life, Melbourne, Jesuit Social Services
10 organisations have also rallied to support the school’s initiatives to improve the learning environment. Friends of Windale are providing scholarships to support student academic excellence. The Windale Bowling Club has purchased school blazers to increase school pride.
The support of the Family Action Centre from the University of Newcastle has resulted in some dramatic improvements for students in the school. The introduction of the Engaging Fathers program has meant that between 30 and 40 fathers are in the school working with their children in classes and the playground. There have been some dramatic improvements in behaviour and engagement in learning from the children involved. As a direct result of this program, a TAFE course is running at the school with a very specific focus on parenting and personal development for fathers. There are also a high number of participants in a successful weekly Educational Links program.
The establishment of a School as Community Centre (SACC) at Windale has provided the focus for all of our interagency support to the Windale Community. Funded under the Families First Program, the SACC concentrates on local families with children from 0-8 years, with an emphasis on the years prior to school entry. Established in June 2001, the SACC has had a major impact on the community. It is a place where people, who may have had unhappy experiences at school, are very willing to come. Parenting programs are booked out within a day; parents come for support and advice on a wide range of issues. The facilitator conducts a Family Skills Program that focuses on personal development, parenting and behaviour management. Other successful programs include a Literacy Program for 0-5 year olds, a pre-school development program, and the Triple P parenting program facilitated by Mental Health.
In a very short time there have been some outstanding outcomes achieved by Windale Public School students and staff. Staff have emphasised raising expectations at the school, with students attending workshops for Gifted and Talented students at the University of Newcastle. Girls have begun to consider a much broader range of career options. Changes in teaching and pedagogy and displays of student learning throughout the school have contributed to an improved school tone and pride. High quality artwork is displayed at the school and at John Hunter Hospital. Education has played a pivotal role in the Hunter Community Renewal Scheme for Windale.
The Inquiry applauds the Windale project believing that it has set a fine example to be followed in other locations that have a strong concentration of social disadvantage. This is, in fact, the Government’s declared intention so that the Inquiry confines its comments to the following two observations: i. Community self-management must be the ultimate goal but the social consequences of a build-up of disadvantage over generations cannot be remedied in the space of a few years. The Inquiry believes that the research and feedback sources that have been created should be used to ensure that the tapering of support for Windale matches its growing capacity for self- directed community action. The project is too rare and valuable an innovation and learning opportunity to be prematurely ended, even if it needs to be supported with staff and its present management structure for five years. One thoroughly worked-through project of this nature may in the long run assist more disadvantaged communities than would occur with a more rapid succession of projects.
11 ii. The experience of the DET’s District level and local involvement in Windale, and another similar project now underway must be incorporated into the consciousness of the Department rather than remain at the regional level. The advent of the recommended Clearinghouse will be one way of achieving that consciousness. Another would be the publication at the appropriate time of the account of the project and the part played in it by the local school and District Office. It will be important for that information to be incorporated in a compendium of program initiatives maintained by the Student Services and Equity Directorate. Finally, the managers of the current project will come to represent a valuable source of information and experience for those seeking to extend the benefits of community capacity building to other communities.
The important cross-sectorial initiatives described in this section may seem somewhat distant from the daily work of teachers in public schools. Indeed, throughout the present Inquiry, teachers have been at pains to emphasise that the focus of their professional work is teaching and learning rather than social work or welfare. At the same time, however, there have been endless reminders of the fact that teachers must necessarily know and relate to individual students in order to work effectively with them. Young people from vulnerable backgrounds do not leave their multiple problems at the school gate when they enter the school, and classroom teachers need to recognise the blocks to learning and draw upon appropriate community supports. If students are to function to the best of their ability, teachers and their schools need to collaborate with a range of community agencies in support of young people. If the recommendations of this report are acceded to, that collaboration increasingly will be guided and mediated by human service specialists but it will remain grounded in the knowledge and advice of teachers.
PART TWO: SCHOOLS AND SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE
Resources for schools in disadvantaged areas
Many of the submissions received by the Inquiry focused on the particular difficulties experienced by students from socially disadvantaged backgrounds. Several strands of those difficulties were commented upon in an important submission from the Smith Family:
Students from low SES (socio-economic status) families are more likely to exhibit the following patterns in terms of educational outcomes, compared to children from high SES families: • lower levels of literacy, numeracy and comprehension; • lower retention rates; • lower participation rates (children from low SES are less likely to attend university); • higher levels of problematic school behaviour (e.g. truancy); • less likely to study specialised maths and science subjects; • more likely to have difficulties with their studies and display negative attitudes to school; and • less successful school to labour market transitions.
These results remain the same irrespective of how SES is measured and whether the studies are based on individual or aggregate level data. Evidence suggests that addressing the social aspects of socio-economic disadvantage will improve the educational performance of students of
12 low SES. As the previous section illustrated, programs with an early intervention focus that target disadvantaged families are programs of this nature. Of particular importance are programs that are able to assist parents in preparing their children for school and that provide appropriate community-based services for a range of parenting needs, support and advice - a collaborative whole of government approach, addressing the needs not just of children but of families.
Against this background of well established knowledge of the blunting effects of SES upon school education, it has been argued by teachers and parents that the education system has a responsibility to make special provision to help overcome this problem. The P&C of a Sydney high school submitted:
The right for all children to have access to a high standard of education in government schools without discrimination on the grounds of sex, race or religion is one of the basic principles of the NSW Education Act 1990. So also is the principle that such education should mitigate any educational disadvantages arising from the child’s gender or from geographic, economic, social, cultural, lingual or other causes. The important role of education as a mechanism for breaking the inter- generational cycle of poverty is well established. Although the OECD PISA report found that 15 year old students in Australia were on average doing well in reading literacy and mathematical and science skills and knowledge, the gap between the top-performing and the poor-performing students is worrying…The very sizeable gap in performance between the top and the poorest students, much of it attributable to family background and school factors, means that Australia is managing this equity issue less well than many other OECD countries…Students with learning difficulties are at higher risk of being disaffected at school, losing interest, acting out, and leaving school early without the qualifications required to gain employment and contribute in an increasingly demanding knowledge-based workplace. The pathway to criminal involvement is paved with risk factors such as poor school performance, poor school attachment, truancy, behaviour problems, and poor supervision and support at home.
A community committee of a country town drew the Inquiry’s attention to the resource limitations in schools with a low average household income. The dependence on local fundraising through P&C groups to provide basic school equipment imposes hardships on parents. “There should be easier access to disadvantaged schools funding which should take into account distance from Sydney and also the average income of the population.”
According to a number of teachers and parents, one important way in which the education system can “mitigate educational disadvantages” is by ensuring that able, experienced staff teach disadvantaged students. However, a number of schools serving socially disadvantaged areas testify to the relative shortage of such teachers in the localities where arguably they are most needed. One such school submitted the following:
Amongst the most pressing issues facing public schools in difficult to staff areas is that of staff turnover and retention. Located in the far western suburbs of Sydney, our school has experienced extraordinary changes in staffing over recent years. In a recent two-year period over forty teachers (executive staff and classroom teachers) left the school. This represents
13 approximately 80% of the teaching staff. Forty-two of the forty-six current members of the executive and teaching staff are in their first appointment in those positions. In the past four years just one member of the school’s executive has remained at the school. This pattern presents enormous challenges for a school in terms of being able to establish continuity in teaching and welfare programs, as well as management structures. Difficulties in attracting staff to schools such as ours means that a significant proportion of the staff are beginning teachers and teachers trained overseas, who are required to make a quantum leap in adjusting to teaching in Sydney’s western suburbs. Strategic planning over a period longer than a year becomes problematic. Most importantly, there is an impact on student learning outcomes. A key finding of recent research commissioned by the DET in New South Wales into HSC ‘success’ was that the teachers identified as being successful teachers were typically highly experienced with strong continuity of experience in their present school. This is a demographic totally alien to our school.
The staff of another high school in the same general region outlined the educational consequences of this situation:
In schools in disadvantaged areas there is an inordinately large number of young, inexperienced teachers or teachers who have their own ESL problems. It cannot be imagined that students at (these schools) are receiving an education of equal quality to that of students at (other specialist schools) when looking at the experience of teachers and the quality of facilities.
Throughout the Inquiry a number of people raised the possibility of providing incentives to attract experienced teachers to work in ‘hard-to-staff’ schools. The following submission from a high school teacher illustrates this type of proposal:
Introduce a special increment for teachers with more than ten years in an easy to staff school who take up a two-year position in a difficult to staff school. They would be granted right of return to their previous school. This would have the advantage of bringing experienced staff where they are most needed and creating a two year vacancy in an easier school to allow new (young, re-trained or overseas trained) teachers to develop their skills in a less demanding setting. It would also enhance the flow of ideas so vital to our profession.
The major initiative in New South Wales to assist schools in socially and economically disadvantaged communities is the Priority Schools Funding Program (PSFP)32. This jointly-funded Commonwealth / State program provides additional support to assist targeted school communities to improve literacy and numeracy outcomes for students and increase their participation in schooling. The targeted schools, which are selected by means of a family survey, contain a high concentration of students from low socio-economic status backgrounds. There are currently 546 schools across the state receiving PSFP funds which is approximately one-in-four of all schools. Once selected, schools stay on the program for three years before a further survey is conducted.
32 The PSFP was established in 2001 after the Commonwealth replaced the more broad ranging Disadvantaged Schools Program (DSP) with the Literacy and Numeracy Grants to Schools Program. The PSFP retained some elements of the earlier DSP, such as the survey used to select targeted schools.
14 PSFP funds are allocated to the targeted schools according to a formula that takes into account student enrolments, staff numbers and distance from the district office. Once allocated, the Principal is responsible for the expenditure of the funds. The DET Equity Coordination Unit issues a set of procedural guidelines for PSFP schools to follow that describe the objectives of the program, and the procedure that Principals are required to follow, such as appointing a PSFP co-ordinator, including a school community member in the process, and meeting accountability requirements. The targeted schools also receive a staffing supplementation that increases the number of staff. A primary school with an enrolment of around 400 students, for example, receives an additional 0.6 of a teacher whereas a large school of over 850 students receives an additional 1.5 teachers. The additional staffing allocation, which totals around 280 extra teachers across the state, is generally used to reduce class sizes, assist with the appointment of Support Teacher Learning Difficulties or to provide teacher release for team teaching.
The Inquiry supports the overall compensatory effect of the PSFP to direct additional resources to schools serving disadvantaged communities. The additional resources provided through the PSFP are greatly appreciated by the target schools that use them to support a range of activities: literacy and numeracy programs, relief time for teachers to provide literacy and numeracy support to selected students, parent and community projects, employment of school community liaison officers and professional development for teachers. Principals that have come to depend on the additional resources experience considerable frustration when, as a result of the survey, their school drops off the list of targeted schools to be replaced by one that is shown to have a greater degree of disadvantage.
The social justice and equity principles that underpin the PSFP33 imply a process of whole-school change towards more inclusive teacher-student relations, home-school partnerships, school cultures and organisations, and styles of teaching and learning consistent with what has been recommended throughout this report. In practice, however, the program is more limited in its scope. After visiting numerous PSFP schools, the Inquiry came to the view that PSFP is primarily a top-up program to allow schools in areas of low SES areas to focus on the literacy and numeracy needs of their students. While this is clearly an important focus of action for schools in disadvantaged areas, it should not restrict the capacity of the program to respond to more pervasive neighbourhood effects upon learning and develop whole-school strategies to work across the school / community divide. As previous research has indicated, teachers and parents can productively use the limited resources made available through the program - it averages out at around $140 per student in PSFP schools - as leverage to instigate a process of critical reflection and action research leading to a plan for whole-school change34. This action-oriented approach to realigning schools to their community and developing inclusive practices is further strengthened when ideas and innovations are shared with an informal network of teachers, consultants and other highly engaged people in neighbouring schools and community agencies.
To strengthen these qualities within the PSFP, the Inquiry believes that three changes are necessary. First, it should be acknowledged that the PSFP consultants and community development officers, based in the District Offices, are primarily change-agents working within and across schools to support whole-school change.
33 Priority Schools Funding Program (2002) Social Justice and Equity Principles, Support Sheet, No. 1, NSW Department of Education and Training, Sydney NSW. 34 Connell, R. W., White, V. M. & Johnston, K. M, (Eds.) (1991) Running Twice as Hard: the Disadvantged Schools Program in Australia, Deakin University Press, Burwood Victoria..
15 They should continue to work under the supervision of the District Supervisor but in a more focused manner. Second, there is an urgent need to develop workshops and materials, including electronically transmitted resources, at the district and state level to induct teachers from PSFP schools into the nature of disadvantage and its effects on learning, and how it may be combated within schools, classrooms and the community. Third, significant resources should be set aside for state-wide initiatives that involve a number of schools working together to improve outcomes and retention through changes to their pedagogy, curriculum and school organisation. The Inquiry is aware of district level initiatives that have used the productive pedagogies model of change35 to achieve this goal. Appropriate leadership at the state level would extend this valuable work.
Recommendation 8.2: That the Student Services and Equity division within the DET reallocate a proportion of the PSPF funds to initiate and support the changes outlined above. While the primary focus should be upon state-wide initiatives, some of the reallocated resources should be made available to PSPF consultants in the districts to organise professional development activities for teachers and where appropriate, parent representatives, in PSFP schools.
The Inquiry has undertaken a small study to compare recurrent government expenditures on schools serving communities of different social backgrounds and the capacities of different schools to supplement those allocations. The study has employed an existing index of social disadvantage36 that is based on a range of medico-social indicators derived from departmental and organisational records as well as the census. The unit of counting is postcode area with each locality being assigned a general disadvantage score. This has meant that the postcodes can be ordered in an array, ranging from the least to the most disadvantaged. The present study is based on comparisons between 20 high schools and 20 primary schools in each of three categories: i. areas with the highest disadvantage scores, ii. areas with scores in the middle of the range from most to least disadvantage, and iii. areas with the lowest disadvantage scores (that is, socially advantaged postcode areas).
The following 2001 data has been provided by the DET for each school involved in the comparisons: total staffing costs; the global budget; Special Purpose Funding (including targeted and equity programs); and funds generated within each school. The results are expressed as average expenditures per student, or the average amount raised per student in the case of locally generated funds. The index used for the purpose of drawing the samples of schools correlates very highly with the Index of Socio-economic Disadvantage produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. At the time the study was initiated (late 2001) the twenty high schools and twenty primary schools in the areas with the highest disadvantage scores were also on the list of PSFP schools.
35 Productive pedagogies is a research based framework that identifies productive classroom practices for enhancing the quality of student learning. Refer to Chapter 2 of this report for more detail. 36 Vinson, T., (1999) Unequal in Life, Melbourne, Jesuit Social Services. This index should not be confused with the survey-based index used by the DET to select schools for the Priority Schools Funding Program described above.
16 The scale of the comparative study while modest provides information in an area where previously little has been publicly available. It suffices to reveal a broad trend with respect to overall funding. The study takes into account all forms of expenditure and is not confined to classroom teachers. Other roles as varied as ancillary staff, executive staff, STLD teachers, reading recovery teachers, counsellors and other specialist staff, are included. The table shows that when this broad range of expenditures is included, the per capita outlay on staffing in primary schools generally increases the greater the degree of social disadvantage of the area served. A similar but somewhat less clear-cut finding applies in the case of high schools, with the rural schools receiving lower allocations than their metropolitan counterparts. It is important to note that this finding in no way negates the Inquiry’s observations on the comparative lack of senior teachers in disadvantaged schools, an issue taken up below. Before doing so, attention is drawn to the fact that Table 8:2 shows no great variations with respect to global budgets beyond the higher averages for primary schools in low SES areas. The pattern of Special Purpose funding is as it should be, skewed in favour of the low SES category, and the funds generated in-school reflect the greater capacity of advantaged areas to raise substantial funds for their schools:
Table 8:2 Average school revenues per student in areas of high, middling and low socio-economic status
HIGH SCHOOLS - Number of schools/students in each category SES SCHOOLS TOTAL STUDENTS High: metropolitan. 20 16,748.8 Middling: metropolitan. 6 4,657.6 Middling: outer metropolitan. 3 2,117.7 Middling: rural 11 6,999 Low: metropolitan. 4 2,612 Low: outer metropolitan. 3 1,847.2 Low: rural 13 9,116.5
Staffing costs REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $5,562.2 $5,596.3 $7,047.6 Outer-metropolitan - $6,615.6 $6,686.3 Rural - $6,055.1 $6,294.5 Global budget REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $326.9 $333.6 $373.8 Outer-metropolitan - $379.4 $385.5 Rural - $377.7 $356.2 Special purpose funding REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $101.1 $170.6 $334.2 Outer-metropolitan - $142.0 $303.7 Rural - $175.2 $303.4 Funds generated within school REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $651.8 $254.0 $247.7 Outer-metropolitan - $173.8 $203.8 Rural - $302.8 $192.6 Total revenue available from above sources per student REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $6,642.0 $6,354.4 $8,003.4 Outer-metropolitan - $7,310.7 $7,579.2 Rural - $6,910.9 $7,146.8
17 PRIMARY SCHOOLS - Number of schools/students in each category SES SCHOOLS TOTAL STUDENTS High: metropolitan 20 9,316 Middling: metropolitan 14 6,796 Middling: rural 6 1,576 Low: metropolitan/outer metropolitan (1 school) 7 1,469 Low: rural 13 2,100
Staffing costs REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $3,321.0 $3,836.1 $4,582.9 Outer metropolitan - - 1 school-included in metrop figure Rural - $3,495.1 $4,648.3 Global budget REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $218.6 $249.5 $320.4 Outer-metropolitan - - 1 school included in metrop figure Rural - $253.6 $289.3 SP funding REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $90.0 $270.8 $414.9 Outer-metropolitan - - 1 school-included in metrop figure Rural - $232.1 $505.3 Funds generated within school REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $468.5 - $122.4 Outer-metropolitan - - 1 school-included in metrop figure Rural - - $152.0 Total revenue available from above sources per student REGION HIGH SES MIDDLING SES LOW SES Metropolitan $4,098.1 $4,546.1 $5,440.6 Outer-metropolitan - - 1 school-included in metrop figure Rural - $4,169.5 $5,594.9
While there remains scope for even greater investment in equalising the educational opportunities of socially disadvantaged students, the authorities deserve commendation for the broad pattern of expenditure revealed by Table 8:2. The table is silent on the question of the total volume of resources that governments devote to public education. That issue is taken up in the final chapter of the report. The Inquiry’s study should be replicated on a larger scale but from the point of view of reform strategy Table 8:2 points in the direction of the need for experienced teachers of high quality in disadvantaged schools to value add to the substantial investment represented by the statistics.
In a later chapter the Inquiry addresses the issue of an appropriate preparation of novice teachers to meet challenges such as those presented in schools in socially disadvantaged areas. The many young teachers who swell the ranks in disadvantaged areas need the leavening of more experienced hands, just as pupils with a sparse educational background need the experience and skill of seasoned teachers.
Notwithstanding the above table, submissions received by the Inquiry indicated that such experienced teachers are thin on the ground in socially disadvantaged areas. The two submissions quoted at the beginning of this section that focus on this point are only indicative of many others that describe a situation that Inquiry staff have witnessed at first hand. Getting experienced practitioners to work in hard-to-staff regions is not an easy task. A recent study undertaken for the Inquiry by Associate Professor Alan Watson (UNSW) and Mr Neville Hatton (University of
18 Sydney) showed that only one in six of 700 teachers at the mid-point of their careers had moved in the preceding two years, and only one in five intended moving in the next two years. Over 60% had been at their present schools for more than five years, and more than 40% wanted to stay beyond a further five years. It seems clear that experienced staff, still classroom teachers in their early forties with dependants and reasonably satisfied with their present appointments, are unlikely to willingly accept a transfer to a difficult-to-staff area. Some creative incentives would be needed to make it worth their while moving.
Table 8:3 Current Locations and Future Preferences of Experienced Teachers (N=700)
CURRENT LOCATIONS CURRENTLY SERVING PREFERENCE FOR NEXT IN AREA APPOINTMENT Central metropolitan, North Sydney, St George /Sutherland, Blue Mountains, Newcastle 31% 35%
Central Coast, Hunter, Illawarra, North and South Coasts 27% 42%
South-West Sydney and Western Sydney 28% 10%
Riverina, N-West and Western NSW 9% 4%
Mid-West, Northern and Southern Tablelands 5% 9%
As the above Table 8.3 clearly indicates, the majority of teachers in the mid-career sample are already in the more favoured locations. Encouraging is the fact that more than a quarter are serving in Western and South-Western Sydney, two areas acknowledged as being difficult to staff. However, the future situation is less promising. Only 10% would seek a future appointment to one of those outer-Sydney regions. Similarly, while nearly a tenth of this experienced group are currently teaching in the inland areas of the State, which are also difficult to staff, only 4% would seek a future appointment there. These trends were confirmed by responses to other questions and many open-ended comments.
What would encourage them to move? A number of personal/family matters were mentioned but the two factors over which employers might exercise control are providing opportunities for professional development and offering a new promotional position. The first of these two factors is one upon which the Inquiry could hardly have placed more emphasis. The second is a practical possibility to which we now turn our attention. The Inquiry proposes that the DET introduce an incentive scheme to attract highly competent teachers who have attained the highest rung on the incremental scale and are working in non-PSFP schools, to take up a two-year promotional position in a PSFP (disadvantaged) school. The promotional rank would be a virtual 14th step on the incremental scale and would thereafter be retained. To be eligible for this position teachers would need to be practitioner leaders. They should be selected on the bases that they possess a high level of teaching proficiency, a record of contributing to the development of teaching knowledge in the schools in which they have worked, and a demonstrated willingness to explore improved methods of classroom and behaviour management. These attributes would make them a valuable resource for schools serving disadvantaged
19 communities but to maximise their impact, their deployment should be on the basis of an initial plan devised by the school’s principal and staff. The arrangement would preserve the right of teachers to return to their previous school after the two-year period. In the case of schools in rural and remote locations, the normal allowances to offset removal costs and assist with accommodation would apply. Since many of the teachers will have employed partners, that factor will need to be taken into account. The scheme would mean that exemplary, experienced teachers would make their organisational skills and subject knowledge available to students and their younger teacher colleagues in disadvantaged schools. They would provide demonstration classes, team teach, coach inexperienced teachers, contribute substantially to collegial discussion and planning in relation to the development of appropriate pedagogy, and generally assist by direct participation in, and encouragement of, whole-of-school development.
Recommendation 8.3: That the DET develop an incentive scheme to attract experienced teachers to work in PSFP (disadvantaged) schools along the lines described above. Estimated costs: unlike most of the other recommendations in this report, the present proposal is difficult to cost in advance because the value of the increment will need to be negotiated, and the additional outlay is cumulative for the remainder of the teachers’ careers. Purely for illustrative purposes, if the increment is approximately $3,000 and the number of benefiting schools is 100, then after five years the cost will be of the order of $4-5 million.
Aboriginal communities and their schools
During the course of the Inquiry, members of the panel were able to meet with Aboriginal parents across the state, and listen to the concerns of Aboriginal teachers, Aboriginal Education Assistants, representatives of the NSW Aboriginal Education Consultative Group and staff within the Aboriginal Programs Unit of the DET. In addition, the Inquiry visited schools in the far west of the state with high Aboriginal enrolments, and schools nearer the coast where Aboriginal students formed a smaller proportion of the enrolment. Concerns brought before the Inquiry about the pattern of inequality and social exclusion that beset Aboriginal young people and their families mirrored those that have been documented in recent surveys and evaluations37. Compared with their non-Aboriginal peers, Indigenous young people at school are more likely to experience: - high rates of truancy and non-attendance; - high rates of student suspension and formal exclusion from school; - high frequency of behavioural incidents in school; - low retention rates to year 12; - low levels of literacy and numeracy; - high rate of allocation to special schools, classes and low academic streams; and - high levels of disenchantment and apathy.
37 Long, M., Frigo, T., & Batten, M. (1999) The School to Work Transition of Indigenous Australians: A Brief Review of the Literature and a Statistical Analysis. Canberra: Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA] (2000) National Report on Schooling in Australia: Preliminary Paper, National Benchmark Results Reading and Numeracy Years 3 and 5, Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.
20 The Inquiry is aware of the work that has been done over the years to confront these serious difficulties. Strategic direction was provided by the Aboriginal Education Policy in 1995, a landmark document with its dual emphasis upon the promotion of educational achievement of Aboriginal students and the education of all students and teachers about Aboriginal Australia. Since that time, both State and Commonwealth resources have supported the employment of Aboriginal Education Assistants (AEAs), Aboriginal Community Liaison Officers (ACLOs), Aboriginal Education Consultants, and staff within the Aboriginal Programs Unit of the DET. Currently, special programs cover a wide range of areas: literacy and numeracy, attendance and retention, pre-school and early language development, Aboriginal language and culture, and Aboriginal student leadership
A number of specific concerns about the effectiveness of the policy and strategies were brought before the Inquiry. The key issues were as follows: 1. The Aboriginal Education Policy has been in existence for seven years but it is yet to be implemented in more than a tokenistic way in many schools. 2. There are not enough trained AEAs to be appointed to schools that, on the basis of their Aboriginal student enrolments, qualify for such an appointment; 3. The potential that the AEA offers to a school is frequently under-utilised because they are loaded with low level tasks, or lack training, or have no direct role in decision-making. 4. It is unrealistic to expect ten Aboriginal Education Consultants to effectively work across 40 Districts. 5. Teachers who take up appointments in predominantly Aboriginal schools lack adequate preparation to teach in the cultural setting they encounter, and are not offered a systematic initiation into the life of the local Aboriginal community. 6. Excessive pressures and unrealistic expectations are placed on recently appointed Aboriginal teachers leading to burn-out, early resignation and their transfer to other career paths. 7. Aboriginal Students Support and Parent Awareness (ASSPA) Committees are controlled too tightly by principals who, while valuing the resources that come with the program, limit the Committees’ role in decision-making. 8. Aboriginal parents are concerned about the frequency with which their children are suspended or excluded from school or classified as emotionally or behaviourally disordered. 9. There is a lack of culturally appropriate school and classroom climates and innovative pedagogies to engage Aboriginal students in learning.
The Inquiry believes that policy initiatives in the field of Aboriginal education are too often crisis-driven rather than expressions of sound educational strategic planning. As a consequence, special programs are designed to tackle specific urgent problems such as absenteeism, literacy, numeracy, language development and health issues while serious core problems of mainstream schooling are not addressed. It is not the Inquiry’s intention here to under-estimate the individual importance of particular special programs. But as one worker in the field commented to the Inquiry, ‘The extra money and the programs that are developed are the icing on the cake. We get to like the icing, but we don’t get to eat the cake’. The strategic problem, from the Inquiry’s perspective, is how to change the social relations around teaching and learning within mainstream schooling to engage Aboriginal students, strengthen their identity and increase their level of success.
In Chapter 2, the Inquiry stressed the important role of professional teacher communities and productive pedagogies in re-engaging students to learning. This has a particular relevance in the case of Aboriginal students. The Inquiry was fortunate to visit a number of schools where the social relations had changed to the
21 extent that Aboriginal students were participating and achieving success within the mainstream. Many factors contribute to this encouraging outcome, but three in particular seem crucially important.
The first is a principal who is committed to implementing the Aboriginal Education policy, and who is accountable to the parents of the Aboriginal students who attend the school. This implies an ongoing, informal relationship with both Aboriginal students and their parents, and a willingness to engage with them on their own territory. It is the principal who must construct an ethos of expectation that all teachers within the school will incorporate, where appropriate, Indigenous perspectives within their teaching subjects and work towards supportive, culturally appropriate classrooms. Without this committed leadership from principals, change is at best sporadic and weak. To optimise these essential qualities there needs to be a concerted effort to improve both the selection process for principals in schools with a significant numbers of Aboriginal students38 and their professional development once they are appointed39.
The second vital ingredient is the role played by the AEA. There are currently around 320 AEAs employed around the state and they play a diverse range of roles. Some are natural teachers who work well in the classroom context, others are net- workers who provide avenues into kinship and community settings, while yet others who are strong on cultural knowledge form a valuable bridge between Indigenous culture and the curriculum. Not all AEAs, however, are sufficiently trained or structurally placed within the school to assist the process of change. The Inquiry observed a particularly effective AEA at a high school who works as kind of cultural mediator or broker between principal, parents, classroom teachers and students. She can play this important role because the principal has incorporated the AEA into the decision-making process within the school. All correspondence to parents of Aboriginal students, for example, is sighted by the AEA before it is sent out. This gives the AEA an opportunity to influence particular decisions by providing additional information about the issue. This particular AEA is also a member of the separate faculty curriculum committees within the school. In this capacity she is well placed to work with teachers to implement an Aboriginal perspective across the curriculum.
Successful teachers of Aboriginal students are the third ingredient in a strategy to adapt schools to the needs of Aboriginal learners. The literature on what makes a successful teacher of Aboriginal students is fairly clear40. Summing up the literature41, one study concluded that effective teachers of Aboriginal students ‘create a sensitive, supportive, friendly and sufficiently demanding environment which
38 Catergorised as schools with at least 40% Aboriginal enrolment, or with 25 or more Aboriginal students attending. 39 Currently, principals are selected according to the usual merit criteria except for two additional features to the process: there must be a member of the relevant Aboriginal Education Consultative Committee on the selection panel; and the applicant must demonstrate an understanding and sensitivity to the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. 40 Fanshaw, J. )1989) Personal characteristics of effective teachers of adolescent Aborigines, The Aboriginal Child at School, 17, (4), 35-48. Harslett, M., Harrison, B., Godfrey, J., Partington, G., & Richer, K. (1998) Teachers perceptions of the characteristics of effective teachers of Aboriginal students, Paper presented at the Australian Association for Educational research, Adelaide, Nov/Dec. 1998.Munns, G. (1998) They just can’t hack that: Aboriginal students, their teachers and responses to schools and classrooms. In G.Partington (Ed.). Perspectives on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education, Katoomba, NSW, Social Science Press. 171-189. 41 Harslett, M., Godfrey, J., Harrison, B., Partington, G., & Richer, K. (1999) ‘We learn a lot from Mr Hart’: a qualitative study of an effective teacher of Aboriginal students, Paper presented for presentation at the Combined Conference of the Australian Association for Educational research in Education and the New Zealand Association for Research in Education, Melbourne, 1999. p 4.
22 attracts Aboriginal students to stay on at school and achieve curriculum objectives’. The following characteristics seem to be particularly important: an understanding of Aboriginal cultures and histories and of the students’ family backgrounds; an ability to develop good relationships with students and their families; a capacity to be empathic, flexible and to adjust to the dynamics of student behaviour and need; a student-centred pedagogy built on relationships rather than authority; firm behavioural boundaries set in consultation with students; and high expectations and not stereotyping students as troublesome or unable to learn.
When the above three ingredients come together in a school, there is an excellent chance that the social relations around teaching and learning will change to engage Aboriginal students, strengthen their identity and increase their level of success. The reality, however, is that such a coincidence in schools with significant enrolments of Aboriginal students is rare and fleeting. There does not seem to be a strategic plan within the DET to identify successful principals, AEAs and classroom teachers, analyse the qualities that contribute to their practical success in implementing the Aboriginal Education policy in their schools and classrooms, and nurture these qualities more widely within the educational workforce. To overcome this serious policy gap, the Inquiry urges action along the following lines:
Recommendation 8.4: That a working party with representatives from the DET, the NSW Teachers Federation and the NSW Aboriginal Education Consultative Group be established to develop a new selection process for principals to schools with significant numbers of Aboriginal students that includes, alongside the normal merit criteria, the following requirements: i. a demonstrated ability to work productively with Aboriginal communities; ii. a commitment and strategy to implement the Aboriginal Education Policy in the school; and iii. an understanding of Aboriginal culture and history and a sensitivity to the needs of Aboriginal students.
Recommendation 8.5: That the DET acknowledge the pivotal role of the Aboriginal Education Assistant as a change agent and cultural mediator in the school and begin a process to upgrade the quality and effectiveness of the position within the school. The process should include the following: i. a new duty statement that reflects the upgraded cultural and educational role of the Aboriginal Education Assistant; ii. re-introducing a university-based program of professional training for the Aboriginal Education Assistant; iii. a requirement that principals include the Aboriginal Education Assistant in the decision- making process in regard to student welfare, curriculum and school organisation; and iv. a review of the current classification and remuneration status of the Aboriginal Education Assistant position.
23 Recommendation 8.6: That the DET, in association with university teacher education faculties, develop a strategy to identify and recruit students undertaking teacher training who have a commitment to Aboriginal education, a knowledge of Aboriginal culture and history, and evidence of the qualities required to successfully teach Aboriginal students. Additional features of the recruitment strategy should include: i. during their teacher education program, the student should undertake a practicum alongside a successful teacher of Aboriginal students in a school with a significant enrolment of Aboriginal students; ii. upon graduation, the teacher should be offered a position, when available, in a school that has a significant enrolment of Aboriginal students; iii. Upon taking up the position, the teacher should be given a systematic induction into the school and the culture and politics of the local community, including meeting Aboriginal parents in their homes and community settings.
Students from language backgrounds other than English (LBOTE)
New South Wales has a very high proportion of students enrolled in government schools who come from language backgrounds other than English (LBOTE). In 2001, 187,506 such students were enrolled, comprising 24.4% of the student population42. There has been a steady increase in the proportion of students from LBOTE in recent years. The most common language backgrounds are Chinese or Arabic (more than 20,000 students in each group), with significant numbers of students speaking Vietnamese, Greek, Italian, Tagalog, Spanish, Hindi, Macedonian, Korean and Turkish. These students are not evenly distributed across the 40 New South Wales school districts. Rather, they are concentrated in the metropolitan Sydney districts of Granville, Fairfield, St George, Bankstown, Liverpool, Port Jackson and Bondi, all of which have more than 50% LBOTE students43.
Not all LBOTE students require assistance with the English language. Many already have good English skills, and others acquire them fairly quickly on arrival. As a group, LBOTE students do nearly as well as English speakers in terms of benchmarks in literacy and numeracy, and many excel in external examinations such as the Higher School Certificate. However, this success is not evenly distributed among all LBOTE subgroups. In New South Wales, students from Arabic-speaking, Turkish, Maltese and Pacific Island backgrounds generally do less well in terms of educational outcomes and employment than other groups44.
A substantial number of LBOTE students in New South Wales schools require significant assistance with English. In 2001, this figure was almost 125,000, or two-thirds of all LBOTE students. One high school with a very high LBOTE
42 Students of Non-English Speaking Background, 2001, NSW Department of Education and Training Bulletin. 43 Ibid. 44 Cruickshank, K. (2002) “Literature Review: Literacy needs of students from non-English speaking backgrounds”, commissioned by the Director-General’s Advisory Group on Multicultural Education and Training, NSW Department of Education and Training.
24 enrolment indicated in its submission to the Inquiry that in terms of state-wide Year 7 reading scores, 37% of their students scored in the ‘low’ or ‘elementary’ range compared to 19% of the state. Only 8% of their students scored in the ‘high’ range, compared with 33% of the state. These figures suggest the degree of disadvantage experienced by these students in accessing the curriculum. The DET website indicates that in 2001, about 85,000 students were given English language assistance in more than 750 New South Wales government schools by 876 specialist ESL teachers. This includes Commonwealth government per capita funding for the provision of intensive English assistance for non-English speaking new arrivals. As a result, 15 Intensive English Centres and one intensive English high school (Cleveland Street) have been established in New South Wales, and other new arrivals receive assistance within regular schools.
The Inquiry has received a small number of submissions from schools addressing the needs of students from LBOTE. In general, these argue that current resources are inadequate to bring students up to English language fluency, a process that the DET estimates to take seven years from entry into an English speaking school, assuming students of average ability and ongoing ESL (English as a Second Language) assistance. One inner West primary school lamented the lack of follow up support for students who have attained a basic level of English proficiency, but still cannot access the curriculum to the same level as their English speaking peers.
Support positions including English as a Second Language (ESL) … have been continually eroded over recent years. As a result, approximately two-thirds of ESL students (those classed as second or third phase) receive no specialist English tuition.
A Western Sydney high school commented on DET guidelines for deeming students to have reached fluency:
ESL staff and District personnel are aware that the language acquisition and development of students does not in any way correlate to DET’s specified number of years in an Australian school. Under this system schools are not adequately staffed to meet the language and literacy needs of their NESB [non-English speaking background] students.
Evidence from the DET confirms these claims. Since 1993 there has been no increase in the number of ESL teachers, despite an increase in the number of students requiring assistance of 18,000, or more than 16%. This means that the ratio of ESL teachers to students receiving ESL support has increased for primary students from 1:88 to 1:104 (it has been held stable for secondary students at about 1:82). The proportion of students with ESL needs that have not been able to be met has always been unacceptably high, and is now more than 30%.
The issue of support for second and third phase ESL students is one of particular concern to the Inquiry. According to DET guidelines, second phase students can understand English in familiar situations but still have transitional English language proficiency. Third phase students often have good oral English but may still experience difficulties in English literacy. It stands to reason that if students do not receive ongoing assistance to reach English fluency, they will not be able to succeed to the level of their potential in educational programs at school or beyond. It would seem to be a false economy to provide ESL resources for beginning speakers, but fail to follow through over subsequent years as students progress through school. Not becoming literate in English can easily translate in adolescence into alienation from high school, acting out behaviour and early school drop-out, and it can
25 contribute to poor longer term educational and employment outcomes (as indicated above). The Inquiry views the provision of adequate ESL services to students in New South Wales public schools as a major responsibility of the DET that has short- and long-term equity and community relations implications.
Recommendations made to the Inquiry in relation to ESL provision include providing schools with high and continuing enrolments from LBOTE students with some permanent ESL positions, so that planning can occur from year to year. At present ESL teachers are allocated to schools on the basis of the ESL survey undertaken once a year. There was also the view that more ESL teachers are needed in schools with very high LBOTE enrolments, and in other schools where smaller numbers of ESL students have led to cut backs in the provision of staff.
Recommendation 8.7: That the number of ESL teachers in New South Wales be increased by 100 equivalent full-time positions. This will enable the ratios in primary schools to approximate 1:88 (the 1993 figure for students receiving assistance), and to enable a small reduction in the number of students who currently do not have their ESL needs met. These teachers will be expected to provide specialist assistance to LBOTE students and consultancy support to classroom teachers. It is proposed that 50 equivalent full-time teachers be appointed in 2003, with the remainder in 2004. Cost in 2003: $3.25 million Cost in 2004 and beyond: $6.5 million
Recommendation 8.8: That the DET distinguish in all published data on student participation and achievement between those LBOTE students who have been in Australia for four years or less, and those who were born in Australia or have lived here for a substantial time.
CHILDREN IN CARE
In a submission to the Inquiry, Uniting Care-Burnside estimates that there are around 7,000 to 8,000 children and young people in the out-of-home care system in New South Wales. A majority of the members of this group of school age attend public schools. The Inquiry has been reminded on several occasions of the general and educational vulnerability of children receiving out-of-home care. One social policy analyst commented:
Children who are removed from their families because of abuse, neglect or the family’s inability to provide safe care are among the most vulnerable children in society, both because of the circumstances that lead to their removal from their families and because of the social and emotional effects of being separated from their families and feeling stigmatised. Often when children and young people enter care, they have to change schools and many also have multiple moves from one foster care placement to another, again necessitating changes in school…Continuity at school and a good education can, however, provide an extremely important stable environment for these children and can
26 assist them to break the cycle of disadvantage and so benefit from wider opportunities and appropriate pathways from education to work.
The same submission went on to indicate that among the benefits of continuity of schooling are the facilitation of social relationships with peers and supportive adults, and the development of self-esteem. On the other hand, the experience of a number of children in care of poor performance at school, stigmatisation, bullying by peers and inadequate support from teachers reduces the chances that they will remain in school and gain the aforementioned benefits from education. Research here and abroad suggests that while some of these children and young people have learning difficulties and disabilities, their poor educational outcomes are more often a result of their circumstances (including their pre-care disadvantage and in-care experiences, such as multiple foster placements), not a lack of ability. Being treated like everyone else is one of the ways that young care-leavers in New South Wales have said that teachers had helped them through some of the difficulties of being a ward. Another is support from a school counsellor or an understanding teacher.
Uniting Care-Burnside has indicated a number of things that can help a child or young person in care to maximise the benefit from schooling, including the following: A. Using the results of previous assessments when they are available, the school should identify where particular assistance may be necessary, B. Appoint a special person at the school with whom the young person is comfortable, as a mentor, C. Permit partial absence for a period while reluctant students adjust to a school, D. Develop an educational plan in concert with the young person, teachers and carers, E. Restore students to school as quickly as practicable following separation for disciplinary or other reasons.
In addition to the above measures, the Association of Children’s Welfare Agencies has recommended: 1. The training of all education personnel regarding the specific issues faced by children and young people in out-of-home care, 2. More resources for support staff for students with behaviour and learning difficulties, 3. Formal development of inter-agency coordination systems recognised and supported by educational personnel, where each child or young person in out-of- home care is assigned a case manager/lead worker, 4. A requirement that educational plans be developed jointly between DoCS and the DET within 21 days of the child or young person coming into care, 5. Develop exclusion policies for children and young people in out-of-home care that enable resources for education purposes to move with the child in the event of exclusion from school.
Point 2 in the above list receives close attention in Chapter 9 of this report. In regard to point 3, although not focusing particularly on young people receiving out-of-home care, the development of pilot projects systematically linking schools and community agencies was recommended in an earlier section of this chapter. Point 4, concerning the formulation of joint departmental plans, relates to points A, B and D of the Burnside proposals. Looking at the current and anticipated capacities of DoCS and the DET to give prompt attention to a young person’s needs, the following recommendation is made by the Inquiry:
27 Recommendation 8.9: That within one month of a child or young person coming into care, using the results of past or current assessments, the relevant school should collaboratively develop an educational plan with and for the young person concerned and appoint a staff member with whom the young person is comfortable, as a mentor. Apart from providing educational support and guidance, the mentor will advocate for the young person’s restoration to schooling when that is necessary and feasible, and do whatever is practicable to ensure continuity of education when the student is excluded from standard schooling.
GENDER EQUITY
The issue of gender inequalities in education has been a focus for school reform since the publication of Girls, Schools and Society by the Australian Schools Commission in 197545. As the title of that and subsequent reports suggest46, the initial focus was upon the difficulties experienced by girls in the course of their schooling. From around the mid 1990s, the policy has broadened to include the ways that schools affect the self-image and learning outcomes of both boys and girls47. New South Wales was one of the first states to examine the particular problems of boys' education48 and the concern about the topic continues with a current Commonwealth inquiry into boys' education by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Work Place Relations.
The overall gender differences in education are fairly clear. As a group, girls have higher participation rates in post compulsory schooling and are more likely to complete year 12 and participate in higher education49. At school, they generally outperform boys in literacy tests. The difficulty that many boys experience in reading, writing and language is reflected in HSC English outcomes where, compared to girls, boys are twice as likely to be in the bottom quartile. Research has also documented the ways in which boys have behaviour problems in school. They are more likely to be implicated in bullying and harassment, and more likely to be absent from school, suspended, expelled or assigned to special behaviour units. While the retention and achievement of girls has increased in recent years, there is still evidence that they do less well in terms of post-school options. Girls who leave school early, for example,
45 Australia, Committee on Social Change and the Education of Women, Study Group (1975) Girls Schools and Society , Woden, ACT: Schools Commission. 46 Commonwealth Schools Commission, (1987) National Policy for the Education of Girls in Australian Schools, Canberra; Australian Education Council (1993) National Action Plan for the Education of Girls 1993-1997, Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation. 47 MCEETYA Gender Equity Taskforce (1996) Gender Equity: A Framework for Australian Schools, Canberra: ACT Department of Education; NSW Department of School Education (1996) Girls and Boys at School: Gender Equity Strategy 1996-2001,Sydney, NSW: Special Focus Programs Directorate. 48 O'Doherty, S. (Chair) (1994) Challenges and opportunities: A discussion paper. Report to the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs on the Inquiry into Boys' Education by the NSW Government Advisory Committee on Education, Training and Tourism, Sydney: Ministry of Education and Youth Affairs. 49 Marks, G., Fleming, N., Long., & McMillan, J. (2000) Patterns of Participation in Year 12 and Higher Education in Australia: Trends and Issues. (Vol.17). Melbourne: Australian Council of Educational Research.
28 are less likely to attain a full time job and more likely to become unemployed than their male counterparts50.
It is perhaps surprising, considering the liveliness of these debates that gender inequalities have not figured more prominently in the concerns that teachers and parents have raised with the Inquiry. Few submissions have mentioned the needs of girls. More have referred to boys’ education, usually in the context of discipline or behaviour or the lack of male role models for boys, especially in the primary school. The relative quietness of the issue is mirrored at the level of policy where there seems to be a hiatus in the debate about how to conceptualise and promote gender equity in schooling. New South Wales is awaiting the release by the Minister of Education of a new gender equity policy to replace the 1996-2001 policy document. The forthcoming release of the report of the Commonwealth Inquiry into Boys Education, and of a separate NSW DET report into male teachers will perhaps increase the momentum in this area and re-invigorate debate about gender inequalities in schooling.
The Inquiry endorses the approach of the DET in adopting a broad gender equity perspective as the basis for policy development, rather than separate policies for boys and girls. Such an approach is much more likely to acknowledge the complex manner in which gender interacts with other social variables to create patterns of educational disadvantage. It is not true, for example, that all boys are doing poorly at school or that all girls are doing well. The higher one goes up the social scale, the less difference there is in academic achievements between boys and girls. At the other end of the scale, boys and girls from Aboriginal families and from low income families and communities are doing particularly poorly. It is important, therefore, to move away from an over-simplified binary approach to the problem of gender equity and instead, as a recent report recommended51, pose the question: which boys and which girls are disadvantaged? In adopting this approach, the DET can more effectively direct resources towards improving the achievements and retention of groups who need it most.
It is important for the DET to continue to take the initiative as regards gender equity and an important step in this regard would be the release of a new policy to guide change at the system, school and classroom level. From the Inquiry's perspective, the policy should address a number of urgent issues including.
• The development of strategies to identify and assist particular groups of boys and girls who are doing less well at school;
• An understanding of changing forms of work and its differential impact upon particular groups of boys and girls;
• Strategies to ensure that both boys and girls acquire communication and relational skills that are highly valued in a knowledge based economy;
• Programs to ensure that information technology courses are equally attractive to both boys and girls;
50 Doherty, L (2002) Dole risk greater for girls who drop out of school, Sydney Morning Herald, August 15, p. 5. 51 Collins, C., Kenway, J. & McLeod, J. (2000) Factors Influencing the Educational Performance of Males and Females in School and their Initial Destinations after Leaving School, A project funded by the Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra, ACT.
29 • Initiatives to confirm students' sense of value by affirming that there are multiple ways of being a boy or a girl and a variety of ways of being successful adults; and
• School and classroom strategies to confront violence, harassment , victimisation and risk-taking behaviour.
30 CHAPTER 9 THE INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IN MAINSTREAM CLASSES
Inclusive education necessitates that schools and classrooms be supportive mainstream environments where all students’ needs are met. This is the essential environment that assists all students to prepare for life in the community. Learning Difficulties Advocacy organisation.
------
BACKGROUND
The treatment of students with disabilities provides an important test of the levels of egalitarianism and social justice in our public education system, as well as in society more broadly. In the past, discrimination against individuals with disabilities was widespread, leading to their segregation, isolation, exclusion, exploitation, neglect and/or abuse. But over time the situation has changed. As a result of considerable public advocacy, discrimination on the grounds of disability is now legally unacceptable, and is increasingly considered to be culturally and ethically unacceptable. As a result, people with disabilities now expect the same access to education and employment, and to a full life within the community, as everyone else.
The impact of these changes on public education has been significant. Prior to the Wyndham Review of 1957, there was little government involvement in educational provision for children with disabilities, and they were either not educated, or their needs were catered for by voluntary organisations, in institutions largely organised according to type of disability. In fact, it was not until 1974 that the State government took over responsibility for educating students with disabilities52. Today, the current Education Act (1990) includes as one of its objects, the “provision of special educational assistance to children with disabilities”, and anti-discrimination and disability discrimination legislation at both the Commonwealth and State level provides the framework within which services for individuals with disabilities are implemented53.
In addition to provisions for students with disabilities, there has been an increased focus in recent years on improving the performance of students with various forms of learning difficulties, who have traditionally under-performed academically. This push has been fuelled in part by the development of national benchmarks in literacy and numeracy, which enable interstate and national comparisons54.
The DET has responded to the above changes with a very substantial increase in funding for special education. In 2002, the funding for the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream classes, for example, reached more than $53 million per annum, up from about $9 million just five years ago. Overall, the
52 McRae, D. (1996) The Integration/ Inclusion Feasibility Study. New South Wales Department of School Education. 53 See the (Commonwealth) Disability Discrimination Act, 1992; the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act, 1977; the NSW Disability Services Act, 1993. 54 Education ministers throughout Australia published the first national benchmarks in relation to reading in 1999. See the National Report on Schooling in Australia, 1999. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs.
31 DET now spends more than $500 million per annum on special education services for students with disabilities and/or learning difficulties, up from $280 million in 1995/9655. This covers the following:
• Early intervention services, such as the Early Learning Program for children with disabilities;
• Early school support for students with mild intellectual disabilities;
• The Funding Support program (formerly known as the Integration program) to enable students with disabilities to be educated in mainstream classes;
• Support units and support classes for students with disabilities in mainstream schools;
• Schools for Specific Purposes (SSPs), which take only students with disabilities and/or behaviour disorders;
• Support Teachers Learning Difficulties (STLDs);
• Tied global funding to schools for special education; and
• A range of itinerant and support personnel at the District level, including itinerant support teachers (integration), special education and disability consultants, support teachers for students with behavioural difficulties, and specialist teachers for students with hearing and vision impairment56.
In terms of students with disabilities, in New South Wales schools there is currently a continuum of services provided (from inclusion in mainstream classes to enrolment in support classes and SSPs), with parents given considerable choice in determining which option is most appropriate for their child. This choice is not absolute, however. In relation to SSP and support class places, it is dependent on availability57. In contrast, unless a school can argue that “unjustifiable hardship” would result if a particular child joined the school, parents can choose to enrol their child with a disability in their local school without having to go through a selection process58. The Funding Support Program aims to provide necessary funds to support this choice, with funding allocated to the individual rather than to the school or district. In addition, substantial capital funds are available to schools to make them accessible to students with disabilities.
55 Information provided by officers in the Disability Programs Directorate of the DET. 1995/96 expenditure figures from McRae (1996), Op. Cit. The 1995/96 figure may not be strictly comparable with that for 2002. 56 In NSW, programs such as Reading Recovery also assist students who are experiencing difficulty with early reading. This program is funded under the State Literacy and Numeracy Plan, which provides the framework for the teaching of literacy and numeracy. 57 Places in SSPs and support classes are allocated by District Placement Panels, which may allocate students to locations that are not preferred by the parents (e.g. at some distance from their home), or place a child on a waiting list until a suitable placement becomes available. 58 The notion of “unjustifiable hardship” is included in both the Commonwealth and State disability discrimination acts, as a possible defence by an institution that refuses admission to a person with a disability. In order to assess hardship - justifiable or unjustifiable - it is necessary to examine the resources available to the institution and the costs and benefits to all involved (for example, of providing wheelchair access).
32 Choice of placement also depends on the knowledge parents have of the potential advantages and disadvantages of each option. This latter is often influenced by parental exposure to advocates for one view or another. Teachers in SSPs claim, for example, that health and community services workers involved in early intervention programs for children living with disabilities tend to be pro-inclusion, and to discourage parents from considering alternatives, even in extreme cases. Inclusion advocacy groups, on the other hand, claim that mainstream school principals and district officers sometimes put pressure on parents to consider less inclusive, more specialised and segregated options, especially for students with behavioural problems, severe disabilities or high support needs. Another factor is the knowledge and other resources available to parents. A submission to the Inquiry from a researcher noted, for example, that:
Many of the inclusive educational practices identified by participants in this study [for students with high support needs] depended on resources such as staff training, equipment and a teachers aide. … Adequate funding and resources continue to be elusive without intensive and ongoing advocacy [emphasis added].
The Head of a Support Unit in a Western Sydney school commented that at her school, a number of the parents of disabled students were themselves graduates of support classes and SSPs, some of whom were not well placed to lobby for additional resources, or to make fully informed placement decisions59. As in other areas of society, in special education, the concept of choice is not matched by a level playing field in terms of access, information or personal empowerment.
Notwithstanding the issue of choice, approaches to meeting the needs of students with disabilities have been increasingly influenced by community pressure to normalise the experiences of people with disabilities. In the education sphere, this involves providing an education to students with disabilities in mainstream schools and classes or in environments and in ways that approximate as closely as possible those applying in mainstream schools and classes60. Consistent with normalisation, since the McRae report of 1996, which explored the feasibility and necessary funding arrangements to enable more students with disabilities to be educated in mainstream classrooms, inclusion61 has been emphasised where possible. The McRae report did not advocate the abolition of the continuum of services, but was the impetus for
59 The more general issue of parents with disabilities and their school-age children is the subject of a recent report. See Robinson, S., Hickson, F. and Strike, R. (2001) More Than Getting Through The Gate: The involvement of parents who have a disability in their children’s school education in NSW. Disability Council of NSW. 60 The NSW Disability Services Act, 1993 has as one of its objects furthering the integration of people with disabilities in the community. See also McRae, D. (1996), Op. Cit. In the United States, the principle of normalisation has been enshrined in legislation, via the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as providing education in the ‘least restrictive environment’. See for example, Palmaffy, T. “The Evolution of the Federal Role”, (2001) in C.E. Finn, A.J. Rotherham and C.R. Hokanson (Eds.), Rethinking Special Education for a New Century, Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and the Progressive Policy Institute. 61 The term ‘inclusion’ is used here to denote the location at most or all times of students with disabilities in mainstream classes. As Hos (2001) states: “In general terms, the concept of full inclusion means that all children, regardless of their abilities, are equally valued and are able to attend their local school, with individualised programmes, in classes with their peers, and are included in all school activities.” (p.1) From Hos, K. “What it means to be one of the kids”, Paper presented to SPOTonDD conference (Speech Pathologists, Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists on Developmental Disability), July 2001. ‘Integration’ is sometimes used as an alternative term, but can also refer to sites that are not fully inclusive, such as support classes within a regular school. In what follows, unless otherwise stated, the term ‘inclusion’ will be used when referring to the full participation of students with disabilities in mainstream classes. Where quotations use the term ‘integration’, unless otherwise stated, this can be assumed to mean ‘inclusion’ in the above sense.
33 significant increases in funding for inclusion in recent years. It did this through changing the basis on which additional support would be provided, from one of disability classification to one of ‘support need’.
Attracting Funding Support now involves a two-step process. First, a student must have an identified disability that fits the DET’s Disability Criteria. If so, a Learning Support Team, which includes the student’s parents or carers, and specialist and other teachers within the school, profiles the student’s needs, develops an Individual Education Plan (IEP) for the student, and seeks funding based on the assessed needs of the student in the educational setting62. This process enables distinctions to be made between students with a similar disability who may, for a range of reasons, have different support needs relevant to their learning and full participation in all aspects of school life. It thus breaks down the assumption of fixed disabilities that affect everyone in the same way, and discourages over-generalisation concerning the concomitants of any particular disability. The assumption behind this new classification mechanism is that students will be assisted to access the mainstream curriculum as fully as possible. The McRae initiatives thus provided support for those students who seek to access a regular school experience. In the Inquiry’s view, in commissioning the McRae study, in basing funding on support need rather than disability, and in developing the Funding Support program, the DET has shown leadership and initiative and is to be commended.
The Funding Support program and the provision of support teachers for students with learning difficulties (STLDs) received a great deal of attention throughout this Inquiry, with about one in four submissions referring in some detail to one or more of them. Likewise, discussion of students with special needs was a frequent occurrence in school visits and public hearings. The majority of comments came from teachers, although parents, advocacy and professional associations were also represented. Most comments received were critical of current arrangements and advocated improvements. This is despite the increase of over 400% in Funding Support in recent years, and efforts by the DET to allocate STLDs on the basis of need. In fact, it requires some explanation that programs that have been increasingly resourced should nonetheless have attracted such trenchant criticism, a point returned to below. In what follows, the chapter identifies themes emerging in the course of the Inquiry, provides an analysis of the current situation, and makes a series of recommendations.
THEMES EMERGING FROM SUBMISSIONS, SCHOOL VISITS AND HEARINGS
The following key themes emerged during the Inquiry’s visits, hearings and analysis of submissions in relation to students with special education needs:
• Recognition of the desirability of assisting each child to learn to his or her fullest capacity, and qualified support for the inclusion of students with identified disabilities in mainstream classes.
• Concern at the available resources and the operation of the Funding Support Program.
62 In other words, funding to support inclusion is based on educational need rather than category of disability, although a recognised disability must be confirmed before a student is eligible. See NSW Department of Education and Training Disability Criteria, March 2001; and NSW Department of Education and Training, Students with Disabilities in Regular Classes: Learning Together Funding Support, 2002.
34 • Differing opinions on the extent to which students with disabilities require generalist or specialist programs.
• Concern at the insufficient numbers of Support Teacher Learning Difficulties (STLDs).
Support for assisting all students to learn and for the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream classes
First, there was widespread support for the public education system’s inclusivity in giving all children the opportunity to learn to their fullest capacity, including students with particular needs. There was a range of views on whether or not this was currently occurring. The following comment was from an inner city primary school:
Parents have the right to expect that all children in every school have an equal opportunity to learn and fully develop their capacities. Public schools have the responsibility for meeting the needs of all children. But sadly in New South Wales this is far from reality.
When it came to the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream classes, rather than in SSPs or support classes, views were mixed. The majority of groups and individuals expressed qualified support for full inclusion, while also outlining particular areas of concern. Teachers from a Sydney primary school made the following assessment:
We are not arguing against the integration of all children with special needs into mainstream classes (we have had several success stories at our school) but there needs to be more careful examination of which children will truly benefit. There also needs to be a more honest appraisal of the sometimes conflicting rights of the child, his/her parents, the class teacher and, most importantly, the other children in the class.
One primary school in south-western Sydney said:
The majority of teachers embrace this policy of inclusion but are unable to effectively provide for these students in their classrooms due to a range of factors.
A small minority of teachers were quite negative about inclusion, although this was often related to lack of resources. Those in one rural primary school said:
Each year more children with disabilities are presenting with a range of problems … Without adequate support these children can dominate the classroom environment, often preventing other children from learning and in some cases causing injury to themselves, their teachers and their peers … Classroom teachers need more support, training and time to adequately address the needs of these children.
Some advocates argued cogently for the full inclusion and adequate funding of students with disabilities in mainstream classes. An inclusion advocacy group wrote:
The benefits of inclusion to the child with disabilities are annotated in the wealth of literature documented in this submission. In brief, the research demonstrates that inclusion provides more opportunities for a child’s
35 knowledge and skills to develop. It provides learning in real environments that enable students with disability to learn real content. In the regular class, everyone’s expectations of the child are higher. There are more opportunities to learn and practice age appropriate skills and to have typical age appropriate experiences.
Supporters of full inclusion also highlighted its social benefits, not only for the included children, but for others in the class as well. Inclusion was seen by many (but not all) parents to offer significant benefits over other options, as the following parent of a student with a disability noted:
Inclusion in regular school has meant that our son now has real friends; he has playmates after school and on weekends; he is learning at school, expectations are high and he meets these expectations; he has interesting things to do and is involved in activities both at school and in the community; he knows and is known and valued by many many people … he is generally happier and enjoys a rich and varied life. These benefits cannot occur when children are segregated in special ed. settings.
However, concerns were expressed at the fragility of inclusion arrangements at present. A professional organisation in the disability area wrote:
The attitudes of teachers and most importantly the school principal have a profound effect on whether a child with disabilities is accepted and then welcomed into the school community … It is however extremely concerning that the right of a child to attend a school depends on such fragile conditions.
The Inquiry acknowledges the preference of many students with disabilities and their parents for inclusion, and in general supports it. It must be said, however, that we have been impressed by the teaching provided to students with disabilities in a number of different settings, including SSPs, support classes and mainstream classes. In all cases, we have witnessed examples of positive, sensitive teaching designed to enhance the students’ skill levels. In all cases, teachers have demonstrated a keen eye for students’ need to function as effectively as possible in the ‘real’ world. It is the Inquiry’s clear impression that students with disabilities can be appropriately challenged in a variety of school settings, assuming appropriate levels of training and resources. However, this does not negate the primacy of trying to find inclusive solutions.
Concerns about the Funding Support program
A range of concerns was repeatedly put to the Inquiry about the current Funding Support program, which enables students with identified disabilities to learn in regular classrooms. It was not so much the fact of inclusion as the manner of its implementation and the levels of resources devoted to it that were causes of dissatisfaction. In relation to funding levels, a northern Sydney primary school observed:
36 The manner in which the Department of Education allocates support to these children defies logic. To be given one hour a week support for a child with challenging behaviour is a tokenistic gesture that gives the impression that the Department is doing all it can for those involved.
An inner Sydney high school wrote pointedly: “Dumping into mainstream classes with a single carer is not adequate”. The phrase “mainstream dumping” was encountered by the Inquiry on a number of occasions. Respondents to this Inquiry in particular emphasised the pressures on classroom teachers as they attempt to effectively teach students with special needs in mainstream classes. The negative day-to-day impact on teachers was pointed out on many occasions. For example, one leading community organisation argued that “teachers should be supported through four hours relief from face to face teaching to undertake the planning work required to teach a mixed ability class”. The need for time to plan instruction for children with diverse needs and capacities was a high priority of many teachers. A primary school in Sydney’s west lamented the lack of support in terms of class sizes:
… within the constraints of DET staffing policies, no flexibility regarding reduction in class sizes is available to our school to support those teachers who accept our special needs students in their classrooms.
Over and again, the Inquiry heard complaints from teachers and parents about the lack of funding provided for training in general, and for training and ongoing support for teachers, counsellors, STLDs, school executives and others working with students with special needs, in particular63. Staff at a South Coast primary school said:
The teachers who have students with disabilities in their classes often have no specialist knowledge of the condition or educational expectations of the individual. (The staff are often “filled in” on conditions by snatches of conversation with parents.)
Access to training by teachers aides (special) was limited because those employed to work in mainstream classes are most often casual employees, with no guarantee of ongoing employment or Departmental support to undertake it.
These dissatisfactions were exacerbated by the common perception that the procedures through which funding support was provided and must be managed were administratively unwieldy. Complaints included the need to confirm the existence of a disability on an annual basis (through the Disability Confirmation Form) and the existence of one funding cycle per year, with students who applied at other times often missing out. But it was the general impact of the procedures on schools that drew the most criticism. This was encapsulated in the following comment from the president of a rural primary school council:
Funding 2001 has proven to be a nightmare for all concerned. The need to justify and account for funds for children with special needs has lead to a trail of red tape which has left teachers hamstrung and frustrated. … Our student counsellor tells me that an entire term of the school year is taken up by filling out forms to justify the funding system.
63 It is recognised that one of the categories for which schools can apply for funds under Funding Support is teacher training and development, as well as teacher release time. However, with very limited funds available for many students, schools often prefer to put the money into teachers aides, who are less expensive than casual teachers who are employed to back-fill classroom positions while teachers are being trained or preparing lessons.
37 A primary school likewise lamented:
Teachers are expected to fight a paper war to gain funding and/or aide time, which is often inadequate in catering for the individuals with disabilities. The paper war battle also falls on the shoulders of the support team chairperson, the committee and school counsellor, as well as any specialist teachers.
The view that the administrative demands of Funding Support were unreasonable was widespread, with several schools indicating that they essentially ‘lost’ the services of counsellors, STLD teachers and sometimes school executives, for weeks or months each year, as funding was applied for and Individual Education Plans developed and consulted on. This was perceived to be a very serious drain on already stretched resources. The frustration experienced when students subsequently missed out on funding, or received a very small amount, was often extreme. One high school counsellor observed that it could take up to $900 in staff time to receive an annual allocation of $900 for a student.
For the sake of complete reporting, the Inquiry is obliged to note that there was also a view prevalent that many children ‘missed out’ on Funding Support. This may be because they lacked access to experts to make a diagnosis (e.g. speech therapists) or because they did not meet the DET disability criteria, despite appearing to have significant difficulties. For example, children with multiple mild disabilities (none of which qualifies for recognition on its own, but which together significantly affect the child’s ability to learn), and those with learning difficulties, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorders (ADD/ADHD), acquired brain injury, and some behaviour problems, are currently excluded. It is appropriate that criteria intended to identify individuals in need of special support should be periodically reviewed. However, there was a view that changes to the criteria were resource rather than educationally driven, as a high school P&C observed:
It would even appear that as more students are being identified, limited resources have meant that the benchmarks for students to qualify have been changed.
All of these issues fed into a general dissatisfaction with Funding Support, as the following comment from a central coast high school illustrated:
The winding up of many special schools with staffing differentials suitable for the specialist needs of these children has heightened the flow of these children to mainstream schools which have neither the specialist trained teachers nor facilities to cater for them properly. … Even McRae himself conceded that integration without resourcing would be a disaster and it has been that.
Specialist versus generalist teaching for students with disabilities
Another issue that received consideration during the Inquiry was the degree of specialist teaching that needs to be provided to students with identified disabilities. Several submissions to the Inquiry claimed that mainstream teachers lacked the knowledge and skills required to plan, implement and evaluate effective programs for special needs students. One submission from a learning disabilities advocacy group noted:
38 … the common arrangement in schools with limited resources of putting together a small group of children with a heterogeneous collection of problems, and giving them all a small amount of undifferentiated coaching in reading or maths [is] definitely not the most effective use of resources.
A teacher at an Inquiry hearing said simply: “Special needs kids need special skills teachers.” In fact, the existence of Individual Education Plans for students on Funding Support, and increasingly, of individual Literacy and Numeracy Plans managed by STLDs for low achieving students, suggests that at the very least, individualised, if not specialised, programs are needed for a considerable number of students. In addition, when teachers aides (special) are provided - on an occasional basis for low support needs students and more frequently, or sometimes full-time, for high support needs students - they are rarely trained.
It is difficult to see how students who would previously have had access to specialised staff in smaller classes and specialised environments (in SSPs or support classes), can receive an equivalent service in the average class of 30 students with an unspecialised teacher. Teachers in SSPs and support classes often develop particular areas of expertise (e.g. in working with hearing impaired students or those with emotional disorders). They point to this expertise with pride, and claim that it underpins their overall effectiveness. The same mainstream class teacher could be asked to teach a hearing impaired student one year, an intellectually disabled student the next, and a student with a severe emotional disorder after that. How are such teachers expected to develop expertise to work with this variety of students? At the very least, ways of making connections between the wealth of expertise existing in SSPs and support classes and regular teachers need to be established. This prospect underpins a key recommendation later in this chapter.
In this context, the Inquiry is conscious of the fact that boundaries defining what challenges can, and cannot, be regarded as falling within the ambit of mainstream professional teaching, need to be established. Generalist teachers, no less than practitioners in other professional fields, clearly need to possess the ability to deal with clients of mixed potentials. Of course, the manageable scope of such challenges depends on a range of teacher support considerations, from class size and the demands represented by the students’ disabilities, to the professional background and development of the teacher.
Two illustrative case studies
The Inquiry visited schools with significant numbers of students with disabilities, including some with high support needs, as well as others with learning difficulties, where there was no staff member with any training in special education64. The level of anxiety about inclusion amongst such staff was palpable, and the desire for training and support, acute. Where inclusion worked well, the principal was strongly accepting of students with disabilities. In addition, these schools were able to use a variety of funding sources constructively to create a full- or part-time position to coordinate the program (especially where significant numbers of such students existed). This person was invariably trained or experienced in special education, and could provide expert advice and ongoing support to classroom teachers in the development, implementation and evaluation of their Individual Education
64 We are not including as ‘training’ here, the one semester unit of special education now required in pre-service education programs. This contributes to awareness raising as much as skill development, and the majority of teachers in the system went through their training prior to its introduction.
39 Plans IEPs). Sometimes this was assisted by the existence of a support unit in the school, as these often had specialist teachers. Often, it involved limiting the number of students in any one class to one or two, and taking care in the selection of teachers to work with students with disabilities. The following brief case studies illustrate some of these issues.
At a large metropolitan Sydney primary school, the inclusion of 15 students with special needs has proceeded with remarkable ease. There are several reasons for this. First, the school Principal is trained in special education, and provides expert back-up support to her classroom teachers. Several teachers told the Inquiry that when they felt ‘desperate’ and did not know how to help a student, the principal could always provide useful suggestions. The principal also knows how to complete the Funding Support forms to obtain the maximum appropriate resources for these students. And in the case of two students with very challenging behavioural problems, she has been able to obtain medium-term placements for them in special schools for several days per week. Second, the teachers aides (special) at the school are very experienced and constitute a stable, highly competent resource. Third, each teacher has been given training in relation to the particular disability of their student/s, and time to liaise with teachers aides and parents, including a day per term for planning and evaluation for each student. Fourth, the school is in an affluent area, and is fortunate to have many parent helpers who assist teachers in the classroom. Also, for the past few years, the school’s P&C has funded a Support Teacher Learning Difficulties for 2.5 days a week over and above the DET allocation, to assist students in the school with learning needs. This has taken pressure off classroom teachers and provided additional assistance for students with special needs. And finally, teachers are encouraged to use teachers aides flexibly, to assist in providing a facilitatory learning environment to a range of students, and not just those on Funding Support. In the eyes of many, this is an appropriate way to manage this resource.
Despite all of these supports, teachers at the school still say that including students with special needs in their classrooms is hard work. Extra planning is needed to optimise the use of teachers aides, and individual education plans require constant updating. But overall, they say, it is worth the effort, and teachers were clearly proud of their achievements with some of these students.
This story is not unique. The Inquiry has visited a number of schools where resources have been made available to enable the creative adaptation to the needs of students with disabilities in mainstream classes. However, many schools do not have these choices. The following excerpt from a submission to the Inquiry by a regional primary school tells another story.
[At our school] a Stage Two class [Year 3/4] consists of three extreme behaviourally disturbed children, one diagnosed as Aspergers, another who is emotionally disturbed and the third diagnosed as ADHD who is not receiving medication. The third child was accepted as a negotiated transfer because of his history of behavioural problems … In addition, there are five students with learning difficulties who require special programs and teacher time. There is also a child who is 90% deaf and suffers from a serious illness. This child is sometimes oppositionally defiant65.
The Department has provided 1.5 hours teachers aide time per day for the Aspergers child. At varying times throughout the year the Department has provided teachers
65 Aspergers Syndrome is a form of autism. ADHD refers to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
40 aide time for the ADHD and deaf child. This time has been minimal and ineffective due to the lack of suitable personnel to cater to these children’s specific needs and lack of training and expertise given to teachers and teachers aides. The deaf child also receives two hours per week from the Deaf Unit, which although very effective for the child, has not increased the teacher’s skill in dealing with this child. One day was allocated for the teacher to consult with specialist teachers. No further time has been allocated to the teacher to develop individual learning programs, liaise with aides or communicate with parents. Little training has been provided to the teacher to cater for these special needs children.
This second case study reflects the kind of problems that occur when inclusion is difficult to appropriately manage and resource.
Numbers of Support Teachers Learning Difficulties (STLDs)
There is a range of provisions directed at what one teacher called the “great unidentified”, those students who may not have an identified disability, but who have learning difficulties. These students are estimated to account for up to 16% of all students66. Their needs are currently met in the public education system through the provision of nearly 1200 equivalent full-time STLD positions, allocated to schools by school districts on the basis of need. In discussions with representatives of many schools, and in submissions to the Inquiry, we have heard considerable appreciation of the contribution made by these teachers, but also some concerns about the number and utilisation of STLD staff. These include complaints that not all schools have even part-time access to such teachers, the view that all children with learning problems should be entitled to specialised help as early as possible, and comments about the lack of training of many STLDs. In addition, there is frustration due to the fact that schools lose STLD support when their Basic Skills Tests (BST) improve, reflecting a paradoxical incentive for schools to not be too successful in improving their students’ basic skills. For example, a northern metropolitan public school wrote:
Funding and provision of STLD teachers is determined on the results of children in standardised testing. Perform well in your BST and your funding for STLD time is cut (as we have experienced). Shouldn’t this be an indication that a program is working well, not a reason to destroy it?
It is generally agreed that more STLDs are needed, especially as their services are now divided between students on Funding Support, students with learning difficulties and students requiring assistance with Basic Skills Test follow-up. A southern Sydney high school observed:
The most recent reallocation of STLD positions was a little like ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’ … Even if we are to take the view that STLDs are there to train and inservice other members of staff, there is inadequate time to do this given the teaching loads of other staff members.
66 Figure proposed by the National Health and Medical Research Council in 1990, cited in McRae (1996), Op. Cit.
41 Conclusions
Many of the foregoing observations suggest that teachers are feeling stressed and confused at what are perceived as ever increasing demands in relation to students with special needs. Others point to real and pressing inadequacies in relation to resources and training for the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream classes. At another level, though, the examples above need to be seen as part of a sea change in government policy in relation to the inclusion of students with disabilities. This change has occurred very rapidly, and at a time when many other changes are also happening in the system, including the rewriting of nearly every aspect of the curriculum, a new focus on student achievement and outcomes and increasing pressures on teachers to meet the needs of every student in their class, regardless of cultural, linguistic and social background. The Inquiry is of the view that much of the tension surrounding inclusion stems from the above factors, as well as from the rapid expansion of the Funding Support program, and failure to provide STLDs in all schools, rather than from inherent levels of rigidity in the teaching profession.
THE FUNDING SUPPORT PROGRAM - RECENT TRENDS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
In this section, figures demonstrating the expansion of the Funding Support program are presented, before a range of specific matters are considered and recommendations made. First, as indicated above, over the past 14 years, and particularly since the McRae report of 1996, there have been very significant changes in the distribution of students with disabilities in different educational settings. This is evident in Table 9.1 below, provided to the Inquiry by the Family Advocacy Association and updated and amended by the DET, which presents figures on enrolments of students with disabilities in mainstream classes, and in SSPs and support units67.
This table demonstrates a remarkable increase in the number of students with disabilities in mainstream classes between 1988 and 2002 - especially since 1997, where there has been a 200% increase. It also shows a smaller but definite increase in students enrolled in support classes and SSPs. But perhaps most dramatically, Table 9.1 indicates more than a doubling in the overall number of students with identified disabilities in New South Wales during this period (from about 14,500 in 1988 to over 35,000 in 2002).
Information provided to the Inquiry suggests that these figures reflect not only an increase in the identification of students with disabilities, but a shift in their school enrolment patterns, as follows:
• A significant increase in the number of low needs students being identified as having a disability, some of whom were already in mainstream classes but had not been identified and did not attract funding support, and some of whom were previously in SSPs and support classes. In areas such as language disorders, mild intellectual disability and mild autism, under-identification has almost certainly occurred in the past. Its alleviation, however, has had problematic effects in terms of overall funds available for the inclusion of students, as discussed below.
67 Where schools have several support classes (e.g. three or more) this is known as a support unit.
42 • Second, a significant increase in the number of moderate and high support needs students now included in mainstream classes. This reflects a key impact of the McRae report, because under integration funding, many more of these students have been able to access considerable amounts of teachers aide (special) time, which has made their enrolment in regular classes feasible.
• A change in the population of students enrolled in SSPs, from those with mild, moderate and high support needs, to those with moderate, high and very high support needs. Some of these latter students previously received little or no education, being cared for at home or in hospitals and nursing homes.
Table 9.1 Enrolment of students with disabilities in support classes, SSPs and in integrated settings, total primary and secondary, 1988 - 200268
Students in Year support Students in Total classes and integrated SSPs settings 1988 13,353 1,135 14,488 1990 14,060 1,983 16,043 1992 14,092 3,335 17,427 1994 14,500 4,478 18,978 1996 18,628 5,080 23,942 1997 18,526 5,416 23,942 1998 18,636 9,026 27,662 1999 19,087 12,193 31,280 2000 19,378 13,440 32,818 2001 18,279 14,459 32,738 2002 18,618 16,638 35,256
Looking at figures on enrolments in mainstream classes first, Table 9.2 below shows the proportion of students on Funding Support with different kinds of disabilities and levels of support needs. In terms of disability category, the table indicates that the most prevalent disability is mild intellectual, followed by mental health, language difficulties and autism. It also indicates a considerable number of students with moderate intellectual disabilities, and a tiny number of students with severe intellectual disabilities (30), in mainstream classes. This is significant because these students would be expected to experience particular difficulty in accessing the curriculum. In terms of support needs, the table reveals an expected correlation between severity of disability and level of support need, although this is by no means perfect. It suggests, consistent with the profiling of educational need undertaken as part of Funding Support, that the current system can distinguish, for example, between those students with a mild intellectual disability who need limited additional support in the classroom, and those who need more. Just over half of all students with disabilities in mainstream classes are identified as having low support needs. However, nearly half (47.5%) have moderate support needs, which reinforces the
68 Notes to Table 9.1: Data 1996-2002 obtained from the integration data base and School Staffing AS 400. Data for students in integrated settings 1988-2001 provided for students in receipt of funding as at the end of the relevant school year. Data for students in integrated settings 2002 provided for students in receipt of funding as at the commencement of semester 2, 2002. SSP and support class data includes students with disabilities receiving support through distance education.
43 view of many teachers that a considerable number of students with significant individual needs are now learning alongside their peers. A much smaller number of students (just over 300, under 2%) have high support needs.
Table 9.2 Distribution of students included in mainstream classes by disability category and level of support need, 200269
Disability Support needs Total Low Moderate High Mild intellectual 5956 1477 0 7433 Moderate intellectual 4 968 55 1027 Severe intellectual 0 1 29 30 Moderate physical 106 870 50 1026 Severe physical 0 72 113 185 Mental health 276 2161 9 2446 Autism 111 1355 45 1511 Language 1881 518 1 2400 Hearing 61 279 4 344 Vision 28 206 2 236 Total 8423 7907 308 16638
Turning for a moment to students enrolled in SSPs, the number of SSPs has decreased slightly from 116 in 1988 to 95 in 2002 (this figure does not include 11 new schools for students with behaviour needs), enrolling about 4500 students70. As noted above, teachers in SSPs have commented that the level of severity of students now enrolling in their facilities is greater than in the past, because students with milder disabilities, especially younger students, are now enrolling in their local school. This has created new challenges for SSPs, as staffing levels are perceived to have not kept up with need. This issue was addressed by the DET in commissioning the Comino Review in 2000, which recommended that SSPs and support units move to a staffing formula based on the support needs of each student (as is the case with Funding Support), rather than on their disability classification71. At present a trial of this new staffing formula (known as resource based staffing) is under way. The Inquiry is of the view that any adjustments to ensure the adequate staffing of all SSPs and support units should await its results.
In relation to support classes, the number of students in support classes has increased from about 8,700 in 1988 to about 14,100 in 2002. Compared to 1988, when there were 375 schools with support classes, there are now support classes in 545 schools, or one in four of all schools, suggesting the pervasiveness of this placement option72. While the Inquiry has visited some impressive support units, these have not always had the level of equipment and resources seen in some SSPs. One officer in the DET described support units as the “poor relations in
69 Data provided by the Disability Programs Directorate of the DET. 70 Figures in relation to numbers of SSPs and support classes for 2002 were provided to the Inquiry by the DET, and taken from the McRae report (1996), Op. Cit. for 1988 and 1995. 71 Comino, G.C. (2000) Review of Special Education Staffing Formulae for Schools for Specific Purposes and Support Classes in Regular Schools, NSW Department of Education and Training (?) 72 The McRae report (1996), Op. Cit. noted that NSW has significantly more students enrolled in support classes and support units in mainstream schools than the national average. Support classes exist for students with most types of disabilities, including mild intellectual disabilities (the number is capped), moderate intellectual disabilities, severe intellectual disabilities (relatively few), autism, behavioural problems, hearing, vision, reading and language disabilities.
44 the system”. Inclusion advocates have argued that attending one’s local school but then being segregated within it does not equate with genuine inclusion. Others argue that such classes offer a constructive compromise, providing staffing levels and teaching appropriate to the needs of certain students, but enabling some level of integration as well.
In terms of future trends in relation to inclusion, it is possible to examine the distribution of students with disabilities on Funding Support in relation to year of school. Figure 9.1 below provided by DET shows this for 1999 and 2002. There is a clear trend evident, indicating that more students are enrolling in mainstream classes in primary school, with a smaller number presently in high school, and relatively few in the senior years of high school. If most students with identified disabilities currently included in primary school continue to choose mainstream classes over segregated ones for their high school years, then the secondary education system will experience a very substantial increase in the numbers of such students in the next few years. There is some evidence that this is beginning to happen. Figure 9.1 indicates, for example, that the cohort of students who were in Year 5 in 1999 has stayed at about the same number now that they are in Year 8 in 2002. This trend will initially put added pressure on the already difficult middle school years. The Inquiry knows of no long-term planning for such an increase in numbers of secondary students on Funding Support in the future.
Inclusion - students by grade
2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1999 1000 2002 800 600 400 200 0
. der de 1 de 2 de 3 de 4 de 5 de 6 de 7 de 8 de 9 in ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra de 10 de 11 de 12 K G G G G G G G G G ra ra ra G G G
Figure 9.1 Distribution of students on Funding Support by year of school
Finally, it is important to look at the geographical distribution of students now included in mainstream classes, and to consider the impact on schools and school districts of their increasing numbers. Table 9.3 below shows the number of students with disabilities in schools in eight school districts chosen because they have either very high or very low numbers of students on Funding Support.
This table shows first, that there are virtually no schools in any of these school districts that do not have students on funding support, suggesting the breadth of impact of inclusion. Second, the number of such students is unevenly distributed. In the first four districts in western and south-western Sydney, one third of all schools have 20 or more students with disabilities included in mainstream classes (in fact, 11 schools have 30 or more students). Only about one in five schools in the district
45 have less than 10 students on Funding Support. In the four districts in northern and southern Sydney, the figures are dramatically different. Only two schools (less than 1%) have 20 or more students on Funding Support, and more than 80% have 10 students on the program or fewer. In addition, whereas the first four districts have over 3000 students on Funding Support (nearly 3%), the second four have only 1300 (just over 1%). These differences have significant implications for school and school district resources.
Table 9.3 Distribution of students on Funding Support in mainstream classes across schools in eight school districts, 200273
Number of schools with: Total % School More 10 – 19 Less No Total funding students Districts than 20 students than 10 Students Schools support in four students students students districts
Fairfield, 63 76 40 1 180 3196 2.8% Granville, Liverpool, Mount Druitt. Hornsby, 2 36 167 7 212 1304 1.2% Northern Beaches, Ryde, Sutherland.
In conclusion, the data in this section indicates a clear progression towards greater access to education for all students with disabilities, in the least restrictive environment possible. While strong advocates of full inclusion for all students express concern at the resilience of segregated options like SSPs and support classes, there has nonetheless been a dramatic shift in enrolments towards more normalised options in the past few years.
BEHIND THE DISSATISFACTION WITH RESOURCES FOR FUNDING SUPPORT AND STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES
On the surface at least, one would expect Funding Support for students with disabilities to be a widely appreciated initiative. That it is not requires explanation and careful interpretation. In some ways it was not unexpected that this funding would become a source of dissatisfaction, especially for teachers. In a period of economic constraint, Funding Support constitutes one of the very few areas of potential additional resources available to schools. By making it dependent on a diagnosis of disability, and then funding individual support needs in relation to the curriculum, it was inevitable that an epidemic of testing would result. Counsellors have been run off their feet testing any child who is under-performing to see whether or not he or she has a disability that qualifies for additional funding. And parents have been strongly encouraged to send children for more specialised testing when schools suspect problems.
This has had unintended cost and socio-economic implications. The cost implications are obvious, and have resulted in more students with low support needs seeking funding from a limited bucket (see later). The socio-economic implications are less obvious but just as important. In relation to speech therapy for example,
73 Table calculated using figures provided by the Disability Programs Directorate of the DET.
46 DET employs no speech therapists (most other State Education Departments do), and the NSW Department of Health and the Department of Ageing, Disability and Health Care have difficulty recruiting them. This means that in the area of language disabilities, parents either have to pay for testing from private speech pathologists, or wait long periods for testing from publicly employed speech pathologists. More affluent parents are thus able to access Funding Support ahead of some of their less affluent counterparts. In lower socio-economic areas, this in turn has resulted in anomalies such as large increases in numbers of students suddenly found to have speech difficulties, due to the sudden availability of a publicly (or sometimes school) funded speech pathologist to test them. In these cases, the Department has been unwilling to increase funding concomitantly74.
Three major issues are explored in what follows, and recommendations made:
• The question of ‘full’ inclusion;
• The operation and resourcing of the Funding Support program; and
• The need for more support teachers learning difficulties.
On the first two points, the Inquiry is of the view that it is necessary after five years of rapid growth, to make a careful assessment of the Funding Support program and its impact. This must take account of other factors that have placed pressure on the public education system in recent years, in particular, increased expectations that teachers will individually assess and meet the needs of a wide range of students in their classes. For this reason, attention is also paid to the need for more support teachers learning difficulties.
The recommendations in the remainder of this chapter are designed to give the many classroom teachers in New South Wales who currently teach students with disabilities and learning difficulties greater access to specialist support, materials and training to assist them and their students to achieving optimal learning outcomes. They are also designed to give teachers additional time so that they can extend the range of competence and experience they bring to the diversity of students in today’s classes. The recommendations combine better use of current resources with modest additional funds for consultants in districts with large numbers of students with disabilities, for lower support needs students and for support teachers learning difficulties.
THE QUESTION OF ‘FULL’ INCLUSION
The value of social inclusion
In considering provisions for students with disabilities and learning difficulties, the Inquiry starts from the perspective that inclusion in mainstream classes is (in most instances) highly desirable. In fact it is more than desirable. As noted above, for legislative and other reasons, it is no longer considered acceptable to direct children with disabilities to segregated settings such as SSPs and support classes in mainstream schools, without also providing them with more inclusive options. The benefits to many children of time with their mainstreamed colleagues is
74 Evidence from some District Offices, confirmed by comments from DET officials, suggest that sudden increases in categories of disability in different School Districts are viewed with suspicion. There are socio-economic differentials in this that require further investigation.
47 recognised as potentially advantageous for all - to the disabled person in terms of the richness of experience offered and as a safeguard against exploitation, and to other students in terms of breaking down ignorance and stereotypes about disability. One observer has expressed this cogently:
Strategically, there simply does not exist a better long-term safeguard for the welfare of … individuals [with disability] than a large number of intimate and positive one-to-one relationships between them and other citizens. Very few people seem to realise that valued people are virtually never segregated. The only times that valued people are segregated is when they segregate themselves in order to increase their own status and value75.
The Inquiry agrees that this is a strong argument for not segregating people who have disabilities. This is especially so in relation to those with severe disabilities, who may be least able to argue on their own behalf. Importantly, the above statement is not based on a claim that inclusion in mainstream schools (for example) is more educationally efficient or effective than segregation, but rather, on a set of values concerning what is right. Subject to protecting the rights of other students, good policy in this field would of course seek to maximise both social inclusion and effective learning objectives. Hence, without denying the desirability of including students with disabilities in mainstream classes, it is relevant to ask how well the present educational arrangements serve their educational needs. Considerable research has been undertaken into what practices are effective in developing the capacities of young people with disabilities76. This work is important in pointing to the conditions that enable effective learning and social skill development for students with different kinds of disabilities, and in identifying obstacles to their successful education. A range of views has also been put to the Inquiry concerning the educational efficacy of full inclusion, in terms of which children are ‘suitable’ for inclusion, and at what stage of their educational careers. In relation to intellectual disability, for example, some teachers and parents have offered the view that while inclusion is appropriate in primary school, it is less so in high school because ‘the gap is too wide’ between the learning needs of the student and the secondary curriculum. In relation to students with forms of autism, it has been observed that they may find the constant changes in secondary school very challenging. Likewise, it has been argued that for some students, teaching life skills in a segregated setting is more appropriate than teaching academic skills in a regular classroom77. These comments focus on possible educational outcomes more than on the social value of inclusion.
In the Inquiry’s view, whatever their individual merit, the above research and comments should not be used to mount an argument for or against inclusion. To do
75 Wolfensberger, W., cited in Macrae, D. (1996) Op. Cit. p. 42. 76 Many research studies attempt to show that inclusive or segregated settings do or do not lead to better academic or social outcomes for students with various kinds of disabilities. See for example, MacMillan, D.L, Gresham, F.M. and Forness, S.R. (1996) “Full Inclusion: An Empirical Perspective” Behavioral Disorders, Vol. 21, No. 2, 145-159; Pavri , S. and Luftig, R. (2000) “The social face of inclusive education: Are students with learning disabilities really included in the classroom?” Preventing School Failure, Vol. 45, No. 1, 8-14; Cook, B.G. “A comparison of teachers’ attitudes toward their included students with mild and severe disabilities” (2001) The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 34, No. 4, 203-213; Cook, B.G. and Semmel, M.I. (1997) “Peer acceptance of integrated students with disabilities as a function of severity of disability and classroom composition: a preliminary report”. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. 77 Parmenter, T. (2001) “The role of special schools - a crucible for the support of the inclusion movement”. Paper presented to the National Conference of the Australian Federation of Special Education Administrators, Sydney.
48 so would ignore the socialisation and social participation dimensions of education to which every student has a right. We are currently unable to ensure that every non- disabled child entering mainstream schools will succeed academically or socially. In fact, we often find it difficult to provide the appropriate interventions to enable optimal learning and social interaction, at least for some students. But we do not use this as a criterion to refuse their enrolment or full participation in school. Rather, we take them in, and if problems emerge, we seek to remedy them. Occasionally, this may involve the (usually) temporary withdrawal of some students to specialised facilities such as behavioural centres - and very occasionally, permanent exclusion may occur.
In this regard, some theorists, in attempting to balance notions of inclusion and efficacy in relation to students with disabilities, have argued that it is important to hold onto the individualised and specialised services, often initially developed in segregated settings, that can be very effective for students with disabilities. However, to maximise inclusion, they argue that these should be provided within mainstream classes78. This requires the existence of specialised teachers (and possibly teachers aides) in schools who can work alongside classroom teachers in the delivery of high quality educational programs to students with special needs. Advantages of this approach include providing the students with disabilities with expert assistance, freeing the classroom teacher to assist the rest of the class, and the collaborative learning that can occur when two teachers work closely together.
The Inquiry notes that New South Wales has made great strides in recent years in the direction of inclusion, and is of the view that this trend should be encouraged to continue. However, at this stage of the evolution of inclusive policies and practices, it would not be appropriate to limit the options for students with disabilities to mainstream classrooms. Evidence suggests that parents want choice in the education of their children with disabilities (as they do for all their children)79. It is therefore the Inquiry’s view that the current continuum of services, from the full segregation of SSPs, to the partial segregation of support units and classes, to full inclusion, should remain. In all these settings, a combination of academic and life skills (including social skills) should be taught, so that the full participation in society of each student is maximised.
The Inquiry is nonetheless of the view that it would be desirable to work towards the more significant inclusion of students now in support classes and units, in mainstream classes. This involves the barriers between support classes and mainstream classes being broken down over time, and the reinforcement of more permeable arrangements for individual placements. In addition, in the longer term, the number of support classes in schools should decrease, with short-term withdrawal for students (if necessary) preferred over semi-permanent segregation. This might involve a flexible notion of the term ‘class’. For example, a teacher of a group of mildly intellectually disabled students might bring them together for some time during the day, but also spend time assisting teachers as these students are included in mainstream classes.
Greater linkages between students in SSPs and in mainstream schools should also be encouraged, and the Inquiry has observed moves in this direction in schools such as the Hills School. Many SSPs and support units are the repositories of significant
78 Sobsey, D. and Dreimanis, M. “Integration outcomes: Theoretical models and empirical investigations” (1993) Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1-14. 79 See for example, Palmer, D.S., Fuller, K., Arora, T. and Nelson, M. (2001) “Taking sides: Parent views on inclusion for their children with severe disabilities.” Exceptional Children, Vol 67, No. 4, 467- 484.
49 levels of skill and expertise, and this should be made available to other schools to assist them in providing for students with disabilities. In Victoria, this is envisaged in the recent Meyer report, and it has also been proposed by some principals of SSPs and by researchers in the field80. The greater coordination of expertise across different special education settings should in the first instance be focused on those districts and schools that are currently bearing an unequal amount of the responsibility for inclusion. These are districts (such as some of those in Table 9.3) where there are large numbers of students on Funding Support placing significant demands on schools and school district resources alike. Some schools, for example, have more than 40 students on the program. The Inquiry notes that at present, the individualised funding basis of the Funding Support program means that the total number of students in any one school is not taken into account in any assessment of funding needs. As a result, pressures are borne unequally among schools and districts81. An increase in the exchange of expertise and experience between staff in SSPs, support units and mainstream schools in these high needs districts would assist not only the greater integration of students with disabilities in segregated settings, but also the effective implementation of Funding Support in those locations.
In order to assist these developments, the following recommendations are made:
Recommendation 9.1: That all schools with support classes or units and all SSPs be required to provide annual reports to District offices on initiatives taken to reduce the amount of segregation of their students and to include them in regular schools and classes for as much of the time as possible. In this regard, the Inquiry believes that the DET should take a flexible view on how relevant staff are utilised in SSPs and support units, by retaining the appropriate staffing formulae for support units and SSPs even though some of their students may become more involved in mainstream classes. Any uncommitted teacher or teachers aide time should be made available as a resource for those classes that contain students with disabilities. It is further recommended that no more support classes be created in New South Wales, with other more permeable options to be preferred. A reasonable goal would be a reduction in the number of support classes by one third in five years. Cost: This recommendation is cost neutral.
Recommendation 9.2: That the DET trial the provision of inclusion coordinators in ten districts to coordinate the exchange of expertise and experience between SSPs, support units and the DET District and State office, to assist schools with large numbers of students on Funding Support. This should involve six metropolitan and four
80 See Meyer, L.H. (2001) Review of the Program for Students with Disabilities and Impairments, Victoria Department of Education, Employment and Training; SSPs in the Future (1999), SSP Principals’ document; Parmenter, T. (2001), Op. Cit. 81 There are 52 itinerant integration teachers in NSW, one in all Districts and the rest allocated to districts according to need. The differentials between districts in numbers of students on inclusion are not, however, adequately accommodated by this. The smallest number of students currently on inclusion in a metropolitan school district is 281 and the largest number is 834.
50 regional/rural high needs districts, and provide funding for the equivalent of one special education position in each district for three years. This person would act as a Coordinator, Inclusion in relation to a group of high need schools in that district. He or she would be responsible for undertaking a census of the needs of students on Funding Support, of the needs of teachers and schools in order to support them, and of expertise available to assist schools. The coordinator would link experts in SSPs, support units and the Department with teachers in mainstream schools, develop specific resources within the district, organise mentoring and other collaborative working arrangements for teachers and teachers aides (special), and be responsible for consultation and outreach services more generally. Their goal would be to assist schools to make optimal use of resources available under Funding Support and related programs. The total estimated cost over the three years is $2.25 million ($75,000 x 10 x 3).
Behavioural issues
A major ongoing concern about full inclusion centres on students with disabilities whose behaviour may be disruptive to the learning of other students. This is a more difficult issue, legally and in practice. From a legal perspective, ‘indirect discrimination’ occurs when a rule or requirement that is less easy for someone with a particular disability to meet than a non-disabled person, is stipulated. An obvious example would be if a school held a 4-unit maths class in a room without wheelchair access and a student taking the class was in a wheelchair. In this case, the requirement to attend that particular classroom would be deemed unreasonable, and indirect discrimination considered to have occurred unless the school moved the class to an accessible room.
This issue becomes more vexed in relation to behaviour, as a recent legal case has demonstrated82. When does the behaviour of a student with a disability, become, in effect, unreasonable, and the requirement for some form of control, ‘reasonable’? Inclusion advocates argue that students with behavioural difficulties are often poorly managed and supported in the education system, due to lack of training, time and resources - and that if well supported, many problems would disappear or become minor. They also argue that it is unfair for students with disabilities to always have to accommodate to rules set down for their non-disabled peers. These arguments have merit. However, it also needs to be kept in mind that every child who enters school embarks on a long process of guided accommodation (also called education), in which their behaviour is shaped over many years, and some find this easier than others83. From the point of view of inclusion, the challenge is to assist all children to learn to behave appropriately in the complex social environment of the school and to gain the benefits of the socialising influences of schooling. It is fair for disability advocates to argue that requirements must be ‘reasonable’ for students with
82 Purvis v State of New South Wales (Department of Education and Training), [2002] FCAFC 106. 83 Kamler, B., Maclean, R., Reid, J. and Simpson, A. (1994) Shaping Up Nicely: The formation of schoolgirls and schoolboys in the first month of school. Canberra: Aust. Govt. Publishing Service.
51 disabilities, but it is also fair for others to assert that there comes a point where ongoing disruption and/or physical danger become unacceptable.
The Inquiry is of the view that inclusive options need to be resourced so that they are given every opportunity to work for all students who choose them. Any notion of non- inclusion (of any student) cannot be justified unless these conditions exist. This means more time and training for those asked to teach these students. It also means providing additional staff in some classrooms, and specialised resources beyond the classroom that can assist when things get tough. It would seem to the Inquiry that currently, adequate supports do not exist in many schools. In the future, the needs of high schools in this regard will be especially critical, as many students currently in primary school are expected to continue on Funding Support in their secondary years. In this context it is sometimes useful to distinguish between three levels of inclusion, all of which need to be achieved. At the purely physical level, students must actually be enrolled and be being taught in mainstream classes. But also important are social and developmental (or curricular) inclusion. A small survey of schools concluded in relation to these latter:
The respondents … universally reported that social and developmental inclusion was poor. In other words, the students are physically present in regular classrooms but teachers are struggling to provide a welcoming environment in which all students feel valued and are struggling to modify material so that all students are involved in a meaningful way in the regular curriculum84.
This conforms to the Inquiry’s impression in some but not all schools, and is clearly relevant to the control of behaviour, in that students whose needs are not met in the classroom are more likely to act out. The Inquiry notes that the NSW Government has recently moved to increase the number of tutorial centres for students with behavioural problems. It believes that (as with other SSPs and support units) every attempt should be made to foster permeability between these units and mainstream classes, and that the behaviour management skills developed by staff in segregated facilities should be disseminated to teachers in mainstream classes who have students with behavioural difficulties. A number of specific recommendations below concerning the operation and funding of Funding Support are relevant to this issue, as are recommendations made elsewhere in this report in relation to student welfare and discipline.
THE OPERATION AND RESOURCING OF THE FUNDING SUPPORT PROGRAM
There are several aspects of the Funding Support program that warrant attention: - the administrative load associated with the operation of the scheme; - the need for more support and training of teachers of students with disabilities - the role of teachers aides (special); and - the overall resourcing of Funding Support.
Administration
On the administrative side, the Funding Support program is in need of streamlining. As indicated in comments to the Inquiry above, there are several time-consuming
84 “Submission to the Review of Teacher Education in NSW” (1999), Action for Macrae report coalition. The submission does not claim that its survey was representative but rather, instructive.
52 administrative requirements associated with access to Funding Support that appear to be unnecessary. Of most relevance is the annual application cycle. The need for an annual disability confirmation, even for students with intractable conditions such as cerebral palsy, is a source of angst, notwithstanding that the Department is currently considering extending this to every two or three years85. It is not clear to the Inquiry why many conditions (hearing and vision impairment, most levels of intellectual disability, many kinds of physical disability and some autism and mental health conditions) need to be reconfirmed at all. Surely an exception reporting system could be introduced, so that notification is only required if a student’s condition has changed significantly? In addition, for many of these students, their support needs will also remain stable, and should only require annual reassessment on an exception basis. The replacement of the annual funding cycle with a less frequent one would immediately free up resources in schools, including the time of counsellors, STLDs, head teachers, support (where they exist), and school executives, as well as classroom teachers. In the view of the Inquiry, the educational and financial accountability of the scheme can be maintained by keeping the current regular evaluations of student progress, and through existing school auditing procedures. Such moves would be cost neutral, and may in fact free up some DET resources in State Office for deployment in District Offices and schools.
Recommendation 9.3: That commencing in 2003, Funding Support provision be assessed and/or reassessed for individual students every three years. This would remove the need for schools to reapply annually for funds. Exceptions would include situations where a student might seek a variation (e.g. an increase) in funding, where the student’s condition is newly identified or changes, or where the DET has reason to believe that change is to be expected and a more frequent reassessment is required. Consistent with this, the disability confirmation form should be required triennially (at most), or on an exception basis where change occurs. This recommendation implies that allocation of Funding Support determined in late 2002 for 2003 will remain in place until 2005, with reapplications to be made in late 2005 for 2006 and beyond. The only students for whom application will need to be made in 2003 or 2004 are those new to the education system (i.e. from interstate or about to enter kindergarten), newly identified, whose needs have changed, or on an exception basis at the request of the DET.
The Need for more support and training for teachers of students with disabilities
The role of the principal (or head teacher, support, where available) in managing the Funding Support program in the school is directly relevant to the success of the program. The Inquiry has reviewed different ways in which schools use Funding Support money, and has found that when care is exercised in assigning students with
85 The Inquiry recognises that this may only require counsellor confirmation. But parents of students with disability have spoken of trips to doctors to reassess their child’s condition. There seems to be some confusion concerning requirements here.
53 disabilities to teachers, adequate specialist back-up provided, and flexible groupings of students allowed, the program works best. The Inquiry believes that principals are responsible for ensuring that the allocation of students with disabilities does not place unreasonable expectations on teachers. This would suggest, among other things, limiting the number of such students in any one class and not giving the most challenging students to beginning teachers. It may also include providing mentoring and other specialist assistance from a special education teacher in the school, or from district resources where this is lacking. In some circumstances, it may involve reducing class sizes in one or two classes, if this is deemed necessary. In addition, in schools with a considerable number of students on Funding Support, giving one person a time allocation to enable them take on a coordinating role in relation to students on Funding Support, especially in secondary school, seems highly desirable.
Another area where additional assistance to teachers and schools can readily be made available is in relation to teaching materials and guidelines for creative pedagogy in relation to students with special needs. The Inquiry has been into several schools where STLDs and other support teachers have developed special worksheets and other materials from scratch for students with mild intellectual (and other) disabilities. While all students have some individual requirements, there must also be commonalities in their learning needs. Research in New South Wales has confirmed the amount of time teachers currently spend preparing ‘special’ materials86. Special education teachers have said that they believe all curriculum documents from the Board of Studies should include life skills outcomes for all KLAs, and that these should be integrated into current curricula, rather than being separate. But more than this is required. The Inquiry acknowledges that materials and guidelines for teaching students with particular kinds of disabilities are being developed in the Disability Programs Directorate for both high support needs students, and a much wider range of students in relation to literacy and numeracy. As these are prepared, they need to be made more widely available via the Pedagogy Clearinghouse recommended in Chapter 2 of this report.
Recommendation 9.4: That the provision of teaching materials and practical guidelines for teaching students with different kinds of disabilities be a priority of both the Disability Programs Directorate and the Pedagogy Clearinghouse proposed in Chapter 2 of this report.
There are also a number of training initiatives that can be introduced to ease the pressure on teachers and other staff in schools. Teachers have repeatedly told the Inquiry that they need additional training in order to meet the needs of students with disabilities. This is relevant both in regard to generalist skills (breaking learning down into smaller steps and so on), and the specialist skills that might be needed to teach a student with Aspergers syndrome, or who is vision impaired or has a language disorder. As indicated, teachers have expressed particular concerns about their ability to handle students with behavioural difficulties that are outside the ‘normal’ range. Sometimes these students attract Funding Support, and often they do not.
86 Louden, L., Chan, L.K.S., Elkins, J., Greaves, D. House, H., Milton, M., Nichols, S., Rivalland, J., Rohl, M. and Van Kraayenoord, C. (2000) Mapping the Territory: Primary students with learning difficulties: literacy and numeracy. Volume 3 – The Case Studies. Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
54 The need for additional training is not sufficiently addressed by the distribution to all schools of the Learning Together training package, which raises awareness, provides information on inclusion, and aims at ‘fostering a sense of community’ in schools. In a similar vein, the Department’s Disability Action Plan is a good start in pointing to what needs to be done in schools (and elsewhere) to avoid discrimination and enhance the inclusion of people with disabilities in society, but without skill development, it will have limited impact87. The one semester special education unit now required of teacher trainees is also a start, but needs to be supplemented by appropriate professional development.
There are two kinds of training needed. On the one hand, individual teachers need specific training to teach particular students, and some of this should be accommodated using the additional funding for teacher professional development recommended in Chapter 1, to be administered through the Professional Development Committee. But in high schools, where by definition many different teachers will encounter students with particular support needs, and in schools with large numbers of special needs students, a whole school training program would also seem necessary. In the first instance, this too, could be a charge upon the professional development funds recommended in Chapter 1. However, it is important that training for teachers in special education not simply be ‘one-off’. Ideally, modules of learning will be developed that combine attendance out of school, actions in school, and ongoing feedback and collaboration with other teachers. Initially this kind of training should be trialled in schools that already have considerable numbers of included students. As indicated in Chapter 1, it is appropriate, once the Institute of Teachers is operating, that it play a role in liaising with training providers and in accrediting courses. In the longer term, meaningful, ongoing training should lead to forms of certification for teachers.
Recommendation 9.5: That from 2003, teachers who teach students with disabilities be provided as a matter of priority with appropriate training in the specialist and generalist skills needed to work with such students, using funds to be provided through each school’s Professional Development Committee. In addition, that in all initial leadership courses undertaken by school executives, training in the management and coordination of Funding Support, as well as in relation to whole school responsiveness to disability issues, be included. Cost: The cost of this recommendation is encompassed by Recommendation 1.2 in Chapter 1 of this report.
The role of teachers aides (special)
The role of teachers aides (special) in relation to Funding Support is a complex one. Currently, these individuals constitute a key part of the education workforce and are integral to inclusion. The Inquiry has been impressed by the commitment of many aides in schools. Under the direction of a classroom or specialist teacher, the Inquiry has observed aides actively supporting the educational program and learning of the students in their care. Sometimes, however, this has seemed to involve more
87 Learning Together : Fostering a sense of community (1999), NSW Department of Education and Training; Disability Action Plan 2000-2002 (2000) NSW Department of Education and Training.
55 responsibility for the educational program of the student than the training and/or experience of the aides can sustain. It is of concern, for example, that sometimes aides are asked to carry out the implementation of students’ Individual Education Plans without supervision. There is also an element of exploitation in the use of this workforce. Teachers aides (special) are employed on an ad hoc basis by each school, can be paid for as little as one hour at a time, receive minimal induction and training, have a very limited career path, are poorly paid, are mostly female and are usually casual employees88. Many aides have worked for years without being given permanency in the Department. One of the implications of the DET’s commitment to inclusion must be the provision of a skilled and stable workforce to assist students, teachers and schools in the inclusion process. Until now, the focus of Funding Support on individual students with disabilities has meant that the growth of elements like the teachers aide (special) workforce has received scant attention. It is of concern, for example, that neither the DET nor the relevant union, the Public Service Association (PSA), can estimate how many teachers aides (special) there are.
This raises the question of when and for how long aides should be used. The DET estimates that 95% of Funding Support is currently spent on teachers aides (special). This is very high, and leaves virtually no funds for teachers to be given time to plan instructional programs, or for the employment of more specialised staff. Significant use of aide time might make sense for high and even moderate support needs students, some of whom need help with personal care and safety, mobility, and technical equipment to assist their learning. But the majority of students with disabilities also need specialist teaching to help them learn. Teachers aides (special) can be an important adjunct in this process, but they should not be asked to carry the educational program. For some low and moderate support needs students, the cost of aide time might be better invested on a smaller number of hours of specialist teacher time. On current figures, for example, the average low support needs student gets about $1200 per annum, although in practice some students get less89. This would only buy about one and a half hours of teachers aide (special) time per school week. More flexible arrangements, where a specialist teacher provides a group of such students with limited periods of assistance, and perhaps also acts as an advisor to classroom teachers, would seem to be more cost effective.
The Inquiry believes that in relation to low and low-moderate support needs students in particular, school principals should be asked to review their use of teachers aides (special), and to consider alternative uses of funding that might better meet the needs of these students and their classroom teachers. This includes additional RFF (release from face to face teaching) for teachers to enable careful planning of classes. As indicated, there is also much to be said for using funds to purchase more expert teacher time. In relation to the use of teachers aides (special) with moderate and high support needs students, it is time for the DET to better equip its workforce. This should include not just those in permanent positions in SSPs and support units, who have access to a TAFE certificate course, but those currently in casual employment. The combination of skills these individuals bring to their work needs to be recognised and training to enhance them provided. In the longer term, the creation of a number of permanent positions for teachers aides (special), attached to districts or schools, would be highly desirable. The Inquiry understands that a review of the working conditions and future utilisation of teachers aides
88 Teachers aides (special) who work with students on Funding Support, given the annual cycle of that funding and the right of students to change schools, are most often casual employees. Teachers aides (special) who work in support classes and units, and in SSPs, are often permanent employees. 89 Calculated on the basis of DET figures indicating that there are 8423 students with low support needs being funded from the ‘maintenance’ element of Funding Support, which for 2001 was about $10.3 million.
56 (special) is currently being considered by the DET, at the request of the PSA, and believes that this is an appropriate next step. In the meantime, the following is recommended:
Recommendation 9.6: That without curtailing the judgement of principals in individual cases, they be advised to consider utilising Funding Support to purchase specialist teaching time and/or consultancy support for classroom teachers, rather than relying solely on assistance from teachers aides (special), particularly in relation to students with lower support needs.
Recommendation 9.7: That a five day training module for teachers aides (special) be coordinated by the Disability Programs Directorate of the DET, in collaboration with the Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate. This should be aimed at new and less experienced teachers aides (special), and be implemented at the start of 2003 beginning on the first pupil free day, and involving four other days during Terms 1 and 2, 2003. The module should provide an introduction to school organisation and to the role of the teachers aides (special) with students who have different disabilities and different levels of support need. It should also provide aides with instruction in how to work under teacher direction. Initially this should be provided for up to 500 teachers aides (special). Cost : estimated equivalent full-time RFF (or direct payment for 4 days) for 500 positions x 4 days at $150 per day is $0.3 million.
Funding of the Funding Support program
Finally, the issue of the financial resources currently available for Funding Support must be considered, particularly in relation to lower support needs students whose numbers have grown but whose funding has been limited. As indicated, widespread concerns have been expressed to the Inquiry about the amount of funding deemed sufficient for students with various levels of need. In the above sections, it has been argued that the administrative streamlining of the scheme will take pressure off schools and teachers and provide some funding stability. It has also been noted that to some degree, the training needs of teachers in relation to students with disabilities can be accommodated within the recommendations presented earlier in this report on professional development. In addition, the rationalisation of the use of teachers aides (special), and greater use of expert assistance, may provide teachers with practical teaching strategies and perhaps a little more time. However, the Inquiry does not believe that these initiatives on their own will sufficiently offset the additional demands on teachers as a result of inclusion.
Briefly, the Funding Support program is currently resourced as follows. It has two elements, one essentially capped and one virtually uncapped. The first involves about 20% of all funding (in 2001, $10.3 million), which is currently designated for students with low support needs, such as those with mild intellectual and language
57 disabilities. In theory at least, this means that if the number of such students increases, each student will attract less funding. In practice, the scheme is administered somewhat more flexibly, but cutbacks are still perceived to have occurred. The remaining portion of the funding (in 2001, about $43 million) caters to the more intensive needs of students with moderate and high support needs, most of whom have more significant disabilities. In allowing a demand driven component to this aspect of Funding Support, the government is accepting that these students simply cannot be included in mainstream classes without significant additional support, and that as their numbers in mainstream settings increase, more funding is needed, and within limits, will be made available90. The Inquiry has been told, however, that even here, pressures to reduce expenditure on individual students and/or to reclassify levels of need are occurring. In this context it is important to remember that the alternative cost of educating this group of students in SSPs or in support classes is very considerable.
Critically, the resource increases for the Funding Support program in recent years have been in relation to students with high support needs and not low needs. This means that while the funding for lower needs students has remained relatively stable, funding for moderate and especially high support needs students has increased significantly since 1996 (and now constitutes 80% of all funding). Prior to the McRae report, funding served any student who sought inclusion in mainstream classes, regardless of severity of disability. Much of the funding went to a relatively small number of moderately and severely disabled students, and some less needy students missed out. Since 1997, it has been allocated to students with the milder forms of disability (on the basis of support needs). This is the reason for the Department’s claim that funding has been made available for some students with low support needs who did not attract funding before.
However, given that the number of students with less severe disabilities and lower support needs form the largest category, and continues to rise, pressures on the capped funding component have become extreme. This is because expectations concerning funding support for all students with disabilities have risen greatly since the McRae report, as have expectations on teachers and schools to meet their educational needs. In fact the move towards benchmarks in literacy and numeracy is an important element in increased pressure on schools to be more effective in teaching students with both low support needs and learning difficulties. The transfer of students with milder disabilities from SSPs and support classes, together with the increase in identification of some kinds of disability outlined above, has meant that many more of these students are seeking an increased but nonetheless limited pot of money. This may account for the perception of many teachers that funding is harder to attract than a few years ago, and that less money is being allocated to each student, despite the fact that there has been a 400% overall increase in Funding Support in the past five years.
In this context it is instructive to consider what constitutes “low support need” in the current scheme. Below are the descriptors for the lowest level of need in relation to two areas - curriculum and participation (others headings include: communication, personal care, and movement, some with two or more sub-headings).
90 However, as many of these latter students will be transferring from SSPs and support classes, the additional funds required should not be excessive. A significant increase in overall special education funding has occurred in part because most SSPs have not closed as a result of the McRae report. Rather, a different clientele now occupies those placements.
58 Curriculum – Key Learning Areas91 1 (lowest level of need): For students to successfully access the curriculum and achieve learning outcomes it is essential that: • all learning materials and assessment procedures are modified significantly to meet the student’s needs, particularly to enable participation in literacy and numeracy tasks; • regular, additional teaching sessions are provided which use frequent repetition and practice in order to deliver the same content; • data is collected frequently and used to review the student’s progress and to inform planning and programming.
Social competence - Participation • 1 (lowest level of need): For the student to engage successfully in social interactions and participate effectively in learning activities it is essential that: • explicit teaching of specific skills is provided to develop friendships and increase participation in playground and group activities and is supported by the school counsellor or specialist teacher; • explicit teaching occurs about how to respond to the situation, adapt to changes in routines and manage transitions between activities; • a careful record of the student’s pattern of interactions and behaviours is maintained and regularly discussed with the student and monitored by a support teacher behaviour, eg a self monitoring program, observation records, data collection.
These criteria suggest that teachers are correct in expressing apprehension at what is required at a practical level to include some students in the classroom. The requirement to modify “all learning materials and assessment procedures … significantly” is not trivial, to say nothing of other possible issues, such as behavioural needs92.
The Inquiry is aware of sums of as little as $900 being provided for a student on Funding Support in New South Wales. This is partly because the DET takes the view that any application for Funding Support must take into account other school and district resources, such as STLDs and itinerant teachers. The above criteria also assume the regular availability of a school counsellor or support teacher, behaviour. If these other support personnel were in adequate supply the assumption might be valid. But STLDs are often overstretched dealing with the many students not receiving Funding Support, and counsellors currently have responsibility for up to 1000 students! Many teachers have explained to members of the Inquiry that their applications for Funding Support have come back with the comment that a particular student’s needs can be met from school or district resources, and that therefore no additional support will be forthcoming. This is not considered satisfactory by teachers, in part because district staff can at best act as intermittent consultants to teachers, rather than intervening directly, when many teachers feel that they need direct help in working with special needs students, at least initially. Teachers also claim that they have taken these other sources of support into account in making
91 Taken from: Students with disabilities in regular classes: Learning Together. Funding Support 2002. Department of Education and Training, NSW, 2001. 92 The Inquiry notes advice from the DET that in practice it is very difficult to match these descriptors with actual students. However, for many students with mild intellectual disabilities, for example, it is reasonable to claim that significant modification of the curriculum would be needed, especially in high school.
59 their applications for Funding Support in the first place, and feel that the Department and/or district office is questioning their integrity in not allocating funds.
What funding that is provided can, of course, be utilised in various ways, as discussed above. But it is difficult to see how $900, which would cover a relief teacher for one day per term (or about one hour’s teachers aide help a week), can meaningfully address the needs of many teachers. In Victoria, the minimum amount of funding provided to a student on their equivalent of Funding Support is nearly $4,000 and this is a demand driven component (although it does have to pay for a wider range of personnel and supports than in NSW)93.
The Inquiry recognises that there are many demands on the public purse, and many legitimate demands on the education dollar. Nonetheless, the current funding for students with low and low-moderate support needs is so low, and the expectations on teachers so high, that the Inquiry believes a mechanism for more generously funding these students is needed. This would constitute an important recognition of the pressures on teachers in many schools who are trying to support these students with limited resources. It would also assist in making inclusion more effective. While no amount will be considered enough, the Inquiry proposes that funding be increased for lower need students (i.e. those notionally supported by the capped or ‘maintenance’ element of the budget) by $7.6 million per annum, commencing in 2003. The aim here is to ensure that students on smaller amounts of Funding Support, which provide few degrees of freedom in expenditure, will have a minimum amount of funding that enables their teachers to be given time to develop programs to meet their educational needs. If only students considered to have ‘low’ support needs were included, the $7.6 million would add, on average, about $900 per student. This proposal constitutes a modest increase that would give teachers (for example) one additional day each term to plan and evaluate a student’s individual education program and to consult with the student’s parents and other teachers. It is not an excessive sum - it simply allows teachers of students with disabilities to do their job in a professional capacity to the maximum effectiveness possible. The use of any additional funds in this way is particularly cost-effective because the kinds of teaching strategies needed for lower support needs students on Funding Support will frequently be transferable to others in the class who may not actually receive funding. The aim is to significantly increase teacher competence and confidence in dealing with a range of students who need additional assistance in order to learn.
Recommendation 9.8: That the fixed element of the Funding Support budget be increased in 2003 by $7.6 million, to be adjusted annually in terms of CPI increases. Once approved, this funding should be incorporated into allocations for low and low-moderate support needs students94. Cost: $7.6 million in 2003, increasing in future years due to CPI adjustments and any increase in numbers.
93 Information provided by officers of the Victorian Department of Education and Training, and contained in the Victorian government’s submission to the Senate Workplace Relations and Education References Committee Inquiry into the Education of Students with Disabilities (2002). 94 The Disability Programs Directorate may wish to allocate a proportion of this money to some ‘moderate’ support needs students, recognising that there is no exact line between low and moderate support needs.
60 THE NEED FOR MORE SUPPORT TEACHERS LEARNING DIFFICULTIES (STLDs)
Students with identified disabilities are not the only students with special needs in schools; there are also those with a range of learning difficulties, including dyslexia, dyspraxia, attention deficit disorders, behavioural challenges and perceptual and related problems. As indicated above, the Inquiry recognises that teachers have always had to teach a wide variety of students in their classes, and should continue to do so. But there are also occasions when specialist assistance is highly beneficial. At school level, this is supplied primarily by STLDs. There are two key problems with the provision of STLDs at present - there are too few of them to meet needs of the wide range of students they are employed to assist, and some are minimally or not trained. There is also an increasing range of responsibilities falling on STLDs. They are assumed to be available to provide expert advice (if not direct teaching) to students with identified disabilities. They are expected to identify and make recommendations on the learning needs of any other student who is experiencing difficulty with learning, especially in relation to literacy and numeracy. They have recently been required to draw up Individual Education Plans for all students who score in the lowest band on the Basic Skills Test. And they frequently assist classroom teachers by withdrawing small groups of students in need of special assistance. All of these roles are central to the school’s ability to produce excellent outcomes for all students and to reach benchmarks in literacy and numeracy.
As indicated, in recent years the DET has moved to provide STLDs to schools on the basis of need. This is highly commendable. However, it can be argued that the expectations on STLDs are outstripping their capacity or supply. A recent national study into the provision of support for students with learning difficulties, found that among a sample of New South Wales schools, more than two-thirds had at least one classroom teacher with special education and related training95. However, this does not equate to that teacher being available in an expert capacity to assist others. The study argued that all schools need at least one person trained in special education to provide expert support to classroom teachers and students. At present, New South Wales has about 1200 STLDs spread across more than 2200 schools.
On the question of training, at present, while all school districts have trained personnel within them who support STLDs in schools, STLD teachers are only required to have two years’ teaching experience and do not need to have any specialised training. In practice, in school districts with high teacher mobility, which also tend to be the districts with many special needs students, beginning teachers are sometimes placed in schools as STLDs, with neither classroom experience nor training in special education. This surprising situation cannot be speedily remedied. The Inquiry recognises substantial additional training currently being done in relation to Basic Skills follow up, and in literacy and numeracy more generally. There is, however, a need for a concerted program over several years to increase the number of teachers trained in special education and to make expertise of this kind available in all schools. The recommendations on the following page make a start in this direction.
95 Louden, et. al. (2000), Ibid. Volume 1: Overview.
61 Recommendation 9.9: That an additional 100 equivalent full-time STLD positions be made available to work in high needs schools - 50 from the start of 2003 and 50 from the start of 2004. Their role should be to provide both consultancy support to classroom teachers and to assist students96. Cost in 2003: $3.5 million. Total cost per annum from 2004: $7.0 million.
Recommendation 9.10: That the DET ensure that untrained STLD teachers already in the system and those coming into it, receive at least three weeks’ training as soon as practicable. This should be funded by taking as many of them out of school for two weeks late in 2002 or as early as possible in 2003, and then for odd days throughout the year. Training should be coordinated by the Disability Programs Directorate in the DET, in collaboration with the Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate. It should be funded from within existing resources, with the newly proposed Professional Development funds being made available for STLDs who have already received initial training. Cost: to be met from within existing resources
96 This recommendation was originally made by the NSW Ministerial Learning Difficulties Reference Group.
62 CHAPTER 10 CONNECTING SCHOOLS AND TAFE
In 1998, the Department of Technical and Further Education [TAFE] joined the Schools Division within the re-named Department of Education and Training, under the leadership of the Director-General of Education and Training, Dr Ken Boston. In the same year, in an address to the Commonwealth House of Representatives Committee of Inquiry into TAFE Institutes97, the Director-General pointed out that the amalgamation was essentially driven by curriculum concerns:
We have the capacity, through amalgamating the two departments - and setting aside for the moment the big industrial issues we know we are going to have to face - to have industry trained people from TAFE working in schools, taking VET programs. We have the capacity to have general secondary education-humanities, science teachers and so on - working in TAFE, taking adult education programs. We have the capacity now to use schools and TAFE facilities interchangeably so that the workshops, the kitchens and so on of industrial standard, in a nearby TAFE, often side by side to a high school, can be used by the high school for these programs.
What we are reaching for is that sort of change: essentially a curriculum view where comprehensive secondary education means that you can go into a comprehensive high school and you can take both vocational education programs and general education programs. They will all be accredited towards your HSC. They will all articulate with the Australian Qualifications Framework. They will not be dead-end programs; they will use industry training packages where they are available and they will articulate with employment and with further and higher education. That is, if you like, the vision.
This vision of schools as accredited providers of vocational education implies a significant blurring of the boundary between schools and TAFE. Other developments, apart from vocational education, have also contributed to the blurred boundary between the two sectors. The reforms that followed the Kangan Report in 197498, affirmed the social justice and equity mission of the TAFE sector, and the primacy of its general educational and social role, notwithstanding the part it played in providing vocational training. In practice this has meant that TAFE Institutes in New South Wales have increasingly taken on the challenge of providing ‘second-chance’ opportunities for young people who for one reason or another have not achieved success at secondary school. Increasingly, young people as young as 13 or 14, who have rejected or been rejected by school, seek to join programs designed for ‘older’ school leavers who might be 15 or 16 years of age. While the policy emphasis in TAFE has shifted over the last decade to embrace the national training reform agenda, this 'second chance' role of TAFE has remained an important element in its activities. Over the last ten years, General Education has accounted
97 House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training, Todays Training: Tomorrows Skills, July 1998. Dr K Boston , NW Dept of Education and Training, Hansard (House of Representatives EET Committee), Canberra, 28 May 1998, p. 714-15. 98 Australian Committee on Technical and Further Education (1974) TAFE in Australia: Report on Needs in Technical and Further Education, (The Kangan Report), vols 1 & 2, AGPS, Canberra.
63 for around a quarter of the Annual Student Contact Hours [ASCH] in TAFE New South Wales 99.
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the changing relationship between schools and TAFE. To what extent have the changes increased the educational opportunities for young people in the post-compulsory years of their schooling? To what extent has the blurring of boundaries led to inefficiencies and unproductive duplication of effort and resources? What are the barriers to a more productive relationship between the sectors? What kind of collaborative models between school and TAFE should be adopted and promoted by the DET?
The Inquiry became aware from its outset that the vision boldly outlined by Dr Boston was a matter of contention both among school and TAFE teachers. Despite the recent administrative amalgamation of the two sectors within a single government department, they continue to operate as relatively self-contained and insulated bureaucracies, each with its own institutional history, organisational culture and administrative procedures. This also creates a strong tendency for people working within these separate sectors to resist the blurring of boundaries and the formation of new partnerships and identities. This is one side of the story that the Inquiry will document in this chapter.
A more positive aspect of the story will also weave its way through this chapter. While fuzzy boundaries can evoke defensiveness, they can also provoke imaginative new ideas about schooling, and innovative programs to enhance the learning experiences of young people. They can engender new professional roles, and draw upon the synergies that are often generated when people from different sectors and backgrounds bring diverse perspectives to bear upon a problem. The Inquiry sees its task as documenting these more creative tensions and recommending changes that will support such efforts to provide enriched pathways for young people in their post-compulsory education and training.
It was not uncommon for the Inquiry to encounter defensive arguments and strategic positions designed to reinforce the traditional cultural and organisational differences between schools and TAFE. On the one side, school teachers are often fearful that the expansion of the VET program will erode the student-base for their academic courses and reduce staff positions, while on the other side, TAFE teachers are sometimes equally concerned that the program will drain away courses and teachers from TAFE. The uneasy relationship was well expressed by a VET in Schools consultant who, in commenting on the administrative marriage between the two sectors, stated that while schools and TAFE occupy the same bedroom, they sleep in different beds!
In the light of the coordination difficulties discussed later in this chapter, the Inquiry is not convinced that the integration of the Schools Division and NSW TAFE in a single administrative Department has delivered the advantages that were confidently predicted by the Director-General of Education in 1998. One of the main purposes of this chapter is to identify positive ways in which the former Director-General’s vision might be realised. However, as a failsafe the following recommendation is made:
99 TAFE NSW (not dated ) The Road to be Taken: Issues and future directions for TAFE NSW profile, Wes Davis, Acting Manager, TAFE / NSW Planning.
64 Recommendation 10.1: That after a further period of two years, the Minister of Education review whether the integration of the Schools Division and TAFE NSW into a single administrative Department has been successful and whether such an arrangement should continue into the future. The review should take account of whether the intended synergies have been obtained, whether the education of school students and the training of TAFE students has been materially advanced by the merger, and its capacity for integrated policy development, staffing and resource management.
The Inquiry received a number of submissions that offered a broad assessment of recent changes within the TAFE sector and their impact upon TAFE students and teachers. While these wide-ranging assessments often exceeded the more restricted scope of the Inquiry’s terms of reference100, they did provide the Inquiry with insights into the broader context within which change has occurred. The Inquiry adopted the working principle to consider within its analysis any change in the relationship between school and TAFE that has a clear and demonstrable effect upon the quality of teaching and learning experienced by young people during the post-compulsory years of their education or training. Before we examine the range of concerns that were presented to the Inquiry in submissions and public hearings, it is useful to present a brief outline of developments at the national and state level that have blurred the boundary between schools and TAFE.
THE CONTEXT FOR CHANGE
The relationship between schools and TAFE takes on particular significance in the light of two major social and educational changes. The first is the increased national emphasis upon vocational education and training (VET) and workplace learning. In 1992, an agreement between the Commonwealth and the States established the Australian National Training Authority [ANTA] to develop a national system of vocational education and training. In the following decade, state and federal governments erected a complex VET architecture of boards, committees, working groups, taskforces, advisory groups and forums to fund, consult, advise, register, certify, review, and monitor the national VET agenda. TAFE, and to an increasing degree schools, have been subject to the national requirements and standards generated through this process.
As far as schools are concerned, the Australian Ministers of Education endorsed the national VET agenda in 1999 in the Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty First Century101. The Declaration asserted that before leaving school, students should have employment-related skills and an understanding of the work environment, and career options and pathways to further education, employment and life-long learning. Two years later, the Ministers went further by deciding on a set of principles to guide the development of VET in
100 The relevant term of reference is as follows: Having regard to the role of TAFE within the public education system, what is the appropriate level and type of interaction and connection between TAFE and public schools? 101 Ministerial Council for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) (1999) The Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty-First Century, Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.
65 schools102. The principles broadened the VET agenda to include community partnerships, a focus upon life-long learning, key competencies, enterprise education and an integrated career and guidance service to assist students to achieve a successful transition from school to work, training or further education.
The reference in the previous sentence to transition points towards the second key social and educational change, which for the purpose of analysis can be called the pathways agenda. At the same time that the VET agenda was taking shape, educators, policy makers and community advocates argued strongly for a range of alternative learning pathways for young people in the post-compulsory years of schooling. The collapse of the teenage labour market was a key factor in persuading students to stay on at school beyond the compulsory years. In addition, the Commonwealth decision to make the youth allowance dependent upon ongoing schooling or training led to an increased number of young people returning to school in Years 11 and 12 who had little interest in obtaining a UAI for entry to tertiary study. As result of these pressures, the senior high school population has become socially and academically considerably more diverse, and the challenge for teachers is to develop a pedagogy and curriculum that meets the needs of this broad group of learners. One response to this challenge is to develop a more inclusive set of learning options for young people in schools, TAFE, work and community organisations103. According to a recent Commonwealth report that endorsed the pathways agenda104, a move in this direction would entail alternative learning pathways, transition support plans for students, and strong local partnerships between schools, young people, their families, business, tertiary education providers, and government and community service providers.
Links between schools and TAFE in New South Wales began in the early 1980s when school students were offered 'taster' type experiences at local TAFE colleges. As the name suggests, the visits were designed to develop interest among high school students in the vocational courses offered by TAFE, and provide information and advice about career development. In the late 1980s, the relationship took a further step when high schools and TAFE colleges were encouraged to make local arrangements for students to enrol in a range of TAFE-provided courses105. The typical arrangement was for schools to set aside one afternoon a week for their students to go to TAFE to undertake their studies.
The relationship altered again in the early 1990s, largely in response to the national training agenda, when schools were encouraged to deliver accredited VET courses on the school site. The government’s HSC White Paper, Securing Their Future, endorsed this trend by recommending that vocational education become an integral part of the HSC. The NSW Board of Studies was instructed to develop VET HSC courses that were appropriate for all students, including those wanting to go on to further education, and offered in sufficient variety to satisfy different student needs and contribute to their broad education. The courses were to be relevant to industry needs and training requirements, have clear links to post-school destinations and
102Ministerial Council on Education, Employment and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) (2001) The Vocational Education in Schools Framework – Overview and Implementation Strategies, Report of the Taskforce on Vocational Education and Training in Schools, Out of Session Report to Ministers. 103Another response is the initiative in Victoria to trial an alternative credential in Years 11 and 12, The Certificate of Applied Learning. 104Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce (2001) Footprints to the Future: Final Report, (Chair: David Eldridge), Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. 105This initiative, the Joint Secondary Schools TAFE [JSST] program, developed as a response to the increased retention of students in Year 11 and 12 who were not aiming for tertiary study.
66 allow HSC and Australian Qualifications Framework106 [AQF] accreditation to be gained concurrently. They were to be developed in collaboration with schools, TAFE and industry and include a component of structured workplace training where appropriate.
The Board of Studies subsequently developed seven VET industry curriculum frameworks that became available for year 11 students in 2000. The frameworks are: Information Technology, Business Services (Administration), Construction, Primary Industries, Metal and Engineering, Tourism and Hospitality, and Retail107. Unlike general education courses for the HSC, the VET curriculum frameworks are aligned with the National Training Framework. What this means in practice is that each framework course is based upon a nationally endorsed Training Package108, and is consistent with the requirements of the AQF. The various competencies109 within the relevant national Training Package become the basis for the assessment and reporting of outcomes in each VET framework course.
Students are offered a range of entry-level qualifications at AQF Certificate I, II, and III levels. In terms of depth of study, these levels are accommodated within the HSC through the delivery of 120-, 180- and 240-hour courses. In addition to competency- based assessment, students enrolled within a 240-hour framework course can undertake an optional two-hour written exam and may have the result included within the calculation of their Universities Admission Index. The universities have stipulated that only one such VET course can be included in the UAI calculation. Students enrolled within a framework course are also required by the Board of Studies to complete a mandatory work placement110. The length of placement depends upon the indicative hours for the particular course. There are also opportunities for students enrolled in the industry-recognised courses to commence part-time New Apprenticeships while still at school111.
An overall picture of enrolments in the TAFE-delivered and school-delivered VET courses in 2001 is contained in the following Table:
106 The Australian Qualifications Framework defines the range of qualifications (diploma, certificate, statement of attainment) recognised nationally in post-compulsory vocational education and training within Australia. It also includes guidelines about articulation and transition arrangements from one qualification to another. 107 An additional framework covering the Entertainment and Music Industry is being prepared for introduction in 2003 108 Training Packages are products that provide national benchmarks and resources for delivery, assessment and qualifications in VET. As well as endorsed competency standards, assessment guidelines and qualifications, they also include non-endorsed information about learning strategies, assessment resources and material on professional development. 109 Competencies are specific knowledge, skills and attitudes required to perform particular kinds of work in actual workplaces. 110 Support for the mandatory work placement program is provided through the NSW Board of Vocational Education and the Commonwealth funded Enterprise and Career Education Foundation. 111 In 2001, a total of 284 public high school students commenced a school based part-time traineeship. The great majority of the students were studying retail (53%), automotive (11%), business (8%), hospitality (7%), agriculture (7%), and horticulture (6%).
67 Table 10.1: 2001 enrolments in HSC VET courses in Schools and TAFE Year 11 and 12112
enrolments enrolments total enrolments in school- in TAFE- in school and VET Curriculum Area delivered delivered TAFE delivered courses courses - TVET courses Framework Number % Number % Number % Business Services 3774 13.2 923 7.3 4697 11.3 (Admin) Construction 2375 8.3 513 4.1 2888 7.0 Information Technology 5712 20.0 1381 10.9 7093 17.1 Metal and Engineering 926 3.2 566 4.5 1492 3.6 Primary industries 1088 3.8 165 1.3 1253 3.0 Retail 2845 10.0 296 2.3 3141 7.6 Tourism and Hospitality 10 734 37.7 2119 16.8 12853 31.1 Non-framework Electronics CEC* 122 0.4 245 1.9 367 0.9 Furnishing CEC 712 2.5 22 0.2 734 2.0 Accounting BDC** 0 0 640 5.1 640 1.8 Electronics Technology 0 0 118 0.9 118 0.3 BDC School BECs*** 266 0.9 0 0 266 0.6 TAFE CECs & BECs 0 0 5645 44.7 5645 13.7 Total 28554 100.0 12633 100.0 41187 100.0 Total frameworks 27454 96.1 5963 47.2 33417 81.2 Total non-frameworks 1100 3.9 6670 52.8 7770 18.8 Total 28554 100.0 12633 100.0 41187 100.0
Notes: *Content endorsed course; **Board developed course; ***Board endorsed course.
Among Australian states, New South Wales has led the way in developing accredited VET in School courses for Year 11 and 12 students that are aligned with the national training framework and provide a dual qualification for the students. The major achievement in recent years has been the rapid expansion of school-delivered VET courses along side the older established TVET courses in the TAFE colleges. The major features of this development can be summarised as follows:
• VET courses have been extremely popular with students in Year 11 and 12. In 2000 the number of HSC students enrolled in VET courses reached 46,000 and the current figure is over 50,000.
• Most of the recent increase in enrolments in VET courses is due to the expansion in school-delivered industry framework courses.
• The number of Year 11 and 12 students enrolled in TAFE-delivered courses has declined from a peak of around 25,000 in 1999 to its current level of just over 15,000 students.
112 Table is based on figures provided by the VET in Schools Directorate of the DET, July, 2002.
68 • School-delivered VET courses are based almost entirely upon the Board of Studies seven industry curriculum frameworks (96% of enrolments) whereas TAFE-delivered TVET courses cover a much wider range. Only 47% of the TVET enrolments are in industry curriculum framework courses with the remainder spanning a broad range of Board endorsed and content endorsed VET courses.
• The large majority of enrolments (74%) in both school-delivered and TAFE- delivered framework courses are concentrated in three of the seven framework areas: Hospitality and Tourism (39%), Information Technology (21%), and Business Services (14%).
It is now time to turn from the broader context to the concerns raised during the course of the Inquiry about the changing boundary between vocational and general education.
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND GENERAL EDUCATION
While most comments to the Inquiry about the relationship between schools and TAFE accept the growing importance of VET in schools, there are contrary voices. Some argue that the emerging emphasis on vocational training distracts schools from their primary purpose, namely, to offer students a general education that enhances their personal development and critical capacities. The following extract from a high school submission represents this strand of thinking:
The whole concept of compulsory primary and secondary education is to prepare students to participate fully in society, including preparation for further education or work. The introduction of VET has brought a very short-term economic focus to education rather than a longer-term model of creating economic prosperity through preparing students to be innovative and critical thinkers ... VET has seen many students opt for subjects that focus on narrow vocational skills that prepare them for immediate employment that may be redundant in a relatively short period. This may be politically more desirable in the short-term, but every hour spent on VET studies is at the cost of broad liberal studies that prepare students for the whole of life, not just their first job.
Other responses to the Inquiry, from both TAFE and school teachers, question whether VET is appropriate within a school context. Teachers within the school lack up-to-date industry experience. Facilities in the schools such as ovens and industrial equipment are often not up to industrial standards. Compared with the small class sizes in TAFE, school VET teachers are faced with class sizes that are considered to be too large for close supervision. In addition, schools find it difficult and costly to comply with stringent occupational health and safety requirements. More historically minded sceptics suggest that the VET in schools initiative is reproducing in new clothes the old, unproductive division between academic schooling (high status, predominantly middle class) and technical and domestic schooling (low status, predominantly working class) that existed prior to the Wyndham reforms in the mid-1960s:
The trend to vocational education and training in schools has serious consequences for TAFE. One has to wonder about what will happen to secondary school education in this country if the trend continues. Surely we will eventually see the emergence again of the technical high
69 schools and the stratification of students into those that study for a general education and go on to university and those who are deemed not quite good enough and who undertake a technical education for the trades. This would be a step backwards in terms of education in this country. (TAFE Teachers Association)
Differences of viewpoint about the distinctions between vocational and general education are by no means new113 and can indeed be productive in clarifying the value of applied, practical learning compared with more abstract, academic learning. Recent developments, however, have occurred without an opportunity for a broad debate within the profession and community about an appropriate form of vocational education in schools, the desirable balance between vocational and general education, and how the resources of the two sectors can be efficiently mobilised to provide a sustainable program. It is vital, in the interests of providing optimal learning experiences and pathways for young people in the post-compulsory years, for these issues to be discussed widely and for the two sectors to develop more effective collaborative procedures.
The Inquiry endorses the Department’s effort to develop a broader range of school- delivered and TAFE-delivered curriculum options for the increasingly diverse group of students who remain at school beyond the compulsory years. The statistics referred to previously are compelling. Students have welcomed the range of applied learning opportunities that are now available within what was previously a rather narrow academic curriculum in Years 11 and 12. When the VET courses are properly resourced and taught well, the skills that are acquired by the students are transferable into a range of work and life situations. Overall, the Inquiry agrees with the view of a VET in Schools consultant who argued that, in regard to post- compulsory schooling, VET is part of the solution rather than the problem:
The problem is that post-compulsory education has proven to be not very relevant to students for the last ten years or so. VET is one of the answers not the problem. The other subjects, I think, are starting to follow our direction in that they are becoming more outcomes based and focusing on where the course takes students as a whole ... There is a place for general education and learning for its own sake. I would be the last one to say that schools should become an employment agency. But on the other hand, they shouldn’t be these vague institutions that give students no transferable skills.
The Inquiry adopts the view that a narrowly conceived version of vocational education that exclusively focuses upon technical competency for already existing work tasks does a disservice to young people. Not only does such a conception fly in the face of the fluidity of occupational change in our times, it also neglects the capacities for adaptation, imagination and innovation that young people will require to negotiate their work roles in the future114.
113 One of the more perceptive comments upon the vocational aspects of education was offered by John Dewey in 1916. 'The problem', wrote Dewey, 'is not that of making the school an adjunct to manufacture and commerce, but of utilizing the factors of industry to make school life more active, more full of immediate meaning, more connected with out-of-school experience.' Dewey, J. (1916) Democracy and Education, New York, The Free Press. p. 316. 114 Robinson, C. (2000) Developments in Australia’s Vocational Education and Training System, Paper presented to a Workshop at the Central Institute of Vocational and Technical Education, Beijing, Peoples’ Republic of China. August, 2000. Adelaide: National Centre for Vocational Education and Research.
70 With this in mind, it is of concern to the Inquiry that the current VET curriculum in schools and TAFE is so tightly aligned with the template provided by the national Training Packages. The competencies that are assessed in the Training Packages are derived from an analysis of work situations within particular industries. The work related competencies then become the basis for teaching, training and assessment. An advantage of such a model is that it provides a standardised national accreditation for students. Furthermore, from the students' and employers' perspective, the VET courses are relevant in the sense that they are based on current requirements identified and agreed to by the employers, and produce credentials that have currency in the labour market. The disadvantage is that the Training Package approach is too rigid and narrow in a situation where fluid employment changes demand more generic and transferable skills. A recent Senate Committee Report115 on the quality of vocational education and training in Australia pointed out that:
If an incentive to lifelong education is the proper objective of school education, the most important credentials to be gained in school are those upon which further certificates, diplomas and degrees can be attained.
The Committee referred to several submissions from industry to support their contention, noting in particular the Australian Industry Group’s view that locking school students into the Australian Qualification Framework limits the schools’ capacity to develop qualities such as ‘love of learning, sense of curiosity, inclination to question, having a capable self-concept, information literate, and having a range of skills'. The TAFE Directors, in a recent Position Paper116, would seem to endorse this viewpoint:
Work area boundaries are blurring. Many of the new jobs are not neatly contained in existing industry areas. The knowledge economy assumes an innovative and flexible workforce. Successful enterprises need employees with relationship and cognitive as well as technical skills. Employers want employees to have generic skills such as the capacity to problem solve, be innovative, be team players and who possess interpersonal, analytic and interpretive skills. These are important life skills as well as work skills.
It is difficult to see how these qualities can be fostered in the VET industry curriculum framework courses when they conform so closely to the units of competency set out in the National Training Packages. Because these courses deliver a HSC as well as an AQF qualification, the Board of Studies has the capacity to ensure that generic, transferable knowledge and skills are emphasised alongside the practical performance criteria for the AQF competency units. Indeed, the Framework syllabus documents include a column entitled ‘HSC requirements’ that lists areas of knowledge and practical activities that students must address, presumably over and above the performance-based criteria they are expected to achieve for the AQF qualification. However, the attributes described in this column typically restate the skills and knowledge required for the AQF qualification, rather than draw upon more generic cognitive abilities and skills. Each syllabus document also lists the
115 Commonwealth of Australia (2000) Aspiring to Excellence: Report on the quality of vocational education and training in Australia, Senate Employment, Workplace relations, Small Business and education References Committee, Parliament House, Canberra. 116 www.tda.edu.au/position-papers/papers.htm
71 Key Competencies117 but as these useful generic skill-areas are not employed to structure the learning experiences, it is difficult to see how students acquire them:
Recommendation 10.2: That the Board of Studies review the VET industry curriculum framework courses in order to clearly distinguish the knowledge, skills and attitudes required for the HSC from the performance-based criteria used in the awarding of AQF qualifications. This review should take place on the assumption that students studying VET courses should be required to develop the same qualities of intellect and analysis as students studying other subjects for the HSC.
COORDINATION BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND TAFE
Perhaps the most consistent strand of concern expressed to the Inquiry is the lack of coordination between the school and TAFE sectors. Despite being located within the one Department, the two organisational structures remain essentially separate, operating according to their own organisational logics, and subject to different regulations and cultural orientations. Expanding VET in schools, it is claimed, leads to an inefficient and costly duplication of resources. Submissions referred in particular to the costs involved in re-training high school teachers to teach VET and replicating special purpose industry standard facilities in high schools when already qualified staff and alternative facilities were under-used in nearby TAFE colleges.
From the learners point of view, the ideal situation is one in which they can select VET courses from a diverse range of quality offerings, taught by qualified and experienced teachers in industry-standard facilities. In most locations, this implies that students select from a range of school-delivered and TAFE-delivered courses. Further on in this section the Inquiry will describe some examples of collaboration between schools, TAFE, industry and community organisations that come close to this ideal. For many schools, however, the reality has been very different. The pressure on schools to maintain or increase enrolments in Years 11 and 12, by offering them a wide choice of HSC subjects, has intensified the competition between schools and between schools and TAFE. Principals, as efficient school managers, protect their student numbers and staff positions by covering as many curriculum options as possible. Unfortunately, this defensive position can prevent the benefits that can flow from cooperation. A VET consultant described to the Inquiry the response of principals to his suggestion that they would achieve a more rational use of resources if the network of collaboration was extended to include TAFE:
We shouldn't be competing with each other. I said to the principals at a meeting recently, 'Why don't we invite the TAFE to our meetings, and why not the Catholic school?' But the response was, ‘No way’! They see themselves as not only in competition with each other, but also in competition with TAFE. The perception is that if you send kids to TAFE, you miss out on resources. The result is that we gang up together to fight against TAFE, and I don’t think that should be happening either.
117 The key competencies listed are: collect, analyse and organise information; communicate ideas and information; plan and organise activities; work with others and in teams; use mathematical ideas and techniques; solve problems; and use technology.
72 When schools adopt this overly protective approach and try to cover everything, they frequently end up with very vulnerable course offerings. Classes that are viable at the beginning of Year 11 dwindle to a maximum of three or four students throughout the year and the remaining students are redirected into subject areas that bear no resemblance to their initial choice. This scenario, which could be played out in a number of nearby high schools, could be avoided if students from several sites had been brought together to study the course at TAFE or at one of the school sites.
The most powerful systemic disincentive for wider collaboration, and for the reluctance on the part of some principals to include TVET courses in their list of offerings, is the staffing model. When students travel to TAFE to study their VET courses, the resources follow them to cover the staffing and other costs associated with the course. While this seems an appropriate transfer of resources, it nevertheless has two unfortunate consequences for the school. One is that the school continues to bear the ‘hidden costs’ that remain at the school despite the students studying at TAFE for a few hours a week. The students continue, as members of the school community, to absorb the time and resources of school staff that offer ongoing administrative support and pastoral care. The argument here is that a proportion of the VET staffing resource should remain with the school to cover these ‘hidden costs’.
The second consequence has to do with impacts on the broader set of offerings within the senior school. When the numbers of students involved is small - a few from this class and a few from that – principals can creatively re-shape the classes to cover the loss of the students and staffing without having to cut classes. If, however, a significant proportion of the senior high school students opt to study the TVET courses, the resulting diminution in staff resources at the school can reduce its capacity to offer the same range of general education courses in the Year 11 and 12 curriculum. As the following high school principal noted, the effects can spread across the school:
The cutbacks to school staffing as a consequence of students undertaking a single course of study at TAFE have discouraged some schools from actively promoting TAFE courses within schools. Schools may pursue training for their teachers to be able to offer national industries frameworks but they are not all enthusiastic about promoting TAFE-delivered VET courses … TAFE colleges should be able to provide courses to school students that cannot be offered in schools. This should not be at the expense of school staffing ... Given that senior students attract a higher staffing ratio than juniors it means that every senior student who accesses TAFE courses can have a negative impact across the whole school. They help cause a tightening of the junior curriculum and larger class sizes or a cut to the senior curriculum that can be staffed within the school.
From the school’s perspective, therefore, it seems a rational decision to use central DET funds to train a VET teacher to deliver the VET course on the school site, rather than send the students off-campus to study the course at TAFE. But rationality, at one level, results in inefficiencies at another; schools valiantly try to teach everything while TAFE has under-utilised specialised resources. There needs to be an incentive structure to make it attractive for schools to think across sites to achieve a more efficient use of staff and facilities.
A further set of disincentives stems from the organisational differences between the schools and TAFE. For example, in some circumstances there are good reasons for
73 TAFE teachers to deliver VET courses in schools. The TAFE teacher may be better qualified with more up-to-date industry experience. The impediment, as a TAFE College administrator pointed out to the Inquiry, is largely cultural:
We would like to have more TAFE teachers working in schools, but it’s a big problem in terms of how schools see the TAFE teacher coming in. ‘Before we know it’, says the principal, ‘we will have them teaching English and Music etc.’ And TAFE teachers report back to us and say, ‘No one talks to me. They have bells and I have to do strange things. Do I have to do playground duty? What happens if I walk past and kids are fighting? I come out of there at 6.00 and there is no security’. The cultures are different and that is a block to getting more TAFE teachers in, and a big block for principals who might want to welcome them in.
The difficulties might seem minor, but they are frustratingly real and difficult to iron out. A similar set of administrative barriers meets the VET in schools teachers who might want their Hospitality or Construction students to visit TAFE to access the superior industry-standard equipment not available in their school. A simple enough visit to arrange, one would think, but the Inquiry was told that small practical difficulties override the advantages and make it all but impossible, regardless of the good will on either side:
There was a memorandum of understanding that said that we could access TAFE resources, and there is goodwill on the side of the local TAFE college, but how does the classroom teacher access those resources? If there is some fancy machine on the TAFE site and the school teacher wants to access it with his students, he can't walk into the TAFE facility and just turn the machine on. It's just not possible. If the TAFE teacher is there with the kids, who is going to pay him or her? On what basis is the TAFE teacher going to be paid? Is he working for the TAFE or the school? The two teachers get paid different rates. There are different class size regulations. (VET in School consultant)
The Inquiry believes that VET teachers in schools and TAFE should not have to spend time and effort removing the institutional barriers that are blocking the better use of resources and restricting the access of students to the widest possible range of VET courses. To achieve the kind of seamless transition that Dr Boston proposed between the two sectors, these systemic difficulties must be ironed out by appropriate action higher within the bureaucracy. At the moment, it seems that decisions and information flow up and down the separate hierarchies in parallel lines and the practitioners spend fruitless hours trying to match the two systems for the benefits of the students. As one VET teacher commented to the Inquiry, “The perception at the school level is that there is no collaboration taking place up- stairs. It's not a matter of they are wrong and we are right - we are merrily going our separate ways.”.
Finally, concerns were raised with the Inquiry about the growing proportion of casual and part-time teachers in TAFE and the implications of that trend for the quality of teaching and learning experienced by high school students enrolled in TVET courses. Casual teachers, it is claimed, are paid on an hourly face-to-face basis, making it difficult to perform the necessary pastoral care and supportive role for students that cannot be fitted into the teaching period. Teachers described the uncertainty that students experience with the high rate of mobility within the casualised teacher workforce. TAFE staff were also worried that the small and
74 diminishing number of permanent teachers within the colleges were insufficient in quantity and experience to undertake the necessary task of revitalising and developing the curriculum. A district VET consultant pointed out that the more limited responsibilities of the casual teacher influenced the quality of record keeping and student support:
If HSC students are not performing, it has to be documented from the very beginning. If you have a casual teacher who comes and goes, the paper work doesn’t always get done. Towards the end of the course, the TAFE teachers might say, ‘I don’t think this student should get this award’. If you ask for the documentation, they could well say, ‘Well, I have only been paid to teach the class, not do all this paper work.’ And if you want to know about the welfare of the students - how they are going, whether they have special needs - its difficult to contact the teacher because they are only there for the time they are paid.
The Inquiry sought to verify the proportion of permanent and part-time casual teachers in TAFE. A communication from the Deputy Director-General of TAFE points out two particular difficulties. As far as calculation is concerned, the overall picture is difficult to obtain because casual teachers often teach across Institutes and have multiple pay-roll codes. The other difficulty pertains to funding. Because 13-15% of TAFE program delivery is funded by contracted, non-recurrent funds gained through commercial tender, it is financially difficult to recruit additional full time permanent teachers. The communication, nevertheless, gives the following estimate118:
An expenditure analysis taking all funds into account indicates an almost even 50 / 50 split between course hours delivered by full time permanent teachers and course hours delivered by part time casual teachers. This could vary plus or minus 1 or 2% based on the number of contracts won and the number of students enrolled.
MODELS OF COLLABORATION
The picture, as far as collaboration is concerned, is more positive if attention is restricted to the local or regional level. The Inquiry was impressed by several examples of collaboration that involved partnerships, not only between schools and TAFE, but also between industry and community organisations. One such example, the case of Warialda High School and the Warialda and Bingara Industry and Education Links Committee, was featured in an earlier chapter of this report. To further illustrate the creative possibilities at the local level, the Inquiry presents two other examples, one from a rural and regional centre, and the other from within a metropolitan district
The Griffith Link Day Program All students deserve the best possible access to a diverse range of quality VET courses. • VET courses should be offered on sites that have the best combination of staffing and facilities. • The needs of students should precede all other sectional interests or considerations.
118 Communication to the Public Inquiry into the Provision of Public Education from the Deputy Director- General, TAFE, NSW Department of Education and Training, 12 July, 2002.
75 These principles are the basis of a partnership that was formed in 1999 between schools and TAFE to provide an expanded range of VET courses for senior secondary students in Griffith and surrounding areas. The partnership is formalised in a Memorandum of Cooperation between the Riverina Institute of TAFE and Griffith District Office of the DET (see Appendix for Memorandum) and is discussed further in the recommendations following this section of the report.
The partnership includes public high schools (Coleambally Central School, Griffith High School, Hillston Central School and Wade High School), TAFE NSW (Riverina Institute, Griffith Campus) and Griffith Catholic High School. The Griffith Area Vocational Coordination Committee, which coordinates the program, meets regularly to evaluate student demand, assess the various delivery options, and decide on the range of courses to be delivered on each site.
In practical terms, the cross-sectoral collaboration gave birth to the Griffith Link Day Program [GLDP] that has greatly increased the range of school-delivered and TAFE- delivered VET courses for students in Griffith and surrounding areas. At the core of the cooperative arrangement is an agreement about timetabling and student travel. The schools and TAFE set aside one day each week, the VET Link day, for offering VET courses in two time slots, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. To gain increased flexibility in timetabling, the teachers from both the schools and the Griffith Campus extend the length of the VET Link day, from 8.30 until 5.30. A bus service transports students from the outlying Central schools at the start and end of each day, and between schools at lunch. The Link Day program caters for 437 students, including 52 from Hillston (115 km from Griffith) and Coleambally (70 km from Griffith) central schools.
The collaboration between schools and TAFE has bought many advantages. Students can select their VET courses from a wide range of options, including seven Board of Studies industry framework courses that are recognised for inclusion in a UAI, and 16 Content Endorsed Courses that provide dual accreditation towards the HSC and Australian Qualifications Framework. Courses with small enrolments that are vulnerable when offered by one school become viable when students from several schools come together to study the subject. The availability of a broad range of VET courses attracts students to stay on or return to school, a trend that is reversing the previous pattern of falling enrolments at the smaller Central schools. The inclusion of the Griffith TAFE Campus in the Link Day program not only increases the range of VET courses on offer, but also allows the students access to specialised facilities and trade-trained teachers in subjects such as Metals and Engineering that are not available within schools.
TAFE-School links in the Campbelltown area When the Full Service School [FSS] program began in Campbelltown in 1999, the three teachers who were appointed to the team were offered premises on the Campbelltown TAFE Campus. The location opened up a range of interesting linkages. The TAFE Get Skilled courses for the long-term unemployed were sometimes cancelled because they did not attract enough students. The FSS team were able to build up the numbers with young Year 11 and 12 school leavers who gained a familiarity with TAFE as well as work-related skills. The team also became aware that TAFE provided an excellent counselling service for prospective students, and they organised group visits of at-risk school students to meet the Counsellors to discuss career options and TAFE programs The close working relationship between schools and TAFE in Campbelltown is the result of several strong local factors. First, special relationships have been built up over time leading to a high level of trust and cooperation. Second, there is a strong
76 commitment to working together at the highest levels within both the School District Office and the TAFE Institute. The key overarching body here is the Campbelltown Industry Educational Advisory Committee that coordinates VET and the transitions between school, work and further education or training. The District Education Superintendent chairs the Committee, with representatives from schools, TAFE, workplace learning, and local industry. Much of the detailed coordination and policy work is achieved by a number of sub-committees: the District VET in Schools committee, School to Work committee, Visits to Industry by Schools committee, Course Provision Committee, and the Macarthur Workplace Learning Committee. Finally, the strong sense of community in Campbelltown generates effective community partnerships to improve learning and work opportunities for young people.
Recommendation 10.3: That the Director-General of Education and Training chair a working group of senior officers in TAFE and the Schools Division to resolve the administrative problems that limit the extent of cooperation between the sectors in the provision of improved education and training outcomes for students. The Working group should adopt the following principles as the basis for cross-sectoral agreements: all students deserve the best possible access to a diverse range of quality VET courses; VET courses should be offered on sites that have the best combination of staffing and facilities; and the needs of students should precede all other sectional interests or considerations. Since these principles have been incorporated within the working arrangements and Memorandum of Cooperation successfully linking the TAFE and high schools in the Griffith District, the working group should extend or adapt the Griffith protocol as the basis for TAFE / Schools Division cooperation throughout the 40 school Districts.
Recommendation 10.4: That all District Superintendents throughout New South Wales be required to develop a memorandum of cooperation between the District Office of the DET and the TAFE Institute(s) within the district, based upon the Memorandum of Cooperation drawn up between Riverina Institute of TAFE and the Griffith District Office of the DET. The joint agreement should include principles, operational protocols, and procedures for joint use of facilities and staff services.
Recommendation 10.5: That to cover the cost of continuing administrative and pastoral care responsibilities carried out by the school on behalf of students when they enrol in TAFE- delivered VET courses, 15% of the funds currently transferred to TAFE for the cost of the course be retained within the school.
Recommendation 10.6: That all District Superintendents examine the feasibility of adopting in their Districts the successful cross- campus transport arrangements for VET students developed within the Griffith Link Day Program.
77 WORK PLACEMENTS
One of the central features of the VET agenda, endorsed by ANTA and MCEETYA, is the idea that students cannot attain an adequate level of work-readiness, or learn about the realities of the workplace, if they are isolated in classrooms. It is also believed that young people are more motivated and learn more effectively when learning occurs within a practical work context. In New South Wales, these ideas have been accepted by the Board of Studies which has stipulated that students who undertake the industry curriculum frameworks VET courses for the HSC must complete a number of hours in work placements. These structured work placements are very different from the work experience programs that are designed to develop in students a broad awareness and understanding of work. Structured work placements introduce students to specific industry-defined competencies that are assessed according to industry standards. The work placement requirement implies a close cooperation between the school or TAFE-based VET teacher and the employer who takes on the responsibility to supervise and examine the student in the workplace.
The Inquiry does not wish to argue with the educational value of a properly supervised and well-organised work placement program. Its concern, which was reflected in the evidence provided by VET teachers, consultants and principals, is that many schools have great difficulty in attaining this ideal. For some schools it is a problem of finding sufficient numbers of appropriate work-sites for their students. Others have expressed serious concerns about the variable quality of the work placement experience itself. All too often, the experience gained by the student is more in the nature of workplace familiarisation rather than the desired structured workplace learning. Finally, as the following extract from a submission to the Inquiry illustrates, VET teachers and coordinators are concerned about the lack of personnel and other resources to support the effort that is needed to liaise with local businesses and organise relevant work placements:
The funding for employment of Work-placement Coordinators needs addressing at state government level. Since the inception of these courses in 1995, we have had to apply annually to the Federal government for funding through the Australian Student Training Foundation, now the Enterprise and Career Education Foundation. This funding has been substantially reduced over the years and we are now securing placements for more students on smaller grant amounts. There is also a considerable amount of paperwork required in the application for and accountability of usage of these funds … While we have some additional funding via our District Office to assist with work- placement coordination, we basically skate from year to year in a state of uncertainty. (High school vocational education teacher)
Teachers from rural and regional centres have particular difficulty in finding relevant work placement sites for their VET students, especially in high demand subjects such as Hospitality or Information Technology. To meet the requirements, students are sometimes forced to travel to nearby centres to attend an appropriate work placement site. Not only are such practices costly in time and money, but the effort also cuts into other important school commitments. A submission from a Student Representative Council in a regional centre described the inequality of provision they experience:
Students taking part in VET courses have to spend ridiculous amounts of money on their transport and additional research material. Personal transport is often not accessible with parents committed to work,
78 and this affects attendance that in turn affects their studies. We recommend that students taking part in VET courses have greater financial support with transport and additional research.
Some of the difficulties outlined above are due to the speed of change and the steep increase in the volume of students who need appropriate work placements. Around three-quarters of the high schools across the state work with the Enterprise and Career Education Foundation [ECEF] to find suitable work placements119. The increase in demand in New South Wales for work placements is revealed by the fact that between 1996 and 2001, the number of placements organised in association with ECEF increased from 6,000 to 37,000. There are difficulties on the supply side as well. Many Australian firms are small businesses that do not have the required time or skill to take work placements. The predominance of small to medium business in providing the bulk of the work placements is again evident in the ECEF figures. In the year 2000, around 40% of work placements for school students in New South Wales were in businesses with between one to five employees; a further 44% were in businesses with 6-20 employees; and only about 8% were in large industries or businesses with over 100 employees. Bearing in mind these pressures, it is not surprising that, as a TAFE administrator informed the Inquiry, the work placement requirement has become a major pressure point within the VET in schools program:
Reality has set in. People from education are saying, ‘It’s going to cost a lot of money to do it well. Let’s cut back and do it as cheaply as we can’. Industry people are saying, ‘Good heavens, we didn’t expect 60,000 students a year doing this. It’s a strain on employers. We are pulling back’. Everyone still believes that the best position is contextual learning, but the reality is that it’s too big and too hard. We have created a bit of a monster.
Doubt about the sustainability of the work placement requirement was a recurring theme in evidence presented to the Inquiry by school VET teachers and coordinators. TAFE colleges seem to have fewer problems, mainly because they have the capacity to skim resources off all the TVET courses offered in the college in order to employ a work placement officer to concentrate on the task. It should be remembered that the work place requirement in the VET industry framework courses is a Board of Studies requirement rather than an industry requirement. In fact some industries, such as Construction, have serious industrial health and safety concerns about the presence of school students on industrial sites. Other employers have complained about the time and paper work involved in assessing students on the work site.
Industry has an appropriate concern that students be work-ready and aware of relevant industry standards when they enter the industry. This can be achieved in a variety of ways apart from the blanket 70 or 140-hour work placement requirement. The Board is already moving in this direction by allowing recourse to simulated work placements in the case of the Information Technology industry framework. It would seem to the Inquiry that the whole issue of work placements should be reconsidered by the Board with a view to a more flexible and sustainable system for ensuring that VET students acquire a degree of work readiness in the course of their studies:
119 McIntyre, J., Pithers, P. (2001) Structured Workplace Learning 2000: a review of the structured workplace learning of students studying VET in schools, supported by projects funded by the Enterprise and Career Education Foundation, Sydney: Enterprise and Career Education Foundation.
79 Recommendation 10.7: That the Board of Studies revise the mandatory work placement requirement for VET industry curriculum framework courses by endorsing a range of non- industrial learning sites for students to acquire work- related skills and a knowledge of industrial standards. These alternative arrangements, such as simulated work situations and skill centres, should be used to reduce the hours that students are required to spend in actual work places.
Recommendation 10.8: That to overcome the serious difficulties experienced by high schools in rural and regional centres in finding appropriate work placement sites for their VET students, the VET in Schools Directorate of the DET identify, as a matter of priority, a range of non- industrial learning sites for students to acquire work- related skills and a knowledge of industrial standards.
CHANGING WORK ROLES
The Inquiry received numerous submissions attesting to the demands placed upon the newly trained VET teachers in schools. The following extract, from a high school VET teacher's submission, is typical:
The workload of teachers of vocational courses is excessive. The volume and detail of documentation required to retain accreditation as a registered Training Organisation far exceeds that required in other HSC subjects. Supervision of students on work-placement is invariably carried out in a teacher’s own time. In 2000 we had one relief day for each vocational education teacher provided from District funding but this year there has not been any additional funding. The industry demands placed on teachers in terms of re-accreditation need to be considered in terms of time demands, eg. the Certificate IV Assessment Task / Assignment that all Vocational Education teachers have been required to complete this year was largely completed in our own time on top of normal workload.
The burden of introducing and sustaining the VET in schools program has fallen disproportionately upon the school VET Coordinator. In the course of school visits, the Inquiry was led through the extensive administrative tasks by stressed coordinators, many of whom are enthusiastic advocates of VET despite the heavy work-load. They looked enviously at the work-load of Head Teachers in other faculty areas who did not have to complete the 20 page document to retain their standing as a Registered Training Organisation, organise regular work-placements or monitor students completing VET in TAFE colleges or by correspondence. The argument for re-thinking the Coordinator's role was supported in numerous submissions that describe the current excessive work-load. The following, from a high school VET coordinator, gives a sense of the strain experienced by teachers who undertake this role:
The teachers who initially undertook VET training were mostly very committed people who wished to go into that field. Down the track a bit, some of them became jaded because they could see that there was so much more work attached to the role which did not apply to other teachers in the next staffroom, or even in their own staffroom. All of the
80 work around student work placements, around assessment, plus their own training requirements has increased and some have fallen by the wayside. Others, after several years of doing the extra yards, are now tired. It is an extra big ask, and there appears to be no end to it! Some of them are quite justified in thinking that there needs to be more of a recognition of what is required of them … There needs to be an assessment at the highest levels of how long we expect these very committed people to keep doing this before they burn-out. And there is a burn-out happening. There has been a problem when people wish to go on long-service leave. Because there is no ready replacement, they feel obliged to stay where they are because they have a two-unit class doing the HSC. All of these things are quite real problems in the system.
Within the 12 TAFE Institutes across the state, TVET program managers have been appointed to coordinate the delivery of the industry framework courses and the content endorsed TAFE course. Like the school-based VET coordinator, the TVET program manager's role is relatively new, and subject to an expanding set of demands. The main task is to liaise with schools, industry and community organisations to ensure that the TVET courses meet the needs of the students. In addition, they organise professional development and staff training for the TVET teachers to teach the dual accredited courses, since many TAFE teachers are unfamiliar with the Board of Studies requirements for the HSC and the duty of care responsibilities needed when teaching senior school students. The occupants of the role, however, regard themselves as employees of TAFE and they are expected to take on a range of additional functions within the Institute. They are generally aligned with anything within TAFE to do with schools, and that can include support for young people studying for the General Certificate of Vocational Education or attending Youth-at-Risk programs in TAFE.
These new and expanding roles manage the evolving relationship between schools and TAFE as joint providers of dual accredited VET courses for senior school students. To complete the picture, there is another emerging role that spans schools, TAFE, industry and community sectors. The OECD, in its recent review of transition arrangements in 14 OECD countries, commended the coordinated safety-nets for at-risk young people in the Nordic states. They referred in particular to the emphasis upon prevention rather than remediation, the integration of education, labour market and welfare policies, and the social partnerships that support the locally managed transition arrangements. A recent Australian report by the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce (2001)120 endorsed the Nordic model and recommended the formation of community partnerships to work with young people and families to identify transition problems at the local level and develop a range of services to meet local needs. In July 2002, the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs endorsed a joint State-Commonwealth Declaration on improved pathways for young people. One key challenge identified by the Ministers is to 'ensure that young people have the information, skills and support needed to negotiate the transition to adult life and to make informed life decisions'121.
120 Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce, (2001) Footprints to the Future Report, Canberra 121 Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) (2002) Stepping Forward - Improved Pathways for All Young People: a commitment to the young people of Australia, by Ministers for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs and Community Services, South Carlton, Victoria: MCEETYA.
81 The role of ‘transition broker’ is crucial in this process to liaise between students, their parents, the school, TAFE and other training or further education providers, local businesses and community groups122. They are either based in the community and work across a small number of high schools, as is the case with the Centrelink trial in Campbelltown referred to earlier, or located within a particular high school. They work alongside the school staff but also have access to a broad network of agencies and organisations that include TAFE and other training providers, local businesses, youth services and community groups, the local council and government agencies. Their role is to work with teachers to identify at-risk young people while still in school, and track school leavers to monitor their progress and support their transition plans. The profile of an ideal transition broker is someone who works one-to-one with students; advocates for students; understands school organisation and is experienced in school-community liaison; has a good knowledge of local support services and knows the personnel and programs at TAFE and other training providers123. This is a task that is beyond the scope of the VET coordinator or the Careers teacher in the school.
The Inquiry has visited innovative projects in Nowra and Campbelltown that illustrate the potential benefits that transition brokers can bring to young people in those communities. In both cases, however, the futures of the projects are in doubt due to insecure long term funding and the lack of commitment and support at senior levels of government. Both projects have generated broad community support at the local and regional level. This must now be accompanied by partnerships at senior levels within relevant government departments and a commitment to provide on-going joint funding and management.
The VET agenda and the pathways agenda have created challenging new work roles to support young people in the post-compulsory years of schooling. Some of the roles are well established but subject to considerable strain as the demands of the position expand. Others, such as the transition broker, are still to be established on a secure basis as part of regular mainstream provision. On the basis of the evidence bought before the Inquiry, it is time to review the coordination and management of the roles discussed in this section.
Recommendation 10.9: That the DET, in recognition of the increased demands on VET teachers, and the additional duties involved in activities such as work placements, maintaining industry experience, and complying with Registered Training Organisation requirements, should: 1. advise high school principals in schools that offer two or more of the Industry Curriculum Framework courses to allocate one of the available curriculum Head Teacher positions to the VET in Schools curriculum area. 2. allocate to high schools an additional allowance of up to three periods a week relief from face-to-face teaching to assist VET coordinators and teachers in their work.
122 The transition broker model has been piloted in Victoria, particularly through a collaborative partnership set up in Whittlesea in 2000. For details, refer to Spiering, J (2001) Regional and local government initiatives to support youth pathways: lessons from innovative communities, in ACER (ed) Understanding Youth Pathways, Research Conference 2001, Proceedings, Victoria: ACER. 123 Dusseldorp Skills Forum (2000) Youth Commitment: A Guide to Developing a Youth Commitment in Your Region, Prepared by Janelle Schloss, utilising the experiences of the Whittlesea Youth Commitment. Available: http:/www.dsf.org.au/toolroom/dl/Whit-Story-Jschloss-JUL00.pdf
82 Recommendation 10.10: That the Director-General of Education and Training initiate a meeting with senior officers in the Department of Health, the Department of Community Services, the Commonwealth Department of Employment and Training, and Centrelink to develop inter-departmental protocols to fund and manage a five-year transition broker pilot project. The project should initially be based in six localities where there is a history of local and regional partnerships to support young people in the transition from school to work or further education and training. An external evaluation should be conducted to assess the outcomes of the project and, if appropriate, to recommend ways to extend the transition broker scheme into other communities in New South Wales.
TAFE AND A 'SECOND CHANCE' EDUCATION
TAFE has traditionally provided an educational ‘second chance’ for students who, for one reason or another, have not achieved success at school and who leave or are excluded at an early stage. The typical route back into education for such students is to enrol in the General Certificate of Vocational Education, which is equivalent to the Year 10 School Certificate qualification, or to work towards a Tertiary Preparation Certificate or Higher School Certificate. The reasons for lack of success in the school system are many and varied, and are often unrelated to individual ability or the desire for intellectual growth and vocational enhancement. The Inquiry is committed to the view that social justice and equity are best served when public education provides a series of re-entry points into general education for those who have been unable to take up earlier opportunities. It endorses, therefore, the important ‘second chance’ role provided by TAFE.
It is no longer the case, however, that re-entry into general and basic education through TAFE is restricted to mature age students. While it is difficult to be precise about the figures, an increasing number of young people, including a proportion that have left school before completing Year 10, are re-connecting with learning through TAFE. In many instances, as the following TAFE teacher commented to the Inquiry, TAFE picks up the ‘casualties’ of the school system, but without adequate resources or appropriate supports to meet their needs:
At present we can see the casualties of the system presenting themselves to us at TAFE. In particular, the young students who have ‘missed out’ or who have been ‘kicked out’ are now our responsibility at TAFE. Yes, we have a Youth-At-Risk program, but the level of funding to develop materials and an effective learning experience is not enough to do anything constructive. Yes, we have a mainstream CGVE group (Year 10) that has face-to-face classes. The drop-out rate this year is 80%. Why? Because often these students require a mix of traditional and flexible delivery modes but the funding is not there because it is not considered important enough in the priorities in the budget. So both the students and the teachers miss out and we all feel like failures again.
The Inquiry was fortunate to be able to visit several sites to assess some of these claims. Three years ago, the TAFE Outreach Coordinator at Meadowbank was approached by a community substitute-care worker to explore the possibility of a
83 special program for young people in substitute care. The initial idea was to connect the students with a horticultural course offered by the Ryde campus. Since that modest beginning, the Study Centre has attracted a wider group of at-risk young people, and the curriculum has expanded to meet their diverse needs. Most of the students, whose average age is around 16, come from Blacktown or Parramatta to attend the Centre but some travel from as far away as Gosford and Mittagong. Some hear about it through friends, but most are referred by social agencies, such as the Glebe and South Sydney Youth Services, the Department of Community Services, Burnside, Riverdale, and Juvenile Justice.
The students who currently attend the Study Centre follow a program that includes two days at the Centre working on General Certificate of Vocational Education courses, and two days with literacy and numeracy teachers studying the Open Training and Education Network [OTEN] Certificate of General Education courses. In addition, the students can elect to study courses from a list of sixteen pre- vocational options that are available through TAFE.
In the demountable that serves as the library / computer area/ coffee lounge, the students explained to the Inquiry why they liked coming to the Study Centre. They particularly liked the adult environment where they have freedom to go outside and smoke, or slip away and make a cup of coffee without having to ask permission. They like being on personal, first-name terms with their teachers and express surprise that their teachers phone to ask about their welfare when they are absent. For some, the Centre becomes something like a home. The teachers have created a supportive environment that takes account of individuals and their backgrounds. This social environment is the prerequisite to re-engaging vulnerable young people who come with very negative experiences of schooling. In academic terms the success of the program is measured by the fact that around 70% of the students attain the General Certificate of Vocational Education equivalent of the School Certificate, and 60% of those enrolled in pre-vocational classes complete the course.
The Inquiry also visited the High Street Youth Health Centre [HSYHC] in Granville that was established by the Department of Health in response to the findings of the Burdekin Commission on the problems of youth homelessness. The Centre adopts a broad view of health that includes not only the normal physical aspects of health and disease, but also physical, mental, and social well-being. A range of services is provided to meet the multi-faceted needs of young people - primary health care, counselling and support, and therapeutic and educational programs. Staff at the Centre includes doctors, counsellors, a nurse, a drug and alcohol counsellor, drop-in workers, a mental health worker, a creative art worker, an education officer, a health promotion officer, and an information technology officer.
The Centre began an educational program for young people about five years ago when it became obvious that problems with school were often a part of the experience of young people who were homeless or at risk of being homeless. The initial role of the Education Officer was as an advocate on behalf of the young people who arrived at the Centre having been excluded from school, or who had left after confrontations with teachers and school authorities. Despite the Education Officer’s efforts to resolve the difficulties between the young people and their schools, it became clear that re-integration back into the regular school was not working for the homeless and at-risk young people who had a history of tenuous relations with the school system. Instead, the Centre has developed a range of direct educational services for the young people on the basis that their overall health and well-being is closely linked to their meaningful participation in learning and education. The purpose of the educational program is to re-connect young people back into
84 education by providing supportive structures that take into account the complexities in their lives. Programs are free, attendance is not compulsory, students can enter and exit the program as circumstances change, learning is self-paced, and assessment is developmental rather than competitive.
While the structures are quite unlike conventional school, the curriculum is orthodox and designed to lead the young people towards the equivalent of a School Certificate. Those who have not completed Year 9 at high school enrol in the TAFE Certificate of Adult Foundation Education [CAFE] to acquire basic literacy and numeracy. This course is delivered through both distance and face-to-face modes and the teacher is provided through the Open Training Education Network - Distance Education. The flexible, modularised units are particularly appropriate for transient young people whose circumstances are likely to change at short notice. A second group of young people meet together three mornings a week to study the TAFE Certificate in General and Vocational Education, the Year 10 School Certificate equivalent. Rather than study a range of subjects, the students work intensively on one subject at a time over a four-week period and gain accreditation for the modules that they complete. In semester 1, 2001, 85% of the students successfully completed their modules. With the support of TAFE Outreach, a third group is enrolled in modules from the Childcare, Certificate 1 course. Completion of this course gives the students advanced standing and access into the mainstream TAFE Childcare course.
The students at both Meadowbank TAFE and High Street Youth Health Centre emphasised that conventional schools had not met their needs in the way that was proving to be the case with the TAFE provided programs. The Inquiry decided to check the generality of this view by conducting a small survey of students attending General Certificate of Vocational Education courses at six TAFE colleges (Lithgow, Liverpool, Mt Druitt, Nowra, Randwick and Ultimo). One hundred and seventeen students responded. Three quarters (75.2%) were in the first weeks of attendance, the remainder were continuing students. There were even numbers of males and females; four out of five had last attended school in the past four years and for a little over three quarters (77%) this had been a public school. The majority (72.4%) had attended a co-educational school. A three-year span (14-16 years) accounted for 91% of the ages at which students left school and 85% had been in either year 9 or year 10.
As the following Table indicates, the reasons given by the students for leaving school in many cases reflect a high degree of discomfort and/or disengagement. Not liking their school or believing their school disliked them accounted for more than half (55%) of the stated reasons. Family/personal problems (15%) and employment/ training opportunities (12.8%) were other major reasons for leaving school:
Table 10.2: Reasons for leaving school
Reason Number % (N=133)* Dislike of school, teachers and/or other students 27 20.3 Suspended/expelled/always in trouble/asked to leave 25 18.8 Family/personal problems 20 15.0 Employment/traineeship/apprenticeship 17 12.8 Wasn’t doing well/ not suited 11 8.3 No desire to complete/other priorities/boring 10 7.5 Financial difficulties 4 3.0 Other 16 12.0 Not answered 3 2.3 Total 133 100.0
85 The 88 new students offered a range of comments to describe their positive first impressions of the General Certificate of Vocational Education program. Expressed as a percentage of all of the 158 ideas that were presented, there were 53 (33.5%) mentions of the fact that teachers were friendly and treated students with respect. A further 29 (18.4%) commended the learning environment, a number describing it as "adult", 27 (17%) found the workload to their liking, and 20 (12.7%) were enjoying the greater freedom and relaxed atmosphere at TAFE. The results were similar among the 29 continuing students. They commended the friendly and respectful attitudes of staff towards General Certificate of Vocational Education students (42%) and emphasised the learning environment and personal freedom. Given the group’s history of previous dissatisfaction with schooling, it would appear significant that when asked “What are your work or study plans once you have completed this course,” half of the students said they intended to continue with further education or training.
The Inquiry is encouraged by the commitment and inventiveness of the TAFE teachers and staff who have creatively adapted TAFE programs to re-engage young people with learning. The successes, however, have frequently been achieved in the face of considerable obstacles and frustration. Both the Meadowbank and Granville projects have suffered from the lack of a guaranteed, sustainable source of funding to support the education program. Teaching and administrative staff spend inordinate amounts of time justifying their activities and writing submissions to obtain a fragile mix of short-term funds to support their work. The problem seems to be that the programs fall between the priorities of the two sectors, schools and TAFE. In the case of the Meadowbank project, the Schools Division in the DET provided the initial funds for hiring a substitute care teacher and teacher aide. When the Centre was successful in attracting additional resources through the Helping Young People at Risk Program, the Schools Division withdrew its support, despite the overall poverty of resources in the Centre. There is an understandable feeling among the staff that the Schools Division should acknowledge some financial responsibility for educational programs that provide a second chance for young people who have not experienced success at school. In regard to TAFE, the support that the teachers receive from Outreach is not necessarily reflected elsewhere in TAFE. A TAFE administrator, referring to the general picture rather than specific initiatives, alluded to the tensions within TAFE:
The number of kids exiting from schools to come to TAFE for the HSC or the General Certificate of Vocational Education is increasing dramatically. The huge increase in demand is not only because kids see TAFE as an alternative to a rather regimented, individualistically-oriented school. There are other reasons too. But what is happening now is that there are a number of principals who are quite eager to say to a student, ‘Leave us and go to the TAFE college’. TAFE is having a lot of problems coming to terms with that. Many colleges and institutes would be quite happy to say, ‘No, it’s not our problem. It’s not our responsibility or core business. We don’t actually get funded for this. We will do it but we will limit the resources that we give to it.'
It is time to acknowledge that ‘second chance’ programs like those described above, whether located in TAFE or in other settings, are an essential component in the overall provision of public education in New South Wales. From a social justice perspective, it is unacceptable that educational services provided for this particularly vulnerable group of young people should be insecurely funded, under-resourced and perceived as ad-hoc, temporary and marginal to core business. It is inconceivable for a child attending a local high school not to be guaranteed a place at that school in
86 a subsequent year. Young people seeking a 'second chance' to enter education are some of the most disadvantaged young people in our community and should be given the same assurance; namely, the right to a permanent and sustainable learning environment. The Inquiry recommends that 'second chance' programs for vulnerable young people be regarded as part of the regular mix of educational alternatives within public education, rather than as temporary accommodations to a short-term crisis. This implies a reorientation within both the DET and TAFE, and a willingness to enter into cross-sectoral collaboration to provide secure, on-going funding support for 'second chance' programs for at-risk young people. In some cases, it will also involve a commitment to enter into collaboration and service agreements with other government departments such as health and community services.
Recommendation 10.11: That the Director-General of Education and Training meet with the Head of the Student Services and Equity section within the Schools Division and the Head of Access Division within TAFE to establish clear administrative procedures for managing 'second chance' educational programs for at-risk young people. The protocols should ensure that: 1. The Schools Division and TAFE accept joint responsibility for funding and managing the programs; 2. staffing, facilities and resources are adequate to meet the welfare and educational needs of the students; 3. students can gain credentials through access to a flexible range of face-to-face and distant education TAFE and Board of Studies modules and courses; 4. students' access to learning is not restricted by their ability to pay fees; 5. TAFE ‘second chance’ programs should be for post-compulsory aged students except in circumstances where, in the opinion of the course coordinators, the admission of fifteen year olds is considered advisable; and that 6. as part of the regular mix of educational alternatives within public education, a report of the ‘second chance’ programs be included in the DET's Annual Report.
87 CHAPTER 11 TEACHER EDUCATION
INTRODUCTION
In the course of many public hearings and school visits, the present Inquiry has had an unusual opportunity to talk with experienced and beginning teachers in schools throughout New South Wales about the practical demands of their roles and about their priorities, hopes and concerns. This has provided an invaluable insight into the current state of the profession. In a number of chapters in this report, the Inquiry has documented observations from teachers concerning the challenging and multifaceted nature of the work they are asked to perform. It has been noted repeatedly that the demands on teachers seem to have increased exponentially in recent years. Teachers today are required to be able to teach an ever broader array of students in ways that recognise their individual learning needs and characteristics, including academically talented students, students from language backgrounds other than English, students from a wide range of cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, students with learning difficulties, students with challenging behaviours, students with a variety of medical conditions, students with identified disabilities, and students who simply do not wish to be in the classroom and in an earlier era would not have been. They are also asked, not infrequently, to undertake welfare and community liaison roles that some teachers do not see as their primary responsibility.
This raises an important question: if this, and more, is what teachers must be able to handle, how can we ensure that people of high quality are attracted to teaching and are adequately prepared to perform this broad range of professional functions in schools? This issue has been touched on in earlier chapters of the report in relation to teacher professionalism and teacher registration124. The Inquiry is also mindful of the recently established Interim Committee tasked with making firm recommendations on an Institute of Teachers for New South Wales. Without wishing to duplicate this initiative, our own investigations would not be complete without a brief consideration of the above- mentioned issues.
There is another issue that has been brought to the attention of the Inquiry on many occasions, sometimes by teachers inviting a quick observation of their assembled colleagues. With the average age of the teaching force in New South Wales now in the upper forties, it is to be expected that a large proportion of the current teaching workforce will retire within the next five to ten years. This will have two effects. First, it will free up many promotion positions that are currently occupied by the baby boomer cohort, providing an expanded career path for entrants into teaching. And second, it will result in a demand for teachers.
The Commonwealth government has recently announced a review of teaching and teacher education, with a particular emphasis on science, technology and mathematics. But the need for more teachers will play itself out in all subject areas and at all levels of the education system. It is anticipated that the decrease in the number of persons
124See also: Quality Matters: revitalising teaching - critical times, critical choices, Sydney, NSW Department of Education
88 under 35 years of age will mean a decline in the school-aged population over the next ten years125.
Any consideration of teacher preparation takes place against a backdrop of cutbacks in faculties of education. The number of academic staff in New South Wales in the field of Education126 has declined by 37 % since 1991. This has meant that there has been little opportunity to employ new staff. University staff around Australia have been experiencing increased workloads - some more so than others. While the number of Education academics declined in New South Wales, student numbers in Education increased - from 13,910 in 1991 to 15,355 in 2001 (full time equivalent). Thus workloads rose dramatically. According to data from the Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST), workloads increased from 15.7 students per staff member in 1991 to 27.6 students per staff member in 2001. Also important from the point of view of importing new ideas into teacher education, is the age profile of Education academics. They have an older and more peaked age profile than all university academics in New South Wales (and in Australia as a whole). In 2001 in New South Wales 74% of Education academics, but only 61 % of all academics, were aged 45 or older. In 2001 in New South Wales 68 % of Education academics, but only 53 % of all academics, were aged between 45 and 59.
This chapter begins with a summary of the views on teacher education presented to the Inquiry, before examining the issue of teacher supply and demand. The focus then shifts to the content and methods of teacher preparation with a particular emphasis upon the frequently raised question ‘How well prepared are teachers for the practicalities of the classroom’? The academic independence of universities and the desirability of course innovations are acknowledged. The role of professional bodies in prescribing minimum requirements for university course accreditation forms the backdrop to recommendations concerning the prescriptions that, in the opinion of the Inquiry, should apply in teacher education.
VIEWS PUT TO THIS INQUIRY
Many of the submissions received by the Inquiry focused on the extent to which student teachers are prepared for the practical realities of the classroom. An experienced high school teacher commented:
Over 26 years I have supervised many practicum students. I have watched a steady decline in the students’ classroom management and lesson preparedness and an increase in the amount of paperwork that they are required to present.
This teacher went on to advocate some form of apprenticeship system for teachers in the final years of their professional preparation. Another high school teacher also emphasised the issue of practical pre-service experience declaring:
125 Department of Education and Training, (undated) Operating Environment for the NSW Department of Education and Training Strategic Plan, Sydney 126 Academic Organisational Unit (AOU - essentially those in faculties, departments or schools of education in universities)
89 Teacher preparation is far too academic. Novice teachers need much more training in the classroom environment so that they are fully conversant with the day-to-day practicalities of converting syllabus material into meaningful and effective lessons in the classroom. This would enable new teachers to think beyond textbooks to the needs and abilities of students in their care.
The theme of novice teachers being helped to acquire practice skills gained expression in a variety of ways. A primary school teacher regretted the fact that students often have no classroom practice until the third year of their course. “Teacher trainees need more involvement in program delivery, with evaluation.” A Teachers Association said that its members viewed favourably the concept of pre-service teacher training being in the hands of the DET, a proposal shared by some other submission writers. A rural primary school teacher would reverse the present order and have students spend two years full time in schools and just one year in university. The parent of a student currently preparing to be a primary teacher believed trainee teachers should be used as teachers’ aides for six months each year to assist teachers with their workload and “sort out students who really want to teach”. Several commentators assigned part of the blame for the inadequate practical preparation of new teachers to the background and interests of their university teachers. A teacher with twenty-five years classroom experience said:
It is my observation that more and more of the newer graduates are floundering particularly in skills-based areas such as primary teaching because the university lecturers do not have enough practical experience to say what actually works on the ground.
Another theme running through the submissions was the need for recruits to teaching to be of a high calibre. A high school teacher commented: “low UAIs for entry to education courses send the wrong message to the community”. Another stated that “Dropping the UAI mark further and further may solve the teacher shortage in the short term but accepting unsuitable personnel to the profession does not improve the standard of our education”. A submission from a teacher provided figures on UAI and equivalent admission minimums to the University of Sydney between 1977 and 2000. The data revealed an overall decrease from the top 15% (TER of 85 plus) to the top 60% (TER of 60 plus). He noted that “No intake in the 1990s met the Carrick Report recommendation that teachers be in the top 25% of HSC recipients.”.
One specific area of deficient preparation identified in several submissions was the inadequate preparation of novice teachers with respect to special education. A primary school teacher in Western Sydney believed that:
Teachers lack enough training in special education to be able to detect speech, language and vision problems especially in our school where 96% of students come from NES backgrounds. We need more special education in pre-service training to prepare teachers to teach these kids.”
Another high school teacher acknowledged the existing input on special education in teacher preparation courses but questioned the adequacy of that education:
90 Without ongoing reinforcement in the form of continued in-service training and regular supervision, this provides the barest minimum. Staff from our school comment that often teachers simply seem frightened about their lack of knowledge and experience to deal with a child with disabilities in their classroom.
No aspect of the recruitment, preparation and induction of new teachers received more comment in submissions and field visits, especially in remote areas, than the support and guidance they need in their first years in the profession. Staff of a Sydney primary school believed there is a need for release time to be provided for supervisors of beginning teachers. “The new teachers are thrust into classrooms without adequate support. Current pre-service programs contain inadequate amounts of practicum experience.” Staff of another primary school believed there should be more “off-class” time for beginning teachers to allow them to acquire the practice of reflecting on their pedagogy. In addition:
There should be an extension of programs like the Associate Teacher Program at the University of Technology, which provides a true apprenticeship experience for teachers to help them acquire effective pedagogies in collaboration with experienced colleagues.
In the minds of many established teachers a period of ‘internship’ for new teachers was considered a potential major advance. Staff of a country primary school observed that:
Undergraduate teachers see enormous benefits in their practice experience. However, they feel that one term is not enough. Internships covering one full school year should be introduced and constitute the fourth year of the degree course.
These sentiments were expressed repeatedly in meetings with the staff of remote schools. Many new teachers described their induction in terms of being ‘thrown in at the deep end’, and survival depending on their own efforts and fate. This sentiment echoes the findings of many formal studies of beginning teachers, summarised by the late Neil Johnson and his associates127:
Customarily assigned substantial teaching loads from their first day of employment, beginning teachers soon realise the insufficiency of their preparation, student lack of enthusiasm, the extent of their management and discipline difficulties, and the exhausting nature of their work. Despite a recognised critical need for support and expert guidance during this stressful and formative first year, many novice teachers receive little assistance from senior colleagues and often have no one specifically assigned to provide guidance and support. Isolated professionally and personally, these beginning teachers succeed or fail alone.
127 Johnson, N. A., Ratsoy, E. W., Holdway, E. A., Friesen, D., (1993) “The induction of teachers: a major internship program,” Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 44, No. 4, 296-305
91 TEACHER SUPPLY AND DEMAND
Teacher education entrants
Nationally, three-quarters of all initial teacher education commencers are women. Just over half of the students commencing initial teacher education programs in New South Wales are school leavers or have had minimal work and life experience outside university after leaving school. Around a third are probably career changers or have had some significant work and adult life experience outside the education industry.
About 1.7% of the students commencing initial teacher education programs in New South Wales are Indigenous, according to Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) data. Those institutions with the largest enrolments of Indigenous students in Education courses (mostly initial teacher education, but also postgraduate programs and enabling courses and advanced diplomas) are, in order, Macquarie University, the University of New England, and Charles Sturt University. The other universities have fewer than ten Indigenous students each.
Teacher education is provided in New South Wales by 12 institutions - 11 universities and the Seventh Day Adventist Avondale College. Around 4,500 students completed initial schoolteacher education courses in New South Wales in 2001128. Almost half (47%) were qualified as secondary teachers, 38% as primary teachers, and 15% as early childhood teachers. Increases in graduate numbers are planned - in 2000 teacher educators indicated that between 2001 and 2005 primary completions were expected to increase by 8%, and secondary completions were expected to increase by 6%129:
128 Roy Ballantyne et al (2001) Teacher education courses and completions, Evaluations and Investigations Programme, Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training, Canberra, Table 7 129 Response to a survey carried out for the Australian Council of Deans of Education. See Barbara Preston (2000) Teacher supply and demand to 2005: projections and context, Australian Council of Deans of Education, Canberra, Tables 1 & 2.
92 Table 11.1: Initial teacher education completions (approximate) in 2001, New South Wales and Australian Capital Territory institutions130
EARLY PRIMARY SECONDARY TOTAL CHILDHOOD Australian Catholic University NSW 0 121 160 281 Avondale 0 16 17 33 Charles Sturt University 150 222 246 618 Macquarie University 114 106 127 347 Southern Cross University 0 77 75 152 University of New England 110 169 229 508 University of New South Wales 0 0 169 169 University of Newcastle 96 165 433 694 University of Sydney 0 182 291 453 University of Technology, Sydney 0 91 54 145 University of Western Sydney 146 390 214 750 University of Wollongong 43 205 110 358 TOTAL New South Wales 659 1734 2115 4508 Australian Catholic University ACT 0 70 0 70 University of Canberra 29 98 88 215 TOTAL ACT 29 168 88 285 TOTAL NSW & ACT 688 1902 2203 4793
The planned increase in the number of graduating teachers needs to be set against possible losses from the teacher workforce. Estimating the latter is an imprecise art form but there are grounds for concern. In much of the western world, the supply of, and demand for, teachers has followed a cyclical pattern of excess and shortage. In New South Wales, as in the other states of Australia until recent years, there has been a considerable excess of teachers over requirement. At the present time, however, there are strong indications that the cycle is turning, not only in Australia but also in much of the western world, so that a time of teacher shortage is emerging. For Australia this is made clear by the analyses of Preston (1997131; 2000132) on behalf of the Australian Council of Deans of Education. New South Wales DET officers have questioned the Preston projections claiming that no general shortages are in the offing while acknowledging that there are shortages in specific areas such as Mathematics, Science and Technological and Applied Studies. Nevertheless, the Senate Inquiry into the Status of the Teaching Profession looked closely at supply and demand and stated that ‘… the Committee supports the general conclusions of the Preston Report” (Crowley, 1998, p. 233)133. The Baumgart review of staffing in New South Wales also projected a serious shortage of teachers in the decade beginning around 2005 (Baumgart, 1995)134. Furthermore, the Ramsey report on teaching in New South Wales, which also discusses
130 Data on anticipated 2001 completions was provided in early 2001, so actual completions may differ. Roy Ballantyne et al (2001) Teacher education courses and completions, Evaluations and Investigations Programme, Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training, Canberra, Table 7 131 Preston, B., (1997) Teacher supply and demand to 2003: projections, implications and issues. Canberra, Australian Council of Deans of Education 132 Preston, B., (2000) Teacher supply and demand to 2005: projections and context, Canberra, Australian Council of Deans of Education 133 Crowley, R., (Chair) (1998) A Class Act – Inquiry into the status of the teaching profession, Canberra: Senate Employment, Education and Training Reference Committee 134 Baumgart, N., (1995) Staffing of NSW Public Schools: A Review. Sydney, NSW Department of School Education
93 this debate in detail, draws similar conclusions, though with some caution. “There is no doubt that the supply of teachers will tighten in the long-term with the effects being more dramatic in some states and in some teaching areas than others.” (Ramsey, 2000, p.201)135. Thus, although there is room for difference over the extent of shortages and how soon they will emerge, there is widespread agreement that the cycle is turning.
This tightening of supply is likely to continue past 2005 mainly due to an increase in the separation rate as the baby boom teachers who began in big numbers in the 1970s enter retirement and as the smaller numbers trained in the mid 1980s and early 1990s prove insufficient to replace them. At the same time recruitment here by overseas education systems seems likely to continue at high levels, due to the impact of the world-wide teacher shortage as well as the rapid expansion of international schools where Australian teachers are highly valued. In addition, the continued draining from the pool of surplus teachers to fill vacancies within the system and the expanding private school sector, as indicated by the present shortage of casual staff, suggests there are not excessive numbers left in that pool. Furthermore, if there is maintenance of good economic growth as projected, teachers will continue to be tempted into other careers. This means that there is a need to consider staffing implications of a looming shortage and to take steps to overcome its adverse effects at least in some measure, as early as 2003.
New South Wales seems better placed than most other states to avoid the worst effects of teacher shortfalls. There are two reasons. Firstly, as Preston acknowledges, the Education system has “maintained much more stability on both the demand and supply sides through the 1990s than most other States and Territories”136. Second, the New South Wales Department has continued to exercise centralised control over most class teacher appointments, and so is much better able to respond to a general shortage than states that have devolved responsibility for staffing to the local school137. This comparative advantage, however, does not allow any room for complacency and there are already indications that there will be additional pressures from interstate recruitment.138. In addition, there is the likelihood that the final and largest instalment (5%) of the 15% four-stage teacher salary rise begun in 2000, which is due on January 1 2003, will have repercussions for staffing during 2003. Anecdotal evidence indicates that many teachers have delayed retirement in anticipation of the superannuation advantages of that pay rise, and others have indicated they will bring forward their retirement after that increment takes effect.
Projections for New South Wales to 2005 suggest that primary teacher supply will be sufficient to meet demand, but that there will be a general shortage of secondary teachers so that by the end of that period, supply will be only 80% of demand139. This will be likely to have its worst effect in the subject areas currently short of teachers, namely Mathematics, Science and Technology, but it is also suggested there will be serious staffing problems in other teaching areas, like English. In such a tightening situation the worst affected schools will certainly be those in difficult-to-staff locations.
135 Ramsey, G., (2000) Quality Matters. Revisiting Teaching: Critical Times, Sydney, NSW Department of Education 136 Preston, B., (2000) op. cit., p.23 137 Watson, A., Hatton, N., (1995) “Staffing of Schools: Quality and equality,” paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Hobart 138 Ramsey, G., (2000) op. cit., 139 Preston, B., op. cit.,
94 According to submissions received and the Inquiry’s own observations, it is these localities in which a substantial number of overseas trained teachers are to be found. The deployment of such teachers is not a straightforward solution to local staff shortages. They often stand in need of an orientation to Australian culture especially as it is reflected in the expectations and classroom behaviour of young people. This year the DET conducted a trial orientation program for overseas trained teachers that includes, among other things, elements of classroom management, teaching in a multicultural classroom and teaching strategies, together with a longer period of professional experience and discussion of the conduct of classes and attendance at school and faculty staff meetings. This program is an advance on the previous induction course. However, the course is not compulsory. The Inquiry believes that it should be. The way to ensure that overseas trained teachers are more appropriately equipped to teach in New South Wales schools, particularly in some very challenging settings, is to require the course’s completion before taking up an appointment.
Recommendation 11.1: That all overseas trained teachers complete the existing Orientation Program for Overseas Trained Teachers provided by the Workforce Development Needs Unit of the Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate of the DET, prior to teaching in a New South Wales public school.
To overcome the major problem of successfully adapting to the culture of Australian classrooms also requires an extended opportunity to reflect in a focused way on issues arising, with the assistance of a designated colleague. To that end, the principals of schools to which overseas trained teachers have been assigned should ask an experienced teacher to act as an informal mentor-colleague throughout the newly appointed teacher’s first twelve months of service. This amounts to a variation of the Beginning Teachers Program that takes into account the experience already gained by many of the overseas trained teachers. Another most important form of assistance would be the opportunity for joint teaching followed by an informal evaluation of what was achieved in the class and pointers for the future.
COVERAGE OF CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT AND STUDENT BEHAVIOUR
In formal submissions to the Inquiry and during discussions in community meetings, as well as in the remarks of teachers during school visits, major prominence was given to the issue of student indiscipline. It was frequently claimed that new teachers are inadequately prepared for the practical management of the classroom. The Inquiry has attempted to ascertain the facts of the matter by reviewing the coverage of this topic area in teacher preparation courses.
The management of classrooms and student behaviour is dealt with in different ways in different courses, in some cases as only an incidental or minor component. Behaviour management is often covered in some detail in the mandatory special education unit (the DET requires at least a one semester unit in special education, covering inclusive education for students with learning or behavioural difficulties). By implication, if not intention, locating behavioural issues in such a unit may indicate their application to particular students and particular circumstances. In some programs a substantial optional unit is offered from an educational psychology perspective.
95 Some newly developed or proposed courses deal with the issues in a planned and integrated way, as part of everyday, central professional practice and the creation of effective and safe learning environments. This coherent way of dealing with the issues is characteristic of the ‘productive pedagogy’ model being applied in the University of Newcastle and some other programs140. This approach revolves around key concepts, including intellectual quality, relevance, supportive classroom environment, and recognition of difference, that played a major part in the Inquiry’s earlier consideration of productive pedagogy (see Chapter 2). Within that framework a number of items and key questions are addressed that explicitly deal with issues usually referred to as classroom or behaviour management.
Classroom management is not something that comes intuitively to teachers or that is achieved by relying on chastisement and criticism141. Rather, teachers need to “plan and practise for more effective ways of influencing students.” One very basic way of approaching that task is for the beginning teacher to consult the now substantial literature on maintaining order in the classroom and practise applying the many insights gained. The novice who peruses this literature will find a body of information available that can guide teachers in their handling of distracting or disruptive behaviour in the classroom. For example, the many constructive suggestions of one authority142 range from ‘situational responses’ (like removing distracting objects and reinforcing appropriate behaviours), to preparing a behavioural contract including i. a statement of the expected, appropriate behaviour; ii. rewards or positive support for exhibiting the appropriate behaviour; and iii. penalties or corrective actions that will be taken if the student does not exhibit appropriate behaviour. Other researchers143 have adapted for classroom use the findings of studies that identify factors that can reduce the ineffective use of punishment. Still other investigators have concluded that classroom discipline depends some 90% on the teacher’s effective body language, and make management suggestions accordingly144. The limitation of much of this material, however, is that despite being based in research findings, it takes the form of disjointed ‘hints’ rather than fitting into a more comprehensive approach to teaching. The latter quality is the particular asset of the work of University of New England teacher educator, Dr Christine Richmond, who has been consulted by the Inquiry.
Dr Richmond’s starting point for assisting pre-service teachers and experienced practitioners is that they should see the ‘doing’ component of classroom management as embedded within sound teaching practices and effective teacher-student communication145. Part of what the new teacher needs to rehearse is preventing the emotion aroused by student indiscipline from dominating her or his response to situations by, for example, relying exclusively on corrective behaviour. “This practice, if used in isolation almost inevitably leads to the slippery slope of a disruption-correction cycle resulting in frustrations associated with growing student hostility on the one hand,
140 Jennifer M. Gore et al, ‘Better teaching: Productive pedagogy as a framework for teacher education’, a paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, Fremantle, 2-6 December 2001 141 Lawnham, P., (2002) “Teachers learn how to behave,” Weekend Australian, July 27-29, p. 13 142 Burden, R. (1995). Classroom Management and Discipline. Longman Publishers: New York. 143 Long, J.D. and Frye, V. H. (1985). Making it till Friday – A Guide to Successful Classroom Management. Princeton Book Company: Princeton. 144 Olsen, J., Cooper, P., (2001) Dealing with disruptive students in the classroom, London, Kogan Page 145 Richmond, C., (undated) “Behaviour Management Minimalism: A no-frills approach,” unpublished paper.
96 and teacher stress on the other.” The way forward depends less on a teacher’s particular choice from a range of behaviour management approaches than avoiding over-reliance on correcting misbehaviour to the exclusion of other types of management interactions.
Richmond uses a simple “no frills” Balance Model to illustrate the core lessons that teachers need to learn in order to maintain their professional focus on teaching and learning. The figure (below) represents three subsets of behaviour management communications, the languages of expectations, acknowledgement and correction:
The language of expectation is made up of all the things that teachers say and do to teach students about the boundaries of acceptable behaviour in the classroom. The languages of acknowledgement and correction describe how teachers notice and reinforce acceptable behaviour, and correct disruptive behaviour respectively.146
Figure 11:1 The Balance model - a minimalist framework of behaviour management language
From the perspective of the Balance Model, the issue of how expectations are established is less important than that they are. Providing overt encouragement to students when they are cooperating is the key to providing balanced feedback, especially for those students who have a history of mainly receiving correction. Overall, a ‘balanced’ approach to classroom management is not something apart from sound pedagogy but is an aspect of it with identifiable emphases and concerns. The latter are summarised by Richmond in a framework that locates the management of student behaviour within the context of a teacher’s general philosophical approach, planning and classroom strategies147:
Room needs to be made in pre-service programs for novice teachers to consider and rehearse the procedures that constitute effective classroom and behaviour management before falling back on memories of their own teachers’ styles and endeavours. This component of teacher education need not be intellectually arid or mechanistic if it is
146 Ibid., p.4 147 Richmond, C., (2002) Searching for Balance: A Collective Case Study of Ten Secondary Teachers’ Behaviour Management Language. PhD Thesis, University of New England, pp. 329-330
97 located within a ‘knowledge for practice’ framework. However, the treatment of classroom and behaviour management in a totally ‘bookish’ way without providing ample opportunities for students to rehearse the practical application of procedural insights, will sustain the practice ignorance that new teachers have complained of throughout the present Inquiry. Below (Recommendation 11:2) we include appropriate attention to knowledge for practice among the requirements that the Inquiry believes should be prescribed for teacher education courses if they are to be accredited.
PRACTICE PROFICIENCY AND MAINTAINING A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE
The summary of comments on teacher education at the beginning of this chapter and the foregoing remarks about classroom and behaviour management reflect an appropriately high level of concern with what many teachers, new and established, consider the ‘practicalities of the classroom’. However, that many commentators consider the professional preparation of teachers to be insufficiently ‘practical’ has to be seen in the context of a recurring tension between practice and theory in the preparation of all human service professionals. The latter must not only be readied to render useful and skilled service but remain critically minded students of their chosen profession. Dewey observed almost a hundred years ago that an ‘apprentice’ teacher:
may appear to superior advantage the first day, the first week, the first month, or even the first year, as compared with some other teacher who has a much more vital command of the psychology, logic, and ethics of development. But later ‘progress’ may with such consist only in perfecting and refining skill already possessed. Such persons seem to know how to teach, but they are not students of teaching148.
One of the continuing purposes of teacher education is to contribute to improving the quality of teaching in our public schools149. A major theme of this report, commencing in Chapter 2 and sustained thereafter, has been the need for sustained critical reflection on teaching practices by teachers, operating as professional communities and nurtured by appropriate forms of professional development. It follows that novice teachers need more than assistance with the mechanics of instruction and classroom management techniques, although the importance in this day and age of those attributes can hardly be over-stated. In addition, the teacher in preparation needs theoretical understandings (particularly those of a kind that bring into question the assumed ‘commonsense’ of professional and classroom practice), a range of inquiry orientations, and openness to ways of thinking about teaching, schooling and society150. These foundations for remaining a “student of teaching” should be part of an appraisal of the adequacy of teacher preparation in New South Wales. Of course, as the Inquiry has been reminded of time and again throughout its fieldwork, it is hard to be suitably reflective and critically minded about schooling when you feel swamped by practical challenges for which you have had little or no preparation. This has been the complaint of many novice teachers who say that they have received little pre-service assistance with practical challenges
148 Dewey, J., (1904) The relation of theory to practice in education. The third yearbook of the National Society for the Scientific Study of Education: Part 1. The relation of theory to practice in the education of teachers. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 149 Beyer, L. E., (2001) “The Value of Critical Perspectives in Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher Education, March, Vol. 52, i2, p.151 150 Beyer, (2001) ibid.,
98 like managing a class, understanding and managing the DET’s reporting requirements, and establishing a working partnership with their students’ parents.
In some fields of professional education it has proved possible to integrate critical perspectives with students’ acquisition of those basic practice skills required for basic competence at the beginning of a career. The definition of what constitutes basic competence for beginning teachers and the practice skills entailed, and the adequate educational coverage of those competencies and skills, should be a requirement of teacher preparation programs in New South Wales. The precise way in which those matters are taught and their integration with more theoretical and normative concerns should remain the prerogative of the independent universities, as occurs with other professional courses.151. There are a number of innovative initial teacher education programs in New South Wales and their innovations are to be welcomed as a sign of institutional vitality. To take just one example, the University of Wollongong offers an alternative pre-service training approach known as the Knowledge-Based Community (KBC). The program is available to a limited number of specially selected students. This group of approximately twenty students in each of the three years of the program operate as a distinct group separate from the mainstream teacher education students. They do not attend regular lectures and tutorials, the group’s learning being based on field experience and problem-based learning.
The students are allocated to small groups or teams of 4-6 members and are attached to a school for their field experience. While in the school the students are: - mentored rather than supervised, - immersed in the culture of the school and ‘teaching,’ and - given the same assignments as the mainstream students but asked to problem-solve collaboratively as a group using the experience and expertise of the school’s teachers.
Students spend two days per week in the school to which they are assigned. In the view of a principal of one of the participating schools, the students are asked to become fully integrated members of staff, to build a professional rapport with the staff, and to build a professional and personal rapport with the mentor(s)152. This requires a shift by staff “not only in the philosophical base from clinical supervision to mentoring, and also in the relationship base from judge to trusted and equal colleague.” One intention of the program is to better develop some of teaching’s key management skills including student discipline, motivating students, dealing with individual differences, the organisation of class work and relationships with parents. An on-line discussion forum has been a major tool for knowledge sharing and construction.
The novel form of the KBC program, and other innovative teacher education programs in New South Wales, reflect the working of enterprising academic minds within the specialist tertiary education domain that is the rightful preserve of universities. These educational prerogatives, however, to a considerable extent have to accommodate the minimum content requirements that professionals in the relevant field of practice believe to be essential for effective practice. Authoritative professional
151 For example, social work and librarianship. 152 Marks, W., (2001) Pre-publication paper, The enhancement of critical reflection and professional development of staff, through the impact of a mentoring-based pre-service practicum program at Albion Park Public School.
99 bodies characteristically formulate those needs in ways that are respectful of the academic independence of the education institutes and, indeed, encourage critical reflection upon the received standard knowledge of the field. Two examples drawn from outside the field of teacher education illustrate possible lines of development within the teaching profession. Social workers undertake four years of preparatory university study and as with teaching, a majority take up government appointments following graduation. The accompanying example of the basis upon which the Australian Association of Social Workers accredits university courses and thereby confers professional status upon graduates is of interest for two reasons: i. it illustrates a framework that allows universities to exercise their discretion in the organisation and presentation of material, and ii. sets minimum content requirements while inviting critical reflection upon both the knowledge base and practice methods of a profession. The role played by the Australian Library and Information Association serves similar professional ends (see the grey coloured section below).
THE ACCREDITING OF SOCIAL WORK AND LIBRARY AND INFORMATION STUDIES COURSES: PARALLELS WITH TEACHER EDUCATION? The following summary is an abridged version of sections of an Australian Association of Social Workers policy document “Policy and Procedures for Establishing Eligibility for Membership of AASW153.
To obtain accreditation from the Australian Association of Social Workers, a university course in social work must meet certain requirements within the broad areas of Knowledge for Practice, Practice Knowledge and Skills, and Field Education.
(a) Knowledge for practice (i) An understanding of society and how it has developed and is organised. The insights afforded by a range of specified disciplines, from psychology and sociology to history, economics and political science, must be studied. (ii) Knowledge of social welfare arrangements, their history and organisation, and of the law in Australia. Attention must be paid to the study of major groups that experience disadvantage, and to those social structures and ideologies that give rise to, and maintain, disadvantage and oppression. (iii) Knowledge of the individual, including human behaviour and development, personality development, life-cycle stages, family and social networks, health and ill-health, disability, vulnerability and resilience. An understanding of the social construction of these concepts should also be developed. When assessing overseas qualifications, for the purpose of equivalence the above areas should usually involve study over two semesters.
(b) Practice knowledge and skills (i) All methods of social work intervention, from work with individuals, families, groups and communities, to social action, research, social policy analysis and development, and administration. (ii) Practice skills, including interpersonal skills, communication skills, the skills of reflective and critical thinking and analysis, data collection and management, and negotiation and mediation.
153 Australian Association of Social Workers, (2000) Policy and Procedures for Establishing Eligibility for Membership of AASW, Canberra, www.aasw.asn.au
100 (iii) The skills of making assessments and deciding on the most appropriate intervention with which to respond to whatever situation faces the worker. When assessing overseas qualifications, for the purposes of determining equivalence the above areas will usually involve at least the equivalent of four semesters of social work practice theory.
(c) Field education Field education is a key activity for the student, providing opportunities to integrate content from classroom learning with practical experience, while at the same time developing competence in a range of social work skills. In all field placements procedures must exist to ensure the promotion of rigorous academic and practice standards. The School of Social Work will arrange for a member of its staff to visit the placement agency at least once, and preferably twice during the placement to provide consultation as required, and to assist in evaluation of the student’s progress. Students must spend a minimum of 140 seven-hour days in at least two field placements. Field educators will be qualified social workers with a minimum of two years’ full-time practice experience, or its equivalent, who display a commitment to continuing professional education, and an interest in developing social work knowledge and skills. There should be a minimum of at least two hours supervision for each five days of placement. The supervisors’ workloads must be such that they are able to provide the formal and informal supervision required by the students.
Librarianship and Information Studies
The requirements imposed on librarianship and information studies courses in order for graduates to be eligible for Associate membership of the Australian Library and Information Association are more generally expressed but structurally similar to those that apply to social work courses154. In relation to curriculum design, courses must encompass at least generic and core knowledge and skills providing a foundation for practice. The generic knowledge and skills are specified. They include attributes that are shared with other related professionals, including effective communication skills, relevant IT and information systems skills, professional ethical standards and effective team relationship skills. More specific knowledge and skills pertaining to the librarianship and information field are prescribed. They include the ability to identify and investigate people’s information needs and relevant information sources, and the ability to forecast, plan, implement, evaluate and apply appropriate resource management to library and information operations. Courses must provide workplace experience as an integrated component to link the theory and practice of the profession. They must be grounded in theoretical frameworks and contribute to the development of students’ critical, analytical and creative thinking. To the extent that courses can demonstrate compliance with these requirements they can gain professional accreditation.
Giving practical shape to proposals for improving the preparation of teachers ultimately is a matter for the Institute of Teachers and the Interim Committee that has responsibility for planning its establishment. In an earlier section of this report (Chapter 2) the Inquiry strongly supported the establishment of an Institute of Teachers and emphasised its potential for involving teachers in its decision-making. In now making a number of recommendations concerning the Institute it will be presumed that its mode of operation will be consultative.
154 ALIA Board of Education, (undated) Education policy statement 1, http:://www.alia.org.au
101 Recommendation 11.2: That the Interim Committee for a NSW Institute of Teachers as one of its foundation tasks and in accordance with the first of its terms of reference, identify the level of basic knowledge and skills required for a beginning teacher to attain initial registration. Those competencies should include the knowledge for practice that the graduate should possess; the capacity for critical reflection upon teaching practices; the knowledge of school settings and organisation needed to make an informed start as a member of a school’s staff; and the practice skills and classroom management abilities that, with collegial support, will enable school students to learn in an ordered and purposeful environment.
GUIDANCE DURING FIRST PROFESSIONAL YEARS
As with other professions that involve the skilled use of the self in applying knowledge, teachers require considerable support and guidance in the early stages of their careers. In the Inquiry’s field work, particularly in regions well removed from metropolitan centres, it received many suggestions concerning the need for new teachers to have a gradual build-up in their workloads while receiving guidance from more experienced colleagues and being encouraged to reflect upon their developing practice. Another category of suggestions focused on the need for novice teachers to take time to establish positive working relations with parents. Such proposals were frequently linked with a rather broad concept of internship.
The idea of internships has had a lengthy history overseas and in the early 1970s Flinders University in South Australia piloted a four-year course comprising three years of university study and a year of supervised teaching practice in schools. Course requirements were not completed until the end of the fourth internship year. The professional status of the intern was akin to that of a student teacher155. Generally, the idea of internship has combined a mixture of professional practice and university instruction with professional status being acquired at the end of the internship. A number of professions have used internships as a bridge, a “guided, gradual introduction to service” with registration being withheld until satisfactory completion of the program.
Neil Johnson and associates (1993) used a case study of the Initiation to Teaching Project (ITP) in the Province of Alberta to illustrate and assess the transfer of a classic model of internship to teaching. The scheme in question had as its stated objectives the development of beginners’ teaching skills, assisting them to establish professional relationships in the workplace, enhancing supervising teachers’ skills, and assessing the interns’ suitability for appointment as fully qualified teachers. Each intern was paid approximately two-thirds of a beginning teacher’s salary plus an entitlement to limited funding for professional development. The interns had a reduced teaching load, the intended starting point being a 50% load, appropriate supervision, service as a teacher rather than an aide, and recognition of the period of service for certification, superannuation and salary purposes.
155 Johnson, N. A., et al., op. cit., p. 297
102 Despite variation in the actual teaching loads assigned to interns, most of them considered the scheme a valuable induction for beginning teachers. An extensive evaluation showed that interns did better than a comparison group of new teachers on classroom teaching skills. Participants in the scheme viewed internships as an effective way to link theory to practice and endorsed the gradual increase in the teaching burden over the first year of service. Notwithstanding these advantages, a major drawback is the cost of a fully-fledged internship scheme. The Alberta scheme illustrated the duplication of teaching resources, the release time for interns and supervising teachers, outlays on professional development, and attendant administrative costs.
An Australian monograph on internships differentiates that concept (as defined above) from the shorter practicum attachments to schools undertaken by local students156. While in New South Wales no minimums have been set, all pre-service programs involve a total of at least 45 days of supervised and assessed practicum. On that basis, the authors identify a range of graduated and supervised inductions into teaching of varying durations that share many of the elements of the model proposed by Johnson et. al.(1993). Following the review of those projects and others analysed in the international literature, Hatton and Harman outline some emerging trends in the field157. First, there is a trend for bridging experiences between initial training and entry into full time employment to become longer, highlighting the issue of financial support and possible payment for work done. Increasingly, internships involve granting to Associate Teachers the status of being conditionally certificated, able for extended periods to take sole responsibility for teaching classes, but working closely with experienced teachers who have been properly prepared for their role as mentors. So far as outcomes are concerned, Australian interns report higher levels of efficacy, greater facility in working with individual children, increased confidence, shifts towards an emphasis on individuals’ learning, and development of reflective capacities.
Some dilemmas and difficulties are also apparent. Notwithstanding the formulation of guidelines, there continues to be unevenness in the implementation of the schemes across schools. The same is true of the preparation of mentors and the time they devote to novice teachers. Finding and preparing suitable mentors in remote areas is a particular problem but there are overseas precedents for at least partly overcoming this problem by the use of communication technology158. However, the major difficulty for new teachers in remote areas regardless of whether or not they are interns is one of adjusting to the school setting and its ethos, together with the people and the community in which the school is located. Additional light recently has been thrown on this issue by the study of long-staying rural teachers159. The attributes of long-staying rural teachers in New South Wales160 include the completion of a rural practice teaching experience as part of their teacher education program, and attendance at a rural teacher education institution for the pre-service program. In 1997 the Beyond the Line program began at
156 Hatton, N., Harman, K., (1997) Internships Within Teacher Education Programs in NSW: A Further Review of Recent Australian and Overseas Studies. Sydney, University of Sydney Education Faculty 157 ibid., pp.14-16 158 Logan, L., Sachs, J., (1992) “Changing teacher education through technology: A study of the Remote Area Teacher Education Project,” Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, 189-200 159 Boylan, C., McSwan, D., (1998) “Long-staying rural teachers: Who are they?” Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 42, I1, pp. 49-60. 160 Teaching continuously in the current school for at least six years and not seeking a move in the next year.
103 the University of New England after an initial approach from Moree. Supported by the DET, the program now involves hundreds of students from eleven university campuses in visits of a week or more to schools and communities in rural and remote New South Wales - Broken Hill, Dubbo, Griffith and Deniliquin as well as Moree Districts. Students spend time in schools in smaller towns such as Walgett, Goodooga and Lightning Ridge. The program aims to give university students a first hand knowledge of what it is like to live and work in a rural location. Beyond the line surveys show that 95% of visiting teacher education students have indicated that teaching in country areas is now a serious option161.
Implications for New South Wales
Individual projects and programs that approximate to the model of an internship discussed in the foregoing brief survey will continue to exist in New South Wales. Future circumstances may permit the widespread adoption of the approach, in which case past and present trials of internship schemes will be of benefit. The Inquiry also recognises the merits of the mentor scheme recently announced by the Government and due to be introduced in 2003. Fifty mentors are to be appointed across seventeen School Districts to assist new teachers with all aspects of their initial professional experience. They will also assist principals and school leadership teams to develop structures and a culture that are supportive of beginning teachers. Much should be learned from this project.
Given present financial constraints and competing demands upon the public purse, the Inquiry is inclined, with the intermediate-term future in mind, to concentrate on identifying the more manageable and affordable elements that comprise the concept of internship. It is again acknowledged that the formulation of minimum standards in this regard rests with the Interim Committee for a NSW Institute of Teachers but the following represent the elements that the Inquiry believes should become requirements of approved teacher education programs:
• Provisional graduate status until the satisfactory completion of one or more practicum(s) totalling at least 90 days,
• Direct involvement of university teaching staff in at least one, ideally two, practicum visits in the course of each student’s placement(s),
• The detailing of placement objectives and their links with coursework content and objectives,
• Appraisal of the practicum as an academic subject with clear scope for a pass or fail grading, with two failures resulting in exclusion from the program and the conferring (subject to the fulfilment of other academic requirements) of an academic qualification that is not a teaching qualification. The practicum supervisor should make recommendations with respect to the grading but the final outcome should be determined by the university in accordance with the usual academic procedures and standards,
161 Communication from Personnel Directorate, NSW Department of Education and Training
104 • The assignment of a practicum supervisor who has been prepared for the role and who has the benefit of a pre-placement briefing by the university on the objectives of the placement and the course content and other practical work to which the student has been exposed,
• The practicum supervisor role should attract a reduced teaching load commensurate with the number of students supervised both individually and as a group, where appropriate. Each student should be assured of at least two hours formal supervision by one of the above-mentioned means, every five days. The supervision can range over discussion, coaching, observation and feedback and jointly undertaken tasks (teaching, classroom management, student case studies, interviews and discussions with parents, assisted participation in teacher meetings, work and professional development groups, school management committees and other events which give rise to critical reflection and professional induction),
• The contribution of the practicum supervisors should be acknowledged by the universities in a number of ways, including the provision of training in supervision, the award of honorary or adjunct teaching appointments, celebratory/instructive occasions when supervisors are brought together and the importance of their contribution recognised.
Recommendation 11.3: That in formulating appropriate arrangements for the supervision and guidance of new teachers, the Interim Committee for a NSW Institute of Teachers should take into account the issues raised with the Inquiry by teachers and parents, and the Inquiry’s response by way of identifying those elements of the concept of internship specified in the text that could be realised in the intermediate-term future.
CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
The Inquiry regards its recommendations concerning a vastly expanded but school- based system of professional development (Chapter 2) as being one of the cornerstones of a revitalised public education in New South Wales. The day has passed when professional accreditation upon completion of a university course entitles one to the associated privileges and responsibilities for the remainder of a professional life. Initial professional education must be continually updated and expanded so that many professional accreditation bodies now prescribe an amount of continuing education that must be completed within specified periods in order to preserve professional status and advance to a more senior professional rank. Rather than being seen as discrete educational experiences, the Inquiry believes that these stages should be seen as constituting a continuous educational process, from the requirements of a novice professional to those of a professional leader. At every stage, in Dewey’s terms, the practitioner should remain a “student of teaching”. The Inquiry commends this philosophy to the Interim Committee for a NSW Institute of Teachers.
105 CHAPTER 12 GOVERNANCE
Public education in its current manifestation is a centrally controlled bureaucracy that implements a system of top-down hierarchical managerial control of its subordinate parts. As such, this system has a very limited capacity to implement and foster a belief in social justice … If one goal of public education is to foster the concept of social justice, then the bureaucracy and structures of public education require a massive overhaul and an immediate shift in the leadership paradigm from one of central control and dominance to one of a more participatory and inclusive model that is clearly focussed on excellence of service delivery to its employees and the public it serves. High school teacher, Central Coast
______
INTRODUCTION
Governance refers to the way in which education is managed, including where decisions are made, and what has been called “the package of arrangements that constitute the framework within which teaching and learning occurs.162” Several dimensions are often examined in relation to governance and the administrative structures that underpin it. These include the degree of centralisation versus decentralisation of management and administration, the overall size of the management operation, communication flows, the extent to which structures are maintenance- or change-oriented, and efficiency and effectiveness. In the previous eleven chapters, the Inquiry has explored specific aspects of the education system in NSW. In all of these areas, implications for governance and administration have been implicit or explicit. Governance has been commented on as part of discussions on everything from teacher training to student welfare to buildings. Table 12.1 below indicates the main locus for responsibility for the implementation of major recommendations made in the report to date, keeping in mind that the aim of all these recommendations is to improve efficacy at the school level.
This Table provides a useful synopsis of the main foci of this report. First, the emphasis on restoring teaching and learning to the centre of the public education system is clear. This is reflected in recommendations aimed at all levels of the public education system, such as those on pedagogy and strategic planning, professional development, VET in schools, early learning, academic extension, the needs of rural students and beginning teachers. In addition, attributes of the public education system that function as barriers to effective teaching and learning are also addressed, including the need for better buildings, improved ways of handling student welfare and discipline, and improved interagency coordination for students at-risk. Second, several key themes of the report are evident, including the importance of social justice and therefore of better meeting the needs of Aboriginal students, those living with disabilities and those from low socio-economic backgrounds. The value of retaining and strengthening comprehensive schools and the importance of linking the curriculum and the operation of schools more closely to other
162 Ainley, J. and McKenzie, P. (2000) “School governance: Research on educational and management issues”, International Education Journal, Vol 1, No. 3, p. 149. http://www.flinders.edu.au/education/iej.
106 Table 12.1 Main locus of responsibility for the implementation of major recommendations to date in this report
Head Office
• Develop DET strategic plan focused on pedagogy • Initiate Pedagogy Clearinghouse on innovative teaching practice, including materials on academic extension and work with students with disabilities • Undertake standards setting/establish Institute of Teachers • Create more preschools and smaller K-2 classes, starting with disadvantaged areas • Train and recruit more school counsellors • Move office of Board of Studies into Department • Review administrative co-location of school education and TAFE • Work with Department of Health on provision of mental health services to students • Work with Premiers Department on Community Education Centres • Work with several departments on school-work transition programs • Work with Office of the Ombudsman on child protection information to teachers • Work with NSW Teachers Federation, the Aboriginal Education Consultative Group and Education faculties to improve education for Aboriginal students • Research outcomes of selective schooling and multi-campus colleges • Strengthen comprehensive schools/ assess impact on comprehensive schools of structural changes to schools • Coordinate training of teachers aides (special) • Make applications for Funding Support (integration) three yearly • Get Office of Board of Studies to review HSC VET and work placement requirements • Coordinate induction programs for overseas trained teachers • Advocate for increased resources for public education, as recommended.
Districts
• Trial inclusion coordinators for schools with many students with disabilities • Coordinate (with TAFE, the DET) use of sites for VET in schools • Coordinate student welfare and positive well-being trials in schools
Schools
• Increase individual and whole school professional development (e.g. in relation to academic extension, inclusion) • Implement performance management scheme • Mentor new and overseas trained teachers • Initiate academic extension programs in all schools • Better coordinate and resource VET in schools and student TAFE attendance • Implement educational opportunity grants scheme in country schools • Develop community learning centres in (some) schools • Trial discipline/welfare roles in needy schools • Trial student welfare and positive well-being whole school programs • Provide mentors for students in care • Involve Aboriginal education assistants in school decision making
107 sectors of the community are also evident. And third, there are several levels at which reorientation in relation to governance is recommended:
• At the state163 office level, in terms of leadership, planning, coordination and increased resources to enhance teaching and learning;
• At the inter-agency level, in terms of greater cooperation with other government departments and agencies;
• At the District Office level, in terms of the coordination and provision of services to schools; and
• At the school level, in terms of schools becoming centres of professional leadership and innovation.
But before moving to explore these issues, principals, teachers and parents have made a range of comments to the Inquiry about aspects of governance and administration not dealt with directly above. These views are presented below, before the chapter addresses additional changes in educational governance and administration in NSW that might assist individual schools and the system as a whole to function more effectively.
VIEWS PUT TO THE INQUIRY
Concerns about centralised decision making
A recurring tension in writings on governance exists between the centralisation and decentralisation of activities164. Both trends in NSW education have been commented on critically to the Inquiry. This section presents views concerning the problems of centralisation in the NSW education system; a later section explores the problems of devolution. Some observers felt that the DET State Office was too remote from schools. A rural high school principal wrote:
There is perception that the DET has again become top heavy, with a disproportionate number of people in Head Office, isolated from the ‘real world’ of the classroom. Schools are then inundated by various policies and programs issuing from Head Office, with no apparent overall plan to ensure that there are real outcomes, within an achievable timeframe, in schools. Again, non-school based staff should be there to support the work happening in schools.
163 The State Office refers to the administrative hierarchy that manages the overall public education system, which is sometimes referred to as the head office. There are also 40 District Offices that are an integral part of the State Office, although as they each have responsibility for schools in a particular locality, they are in some sense administrative units in their own right. 164 See for example Lingard, B., Knight, J. and Porter, P. (1995) “Restructuring Australian Schooling: Changing conceptions of top-down and bottom-up reforms”, In B. Limerick and H. Nielsen (Eds.) School and Community Relations: Participation, Policy and Practice. London: Harcourt Brace and Company; and Sharp, F. (1992) “Restructuring school education in New South Wales, Australia, 1988-1991”, paper presented to the annual conference of the Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration, Hong Kong, August 1992.
108
A country shire council argued:
Bureaucracy needs to be brought back to the regional level. A centralised system based on inflexible formulae does not meet the individual needs of all public schools and their students, particularly in rural communities. Administrators need to come out to the schools to understand the impact of their decisions.
A high school principal wrote:
At present schools are reeling under a barrage of policies to be implemented, most of which are not necessarily priorities for the individual schools.
There was a view that change to a more open, consultative approach may be needed. A member of the public from Sydney noted the need for greater involvement of all parties in educational planning and provision:
Any attempt to deal with complex and evolving systems requires multiple strategies (mechanisms) combined with feedback and adjustments, which means that some strategies will change, some will be dropped, and new ones explored. Surely we need a dynamic approach to the planning and implementation of education with the department, educationists, teachers, students, and the community involved.
A principal of a Central Coast high school lamented the continuation of the centralised staffing system that sees the majority of classroom teachers matched with schools by computer, based on a series of codes, or allocated schools on initial employment:
Schools have little control over their staffing unless appointment is by merit and even then the selection criteria and codes required are very restrictive.
In addition, the existence of a series of centrally mandated formulae that determine exactly how many teachers and support staff schools get was the cause of some disappointment. It was argued, for example, that formulae cannot always take account of the specific circumstances of different schools. A senior school assistant at a central school said:
Within our own school, our student enrolments in the Primary Department for next year will drop below 201. One of our SAS staff, who is permanent 0.8 (4 days per week), will have her time reduced to 0.4 (2 days per week). This particular staff member has acquired technological expertise and is able to rectify many of the minor problems with the computer system in the Primary Department. None of the teaching staff have this expertise …
A South Coast public school lamented the ‘all or nothing’ nature of allocations for teaching and non-teaching principals, such that schools with 159 students are only given one day a week release for their principal, and those with 160 students have a full-time non-teaching principal.
109 Leadership and advocacy by the DET
There was a strong view among parents and teachers, often raised at public hearings, that there was a lack of leadership in the DET. It was felt for example that the government, and by implication the DET, had not supported public education to the extent that it should have done. A women’s association wrote:
Media and government lack of support for the public schools has damaged the public perception of public education and this should be rectified. The media should be enlisted to praise the very good work done in public schools and give encouragement and support to the many excellent staff. The sale of public schools for private development is further destroying public confidence in Education Department policies.
Others shared the view that the DET has failed to publicise successes in the public education system. A parent wrote:
Where principals have successfully turned schools around so that they have become successful – such as [two schools in the inner west] – these appear not to have been documented or used as role models.
A district superintendent who felt that there was little interest at the top of the Department in what those on the ground had to say observed: “I don’t think there’s any heart in the system anymore.” As indicated earlier in this report, there was also deep resentment at the way in which government school teachers have been attacked by the government and the Department in recent salary cases.
On a different matter, the Inquiry recognises that the DET is not directly responsible for the government’s policies in relation to non-government schools. But in important ways, because of flow-on effects to government schools that are discussed in the next chapter, in meetings and submissions the Department was often held accountable. The DET was seen as somehow not fighting hard enough over the past 15 years for public education. And finally, there was concern that the DET had allowed a situation to evolve in which accountability was considered more important than good educational practices. A retired high school principal wrote of a concern that financial accountability may be becoming more important than educational accountability to the DET, not least in relation to its own activities:
There must be more educational accountability at all levels. Secondary schools often have two financial audits a year to ensure school finances are in order, but there is an almost total lack of an educational audit to ensure quality education is being delivered to students, and even less to ensure the quality of services delivered to school, by the DET.
Concerns about devolution of resources to districts and schools
Devolution refers to the location of some forms of decision-making and financial and administrative control at the District or school level. Devolution occurred as part of reforms to NSW public education in the early 1990s through implementation of the Scott
110 report165, when schools were organised into clusters of schools and then into larger districts. There is some question as to whether current school districts operate only as arms of the centre or as meaningfully devolved units. A rural high school principal wrote:
The present District structure of the DET has both positive and negative characteristics … There is often difficulty in getting the support required in a particular areas within a short period of time … Schools still have a cynical view about many in District roles, extending to questioning whether District Office staff are aware that they are supposed to be supporting schools. The numbers of schools within each District means that these staff are stretched to the limit in providing equity of access, and management becomes crisis based. The previous cluster model was starting to work well when it was restructured.
A rural teachers’ association said:
The leaner and, at times, meaner schools District structure that now exists bears little or no relationship to the original proposals of the Scott Report that started the process.
A major element of devolution under the Scott reforms was school global budgets. The global budget incorporates funds for the day to day management of schools and is essentially a per capita amount, although the size of schools and their location are also included166. Devolution enabled schools, for the first time, to determine how they spent these funds. In discussions with the Inquiry, however, mixed feelings were expressed about global budgeting. There is a widespread view that over the years, the global budget had been squeezed tighter, expected to absorb more and more things without commensurate increases. The NSW Secondary Principals’ Council wrote:
The current resourcing of public schools does not adequately provide for textbooks, teaching equipment, the learning environment and technology support. Principals are keenly aware that the global funding of schools is not only insufficient, but also does not adequately reflect changing and increasing cost burdens on schools.
A regional P&C District Council said simply: “There is a clear need for a review of the global budget provision.” A regional parents and teachers association commented on the shifting of responsibility from government to the school:
Much accountability for services, for resources, curriculum implementation and training and development has moved from government to the school – school based management. The impact is that schools are implementing more policies with the same funding. This is becoming the school’s problem not that of the government.
165 School-centred education: Building a more responsive State school system. Report of the Management Review: New South Wales Education Portfolio (1990) Director: Brian W. Scott. The Management Review: NSW Education Portfolio. 166 The global budget of each school includes money for textbooks, library resources, professional development, computer maintenance and repair, payment of utilities, office administration, the Principal’s fund (for needy students), advertising, minor maintenance and repair work, security, casual replacement staff (to cover staff who are sick or on leave), leasing (e.g of photocopiers) and the like.
111 While as indicated above, NSW still has a predominantly centralised staffing system, merit selection procedures introduced in the 1990s for promotions positions and positions that are hard to fill allow local selection of staff, involving the principal, a Teachers Federation representative and a parent representative. There is considerable dissatisfaction with the new system. As a girls high school on the north shore said:
Teachers have grown cynical about the perceived inadequacies of the merit promotion system. Fewer positions are available on lateral transfer as principals tighten the requirements through the manipulation of the codes. Some see nepotism as rife in the system as well as a lack of rigour in the examination of resumés.
A Sydney primary school teacher said:
The process whereby promotions positions in schools are filled by advertisement and panel selection has many flaws. It favours those who are good at ‘selling themselves’ and disadvantages those who are just genuine, honest people. Those teachers seeking promotion become preoccupied with anything which will make their resumé look good and may not be good classroom teachers. In fact, there is very little opportunity to establish this with the current process.
School level governance
Finally, there is governance at the school level. Pivotal to the success of schools is the principal. There was widespread agreement among teachers, principals and district superintendents that the role of the principal has expanded exponentially in recent years, and is now reaching breaking point. Principals are expected to be all things to all people. As a teacher-librarian said:
A principal has to be an educator, administrator, leader and chief protagonist for the school, but also has to spend much of her/his time attending to plumbing, finance juggling, filling in reports, organising the practical side of installing technology and coping with its myriad breakdowns (without adequate funds). The Principal must encourage his or her staff, usually by example, and also has to support and be a friend to many of the children and their parents in these times of social stress.
A high school principal complained to the Inquiry that an hour a day was spent in just responding to and forwarding emails from the DET. A senior teacher at a south Sydney public school commented that principals, contrary to a major aspiration of the Inquiry (see Chapter 2), have become “largely site managers with little time to engage in educational leadership activities”. A submission from a Sydney girls high school added:
Principals and deputies spend a ridiculous amount of time on vandalism, maintenance and property issues, especially in old, run down schools.
There was also general agreement on the solution to the problem, especially for larger schools, as this school continued:
112 Schools need bursars and financial managers on reasonable salaries to administer the complexities of school finances, freeing educational leaders to concentrate on curriculum, teaching and learning, student welfare, promoting public education and supporting students with special needs.
In important ways the role of school administrative support (SAS) staff and that of principals are interconnected. Not surprisingly, a number of submissions focusing on SAS staff also recommended a school bursar or equivalent position as a solution to the increased financial load experienced by SAS staff, since the introduction of global budgeting, new technology and the GST. A country high school noted in relation to senior school assistants (the most senior administrative position in schools) that:
There just aren’t enough paid hours in the day as most senior school assistants in high schools work well past the 6 and a ¼ hours each day and into the weekends to cover their workload. Their daily workload is not just administration. It covers areas of consultation with teaching and administrative staff, counselling, conflict resolution, grievances and everyday enquiries.
Of particular concern was the extent to which school support staff were no longer able to provide services to classroom teachers that were previously possible. A Sydney high school wrote:
Administrative staff have to deal with complex budgets, a range of income sources, expenditure types and accountabilities, as well as a huge volume of individual student transactions. The administrative support for teachers often is limited.
And finally, the role of parents and the community in school level governance is an important issue. Considering the important financial contribution of parents to public schools, it was surprising that parental involvement in the more serious matter of school governance was rarely mentioned in submissions to the Inquiry. In discussions with parents, the Inquiry came to the view that in many instances parental contribution to educational decision- making was tokenistic at best.
THE TENSION BETWEEN CENTRALISATION AND DEVOLUTION
While generalisations are always fraught, it is fair to say, consistent with many of the above comments, that in the last 15 years there have been two contradictory trends in NSW education. On the one hand, the early 1990s saw an increase in devolution of responsibilities to schools through the application of private sector management principles to the education system (the Scott report)167. On the other hand, the mid 1990s saw a move back towards centralisation, in the name of cost-cutting and efficiency.
The first phase involved ‘freeing up’ schools to manage their own resources, and to a lesser extent, teaching and learning, with the school considered the central organisational element in the system. Schools were made responsible for a school renewal plan, a global administrative budget, decisions concerning training and development, and staffing
167 School-centred education: Building a more responsive State school system (1990), Op. Cit.
113 (although this only happened to a limited extent). School councils were also encouraged, along with school community involvement in the appointment of principals and executive staff. To enable these changes to take place, a significant reduction in the size of the DET State Office was proposed, with its functions confined to policy development, corporate planning and coordination, and managerial oversight168. A new administrative tier, the school cluster (with about 14 schools in each cluster), was created between the 10 existing education regions and schools. School clusters were designed to directly support the educational activities of schools and be responsible for quality control. In a very short space of time, many of these changes were enacted. The Inquiry has met with a number of district superintendents, principals and classroom teachers who look back on this time of ‘bottom-up’ educational reform in NSW as exciting and rewarding. A former cluster director said ruefully, “I remember being told ‘you are a change agent!’”
Also part of the first phase of administrative change was the Carrick review, which focused on parental choice in schooling and freed up requirements for the registration of non-government schools, consistent with a belief in the value of the private sector169. The Carrick review led to the new Education Act (1990), and for the first time, to the inclusion in legislation of minimum curriculum requirements in NSW in terms of Key Learning Areas (KLAs). Importantly, it gave the Minister for Education the power to approve the new standards-based curriculum170.
The second phase of administrative change in NSW education came in the mid 1990s with the decision to reverse aspects of the Scott implementation. Both school clusters and regions were abolished, replaced by what was termed “a simplified two tier structure” that “eliminates duplication and waste and produces a leaner and simpler bureaucracy171.” In the place of regions and clusters, 40 school districts were created (with an average of 55 schools each), envisaged not as autonomous but as arms of the centre, ‘conduits’ of Head Office, as one district superintendent told the Inquiry. The administrative devolution to schools that had occurred under Scott, in particular global budgets, was retained, but the regional and local freedom to plan and manage teaching and learning that Scott had encouraged was curtailed. A more centralised, top-down system of governance was thus restored.
As indicated, there is a tension evident in recent educational reform in NSW between the centralisation of power and decision-making and decentralisation and devolution. There are good reasons for this tension. Those who defend centralisation argue that it is essential to the maintenance of equity in a large state like NSW, which has diverse geographical and socio-economic characteristics. Without central administration, inequities in the provision of teachers and other resources might prevail172. In a similar way, those who argue for a standard core curriculum point to the importance of equal opportunity – that all students in the state should be exposed to the same education, regardless of their geographical location. In NSW today, there remain strong elements of
168 Ironically, at around the same time, the government reduced the number of teachers in schools by 2300 and increased class sizes by one, see Sharp (1992) Op. Cit. 169 Report of the Committee of Review of New South Wales Schools. (1989) Chair: John Carrick. New South Wales Government. 170 Sharp (1992), Op. Cit. 171 Boston, K. (1995) The Structure and Organisation of the Department of School Education. Memorandum to all staff from the Director-General of School Education, August 1995, New South Wales Department of School Education, p. 2. 172 Sharp (1992), Op. Cit.
114 centralised control. School curricula and external examinations are developed centrally and imposed uniformly, notwithstanding discussions about how much of the curriculum needs to be uniform and where diversity should be allowed to flower173. Staffing decisions are also largely made centrally through a statewide staffing system. This provides incentives to teachers to work in hard to staff schools, in order to ensure teacher availability throughout the system.
But at a different level, the priorities of the current education system - whether it be the new HSC curriculum, standardised basic skills testing, information and communications technology, VET, student behaviour or child protection – are centralised in a rather different way. Since the 1990s, educational priorities have been much more influenced by political and/or economic considerations, and more subject to political mandate than in the past174. As one leading educationist has lamented:
The need for clear political ‘victories’ often carries with it the ‘need’ to do things differently in education. Policies, structures and programs must be noticeably ‘different’ to those devised by others, or those of the preceding regime. In education, where the time scale for effective change is so slow, this continual political profiling, through education, is disastrous175.
On the other hand, it is rightly claimed, consistent with the Scott reforms above, that since the 1990s schools have greater discretion than ever in how they spend their funds and therefore in what they can do. This is primarily because the global budget is a one-line budget that can be dispersed at the discretion of the principal. In addition, at the school level teachers have always had some discretion over what happens in the classroom, (such as lesson plans, the allocation of students to classes and choice of textbooks), subject to demands upon their time. And as indicated, individuals in executive positions in schools are now often selected through the merit selection process, which involves the participation of the school community176.
There is general agreement that allowing schools to manage themselves, at least to some extent, is beneficial. However, a number of observers have noted the conceptual blurring that occurs when devolution is under consideration. For example, moves to devolve more influence and decision making to schools can occur as part of a managerialist conception of education, in which school choice, schools viewed as enterprises like business organisations, and efficiency and accountability are central principles (such as the self- managing schools movement in Victoria and elsewhere). But devolution can also operate as a key element in the progressive tradition of democratising education and making it more locally responsive through greater parent and community involvement (significantly, also a strong movement in Victoria)177. There is a general view that the managerialist
173 This situation is similar to that in most states and territories in Australia, although some (such as the ACT and Queensland) do not have an external exam at the end of Year 12. 174 Beare, H. (1991) “The Restructuring of Schools and School systems: A Comparative Perspective”, in G. Harman, H. Beare, and G.F. Berkeley (Eds.) Restructuring School Management: Recent administrative reorganisation of public school governance in Australia, Australian College of Education, Canberra. 175 Hughes, P. (2002) “Educational Reform: A global perspective”, Principal Matters, 2-5. 176 See Promotion and Transfer: Procedures for Teachers and Merit Selection Procedures Manual (2002), NSW Department of Education and Training. 177 See for example, Ainley and McKenzie, Op. Cit., Lingard, Knight and Porter, Op. Cit., and Marginson, S. (1994) “Emerging patterns of education in Victoria: Anyone for a zero sum game?” in Schooling what Future? Balancing the Education Agenda, Deakin Centre for Education and Change, Deakin University, Victoria.
115 aspects of devolution have been predominant in recent times, and that they are not always transparent. Writing in 1995, three researchers claimed:
Over the past decade … there has been a shift from more democratic forms towards more managerialist constructions of devolution. The general tendency has been to[wards] more top-down control as against the trends of the preceding decade, where the move was towards bottom-up approaches. What is confusing is the fact that it is the contemporary top-down approach which characterises its reforms as ‘devolution’178.
In many ways it is the tension between the appearance of devolution and the reality of responsibility with limited degrees of freedom in public education that is causing much current dissatisfaction179. The question for the Inquiry in relation to these developments is ‘how can the best possible educational practices be encouraged to flower in the current political and economic environment?’ Complex systems such as public education are generally considered to need both central control and direction and some degree of devolution; neither alone is effective, as has been argued throughout this report. The weakness of centralisation is that it tends towards over-control. In complex organisations, for example, edicts emanating from the centre (or the top) cannot make things change in any direct way (except for very simple things)180. This has implications for activities such as strategic planning, which often tend to be top-down exercises that founder when other levels of the organisation fail to identify with them. Decentralisation and local control are also important, but not if they operate in ignorance of the priorities set by the centre. Rather, all parts of a system must connect with one another181. The implication for public education is that there needs to be coordination between different levels of governance – in NSW, between State Office, school districts and individual schools. Schools that ignore wider structures will become insular and vulnerable to destabilisation (e.g. loss of key personnel). School districts that are not linked closely to the centre and also to schools will not be maximally effective. A State Office that does not listen closely to what is happening on the ground will become increasingly irrelevant and resented. Any level of governance that ignores the others will suffer. In particular, the Inquiry sees District Offices as both the weak link and potential strength in the current governance structure of the DET. At worst, District Offices operate only as ‘nodes of the centre’, bringing principals together to announce new priorities, or feeding information on school performance down to schools. At best, they are a dynamic resource that can be drawn upon by schools to provide educational leadership, professional development, curriculum consultation, expert assistance for students with behavioural and learning difficulties, and a range of staff welfare matters.
As Table 12.1 above indicates, the Inquiry has already made a range of recommendations that are quite specific as to the locus of responsibility. Some are directed at the State
178 Lingard, Knight and Porter, Op. Cit., p. 88. 179 A number of observers see the trend to more managerialist forms of devolution, consistent with privatisation, as also ideologically driven, as part of a broader redefinition of the relation between the individual and the state. This is reflected in smaller government, reduced expenditure on public education, increased expenditure on private education and a shift away from state responsibility to individual responsibility in relation to health, education and welfare. See for example, Blackmore, J. (1994) “Devolution and the ‘new’ disadvantage”, in Schooling What Future? Balancing the Education Agenda. Op. Cit. 180 Fullan, M. ((1993) Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform. London: The Falmer Press. 181 This is consistent with work on what makes organisations operate effectively, or on what makes a ‘learning organisation’, Ibid.
116 Office, some at the district level, and many at the school level, although in all cases, they will only be effectively implemented if they result in linkages between all three levels of governance. For the purposes of analysis, the remainder of this chapter will examine the three levels of governance separately – the DET State Office, District Offices and schools.
THE DET STATE OFFICE
In terms of overall governance, the DET State Office is responsible for a massive enterprise. In fact it is often claimed that it operates one of the largest public school systems in the world. Briefly, the State Office of the DET is made up of 55 directorates and units located in 33 city, metropolitan and country locations throughout NSW. On the schooling side, State Office is also responsible for 40 District Offices, and in 2001, 2,225 schools, with 756,740 students enrolled182. The latest staffing figures, for 2000, indicated that in NSW government schools, there were about 50,000 teaching and 12,000 non- teaching equivalent full-time staff183. In addition, on the TAFE side, DET State Office is responsible for 11 institutes with 130 campuses, serving the needs of over half a million students per annum. The chart on below is a simplified version of one taken from the Department’s 2001 Annual Report.
182 Figures taken from Annual Report 2001, NSW Department of Education and Training. 183 Figures from National Report on Schooling in Australia: 2000, Appendix 1, Statistical Annex, which gives the latest figures for teaching and nonteaching staff in government schools in NSW. http://online.curriculum.edu.au/anr2000/template/html/downloads/anr2000_annex_stat.pdf
117 This chart indicates that there are currently four main organisational ‘arms’ of the Department. These are the two operational arms of Schools and TAFE, and the two organisational support arms of Corporate Services and Strategic Planning and Regulation.
This schematic representation of the Department follows the convention of a two- dimensional portrayal of a series of organisational units. There is nothing technically wrong with this depiction. However, in the Inquiry’s view it is more than a conventional oversimplification. In the case of the DET, this skeletal diagram so accurately captures the actual unintegrated functioning of the various organisational units as to warrant consideraton of an alternative representation of the DET’s central purposes and the ways in which organisational units can collaborate to achieve them. By more closely aligning the organisational chart with the direction-setting strategic plan discussed in Chapter 2 and elaborated on in this chapter, a conventional observance of authority rankings might be converted into purposeful change. For example, an alternative depiction of the organisation might place schools and TAFE campuses and the key services they provide at the centre (rather than disconnected and at the periphery), and show how the operational arm of the Department and the two organisational support arms singly and in combination work to enable the successful provision of key services. The very act of formulating this more integrated representation of the Department would be a useful contribution to making a unity of presently unsynchronised directorates and units.
Even with such a reorientation, it is extremely difficult to see how one government department can effectively manage such a huge operation. That is why in Chapter 10 the Inquiry recommended a number of ‘tests’ of the viability of the TAFE/School Education amalgamation. It is vital that the recommended measures be pursued with enthusiasm to see if the originally contemplated synergies can be realised. That will be a formidable test of the DET’s management capacities. If the goal of effective TAFE/schools collaboration proves to be administratively unattainable, then the DET should return to a focus on the public school system.
Leadership and planning
Leadership is both symbolic and actual. In recent years, there have been some clear examples of real leadership exhibited by the DET. These include its program to include students with disabilities in mainstream schools, its work on value added data and ways of using this in schools, its support of VET in schools, and its work on child protection. But there are also examples where leadership has been lacking or subordinated to political considerations, such as the implementation of the new HSC, the restructuring of secondary schooling in some districts, and the limited provision of professional development funds in school global budgets. In the context of more competition among government schools in recent years, and increasing government funds and rising enrolments in non-government schools, public school parents and teachers look to the DET for a strong and vigorous advocacy for and on behalf of public education. Sadly, this leadership is not always apparent.
Comments have been presented above to the effect that the State Office of the DET is to a greater or lesser degree not open to receiving critical information from districts and schools and so is out of touch with what is happening on the ground. On the other hand, the Inquiry has spoken with many officials in the DET who are clearly keen to influence how things happen in schools and to improve them. Many also recognise the need for a
118 cultural change within the Department to re-orient it both internally and externally to focus more directly on teaching and learning. In one sense, there seems to be a disjunction between many of the people in the DET and its current organisational structure and functioning.
Adding to this is a strong sense that the Department tends to be reactive and non- consultative rather than proactive and open to input at the planning level. This has been documented earlier in the report in relation to issues such as school restructuring, but is also evident in recent initiatives to address the shortage of casual teachers and building refurbishment, where only at the point of near crisis has concerted action been taken. In addition, political imperatives exercise considerable influence. For example, in response to a perceived increase in violence in schools, in May 2002, one month after a public meeting discussed the issue, a new directorate named “Safety and Security” had been created and subsequently appeared on the DET organisation chart, as part of the responsibility of the Assistant Director-General, Secondary Education184. This represents an extremely efficient response to a perceived problem. But teachers and parents become cynical when they see other pressing needs (for example, for HSC textbooks) go unmet because they do not attract the same degree of political commitment. The impacts of four yearly electoral cycles are also lamented by senior officials and teachers alike, as tending to distort priorities.
In terms of leadership and planning, the DET has been reluctant to undertake a broad consultative planning exercise on the longer-term future directions of public education in NSW, limiting its focus to shorter term strategic planning. In comparison, the NSW Secondary Principals’ Council and the Australian Primary Principals’ Association have both undertaken futures exercises185. The Secondary Principals’ exercise involved consultation with a large group of principals as well as DET officials and university educators, and came to grips with the very significant projected changes in the organisation of teaching and learning expected in the future, including the need for more innovative teaching practices and more flexible learning pathways and learning environments. The Australian Primary Principals’ Association surveyed government school principals and focused on resources needed to sustain government primary education into the future.
The Department’s efforts in corporate and strategic planning have been significantly less forward looking and consultative. When the Inquiry asked a district superintendent about his role in planning, the response was “Yes, well – what can I say?”, adding that they had “once had a conference on it”. Another superintendent said “They’re not interested in hearing from us”. It is not that the DET is not involved in strategic planning – all government departments are. It has produced several documents, including “NSW Public Schools: Strategic Directions 2002-2004”, an orange wall chart that is displayed near the front office of many schools, and the DET ICT [Information and Communications Technology] Strategic Plan, 2001-2004186. The Strategic Directions wall chart was
184 Information and organisation chart dated 29 August 2002 provided by the DET. 185 Preferred Futures for Public Secondary Education in NSW (1999) NSW Secondary Principals’ Council; Angus, M. and Olney, H. (2001) Our Future: Report of a Survey of Australian Government Primary School Principals, Australian Primary Principals’ Association. 186 NSW Department of Education and Training, NSW Public Schools: Strategic Directions 2002-2004, http://www.det.nsw.edu.au/aboutus/strategy2002_04.htm. This document is also discussed briefly in Chapter 2. The context for the public schools strategic directions document is set out in an unpublished document provided to the Inquiry by the DET entitled “Operating Environment for the NSW Department of Education and
119 developed in consultation with peak groups in education (representatives of parents, the NSW Teachers Federation, Aboriginal and ethnic groups and senior officials in the DET) during 1991, and provided to district superintendents in draft form for comment, although few chose to give input187. The chart is framed as a series of general commitments in relation to student educational success, learning environments, teaching and educational leadership and management. Specific goals include: increased HSC completion rates, improved levels of student, parent and staff satisfaction, enhanced status and quality of the teaching workforce, and improved school leadership and management. These are all laudable aims.
But the Strategic Directions chart is also surprising. First, there is no focus on the specifics of how these aims are to be met. The chart states clearly that it presents “the priorities that will be the focus of our work over the next three years”. It then says “the responsibility of schools is to transform these strategies into actions that are appropriate for their individual needs in order to produce the best opportunities and outcomes for students.” But through what practices? Second, it is not clear that ‘schools’ have endorsed the document or simply been handed it. Third, the document is an invitation to do similar things better rather than to question fundamental purposes and emphases. It gives no sense that there is anything in need of review in relation to the way schools are organised and managed or with respect to curriculum and pedagogy. And fourth, the Inquiry has met few principals, teachers or DET officials who have referred to the Strategic Directions chart at all, and none that have presented it as influential in their work. It is not specific enough to gain the commitment of those who must implement it.
Documents such as this are symbols of top-down management. There are other ways of doing strategic planning, ways that require leadership, openness and a genuine willingness to be responsive to alternative visions and to change. These ways recognise that the process can be as important as the outcomes, and that giving people a stake in the future of an enterprise is enlivening. Education Queensland, which runs public schools in Queensland, undertook a futures planning exercise in this rather different way188. It involved the preparation of a discussion document that challenged, amongst other things, traditional notions of the way schools operate, the segmented nature of the curriculum, and the ‘narrow instrumental training’ that currently dominates teaching and learning. It invited participants to engage with these issues and to consider how they wanted Queensland public schools to look in the future189. As a result, a document entitled, 2010: A Future Strategy has been produced to provide the long-term framework for strategic planning. Amongst other things, this document says:
Central office and district staff are there to assist [schools] … to support innovation, responsiveness and flexibility. Schools have the primary role in
Training Strategic Plan”. See also NSW Department of Education and Training, DET ICT Strategic Plan 2001- 2004, http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/itc.pdf. 187 Information provided by officials in the DET. 188 See Education Queensland, 2010: A Future Strategy, http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/qse2010/pdf/strategy.pdf; Department of Education, “Summary of Consultations – 2010” http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/qse2010/pdf/summaryofconsultations.pdf; and Department of Education “2010 Written submissions – Stage Two”, http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/qse2010/pdf/writtensubmissions.pdf 189 Education Queensland also sought outside input from education researchers and academics, in order to ensure that its deliberations were based on best practice, and any implementation undertaken with a strong focus on evidence and evaluation. Some of these individuals took up key positions within the Education Department in order to guide progress towards substantial change.
120 developing appropriate learning programs and the primary responsibility for the relationship between schools and the community. This should determine the way central office allocates resources, develops policy, monitors performance and provides support. It needs new standards for communication with schools and for providing services to schools190.
Importantly, this document now forms the basis of a range of implementations in Queensland, including trials of new curricula. It is not just a ‘sit on the shelf’ publication. In Chapters 1 and 2 of this report, the Inquiry argued for a ten-year policy focus on pedagogy as the most important ingredient in school change and reform. It was also argued that the teacher professional community was the most important element in the change process. Recommendation 2.1 proposed that a Strategic Plan based on these priorities be developed by the DET. The discussion above suggests a possible modus operandi to achieve this, one that departs significantly from mechanisms used to date. In order to reinforce the importance of a new process to consider future directions for the DET and for NSW schools, a consultative exercise such as that undertaken by Education Queensland, but unique to NSW, should be undertaken. This would be quite distinct from the consultation process undertaken by the Public Education Inquiry. It would use the insights of the present report to engage the teachers and citizens of NSW in the exciting adventure of imagining possible educational futures. Such an exercise would require a major change in attitude on behalf of the DET State Office, but have a number of direct and indirect benefits:
• It would provide the conceptual framework for the enactment of Recommendation 2.1 of this report (for a strategic plan focused on pedagogy).
• It would send some clear messages to teachers, parents and the community about the DET’s strong commitment to the future of public education in NSW (something which is currently seen to be lacking).
• It would provide an opportunity for ordinary classroom teachers to voice their aspirations about the future teaching and learning environment, and so go some small way to restoring their sense of being professionally valued and respected.
• An exercise of the kind envisaged, undertaken in good faith, would signal a willingness on the part of the DET to confront the organisational, resourcing and professional implications of educating students for the 21st century.
It is not the Inquiry’s intention to recommend a major restructure of the Department of Education and Training in this chapter. However, to support the above-mentioned initiative, it is proposed that a Program Planning, Innovation and Evaluation Directorate be established. This should incorporate some of the current responsibilities of the Directorates of Strategic Information and Planning and Strategic Research that currently come under the Deputy Director-General, Strategic Planning and Regulation. It should also incorporate some of the activities currently located in the School Education Services Directorate, currently under the Deputy Director-General, Schools. In organisational terms the new directorate should be responsible directly to the Director-General, and act as a bridge between schools and long-term future planning. To ensure linkages with the
190 Education Queensland, 2010: A Future Strategy, Op. Cit., p. 9.
121 wider community, the new directorate should also work to a management advisory board. In including much of the current strategic research directorate in the new directorate, the Inquiry is also signalling a desire that in the future innovations are not trialled only to disappear, but genuinely evaluated, using multiple measures (not just BST results). The aim of the new directorate is to place long-term planning, research and innovation at the heart of the DET. Its initial focus should be to assess ways in which State Office can reorient itself to support schools and so enable the meaningful enactment of Recommendation 2.1 on the development of a strategic plan centred on pedagogy. Later, it should institute a program of research and evaluation to inform ongoing developments.
Recommendation 12.1 That the DET establish a Program Planning, Innovation and Evaluation Directorate, working to the Director-General, to spearhead its reorientation to servicing schools as professional learning communities. Further, that the DET show leadership by engaging in a futures exercise to be managed by the new directorate. This should be genuinely forward looking, consultative and responsive to the expertise of teachers in schools, academics, the community and District Offices. Cost: To be covered mainly by the transfer of existing positions, although secondments would be an essential element of staffing.
There are four additional areas in which leadership by the State Office of the DET can assist in revitalising public education in NSW. These are through:
• opening up information flows and increasing professional interchanges;
• instituting succession planning and enhanced leadership training;
• advocating on behalf of public education, including taking a constructive approach to industrial relations; and
• taking responsibility for appropriate regulation of non-government schools.
Each will be dealt with briefly, and specific recommendations made.
Information flows and professional interchanges
First, in relation to information flows, it is essential that the DET State Office increase the input it receives from District Offices and schools, so that the policies and procedures it develops are pertinent. At present, schools tend to have most contact with staff in the District Office, such as curriculum or student welfare and equity consultants, or with divisions within State Office in relation to specific issues such as maintenance or staffing. In terms of exchanges between school and district staff, there appears to be no mechanism whereby the richness of experience so garnered can inform policy and resourcing decisions further up the line. Of course, in the interests of orderly
122 management, a division of labour needs to be maintained between those who set policy and ‘on the ground’ practitioners. What is needed is the provision of means that are not too demanding of time for the practitioners to provide feedback and ideas for consideration by management. In theory, of course, consultants can let their superiors in District Office know about issues, and they can communicate things further where necessary. In practice, a number of District Offices have told the Inquiry that they feel disconnected from the wider system. The Inquiry has met District Office staff who have said that when they have tried to put up arguments, “we’re told to get back in our box”. At the level of the district superintendent, there appears to be significant variability in the networks into State Office developed by different individuals, and too few meetings of district superintendents as a group to function as a meaningful channel for input.
There is presently a strong sense in the DET of a separation of policy development and implementation rather than each informing the other in an ongoing loop. At the very top of the DET, a Management Board of five individuals (with support staff) currently oversees the entire education system (both schools and TAFE). To assist this body in its work, and to act as a clear channel of communication from schools and school districts, it is proposed that a larger management group be formed to focus specifically on school governance. This forum should include two district superintendents whose role would be to feed information from districts and schools into deliberations. The forum should meet regularly, for example, ten times per year.
Recommendation 12.2 That the DET establish a Schools Management Group comprised of the Director-General, the Deputy Director- General for Schools, representatives of the Directors- General for Corporate Services and Strategic Planning and Regulation, the new Assistant Director-General, Program Planning, Innovation and Evaluation, the four Assistant Directors-General in Schools Division and two District Superintendents, representing rural and metropolitan precincts. Cost: From within existing resources
One way of increasing mutual understanding across the system is to encourage exchanges of staff. At present, senior executive staff in the DET are expected to spend one week per year in schools, either teaching (where they have this background), or in other substantive capacities. This is to be commended and gives a degree of currency to State Office perspectives. There is, however, currently no management information system that can indicate which schools have been attended by State Office staff in recent times. Perhaps as a result, the Inquiry has visited schools with a strong reputation for excellence in an area (e.g. literacy, teaching refugees or assisting students with disabilities) that have not had a recent visit from anyone in State Office to see what they do and why it works.
Recommendation 12.3 That the Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate develop a more focused interchange program for the exchange of staff between State Office and District Offices and schools. In addition, that the Directorate establish an
123 information data base on staff and schools involved in the program, with a view to ensuring an appropriate spread of contact across different geographical locations and different parts of the DET. Cost: to be absorbed within current allocations
Succession planning and leadership training
Second, succession planning and leadership training are essential to any dynamic organisation, especially one as complex and multi-faceted as the DET. There is much evidence in the education literature on the critical role that principals play in creating the learning environment of their school, and in encouraging creative teaching and learning. The DET has gone some way towards recognising the importance of investing professional development time into its aspiring and existing school leaders. In 1998, the DET published its School Leadership Strategy, which has provided the context for leadership training in the Department since that time191. The strategy has four key elements:
• The School Leadership Preparation Program, which focuses on teachers aspiring to positions of leadership in schools, such as classroom teachers wishing to become head teachers, assistant or deputy principals and principals.
• The School Executive and Principal Induction Program, which is designed to support school executives in their first year of service.
• The School Executive Development Program, which provides ongoing professional development to existing school executives other than principals.
• The Principal Development Program, which assists existing principals.
These programs incorporate different combinations of seminars, conferences, individual learning components, workplace learning, professional portfolios, networking opportunities, mentoring, team leadership exercises and opportunities for work exchanges and formal study. Until now they have operated primarily for individuals who have already been promoted or who have indicated an interest in being promoted.
The Strategy has recently undergone review. Reasons for this include the need for the DET to undertake more succession planning for leadership positions, as the average age of teachers (and therefore of school executives) is such that many will retire in the next five to ten years. The Department also recognises the need to identify talented teachers early in their career and to target professional development opportunities to them in a more strategic way. This might include, for example, outlining different pathways such teachers might take to prepare them for leadership, and articulating the capabilities of very successful principals so that individuals can work towards acquiring the relevant skills and experiences. It might involve pairing aspiring leaders with successful principals, and developing skills profiles and training packages for school leaders taking up positions in different parts of the State.
191 School Leadership Strategy (1998) NSW Department of Education and Training.
124 The Inquiry is of the view that this kind of succession planning is overdue in the DET and must become a priority at every level of the system, but especially in schools and District Offices. In this context, the Inquiry has been surprised at the way in which district superintendents often seem to fall between development programs for school leaders and those for State Office staff, despite the existence of an induction program. The Inquiry believes that the District Office is well placed to coordinate much of this activity and to identify candidates for succession training. This is already occurring in some districts through Inter-district School Leadership groups established to help implement the current School Leadership Strategy.
Recommendation 12.4 That consistent with the current review of the DET Leadership Strategy, the DET institute a more strategically oriented succession planning and leadership training program for teachers and others aspiring to positions of leadership. This should include the identification of future school leaders and district superintendents. That the DET direct sufficient resources to this program with the goal of ensuring that no novice enters a leadership position without preparatory training and that sytem-wide and location- specific programs are put in place for aspiring, new and existing school executives. In recognition of the importance of this role, the DET should provide each school district with a sum of $30,000 per annum for leadership training, and encourage district superintendents to cooperate with other districts in the conduct of programs. Cost per annum: $1.2 million
Advocacy on behalf of public education
Third, in relation to advocacy on behalf of public education, advertisements on television notwithstanding, there has been a clear view expressed to the Inquiry that more needs to be done. This is not an issue that can only be solved with more money. It is rather a matter of the extent to which senior management in the DET believes in public education, believes in their teachers, and is willing to fight for public education both behind closed doors and in public. A commitment to retaining a strong public education system in NSW – on the part of the government or the DET - is not something that the public currently takes for granted. In fact, there is cynicism, some despair and real anger about the way in which the public education system has been run down in recent years, and at the impact this is having on teachers, students and learning.
School spectaculars and Education Week are important but they are not enough. Teachers out in the field, parents of children in public schools all over the state, and students themselves, need to feel that the public education they receive is the absolute best that the government of the day can afford. At a more personal level, Director- General’s awards for outstanding achievements of one kind and another, to schools, teachers and students, are also important, but the Inquiry has learned first hand that nothing beats a visit to a school and time taken to listen and learn.
125 Recommendation 12.5 That all organisational units in the DET include in their strategic assessment of all decisions, the impact on the standing of public education in NSW. (cost neutral)
There is one particular area in which the DET can take a lead in demonstrating its support for public education and for teachers in public schools. This is in agreeing to a framework for publicising details of negotiations for the next teacher salary agreement that seeks to avoid the destructiveness that characterised the last wage case. In this context, the Inquiry notes the recent staffing agreement between the Department and the NSW Teachers Federation192. This agreement indicates a willingness on the part of the Department and the Teachers Federation to work together to solve a number of ongoing problems. Advice from both parties indicates that discussions are so far proceeding smoothly and constructively.
Recommendation 12.6 That the DET and the NSW Teachers Federation jointly develop a protocol clearly outlining the parameters for publicising details of the next wage negotiations, with the aim of avoiding the negative publicity that has occurred in the past. (cost neutral)
Requirements for non-government schools
Fourth, in considering governance at the State Office level in the DET, it is necessary to consider the position of non-government schools in NSW. An active involvement by the DET State Office in determining appropriate requirements for non-government schools is essential both to restore faith that the Department values a strong public as well as private education system, and in the interests of fairness and transparency in terms of decision- making. One implication of the earlier recommendation in this report to move the Office of the Board of Studies back into the DET is that current arrangements for the registration and monitoring of non-government schools will again come under the Department’s umbrella.
The Education Act (1990) makes provision for the registration of non-government schools in NSW. Unless an application for exemption on the grounds of conscientious objection has been approved, non-government schools and school systems must be registered by the Minister for Education and Training, on the recommendation of the Board of Studies193. Once registered, non-government schools are entitled to receive funds from both the Commonwealth and State government. Prior to the dismantling of the New Schools Policy194 by the Commonwealth government in 1996, proposed new non- government schools were required to comply with the principle of ‘planned educational provision’ if they wished to receive recurrent funds from the Commonwealth. Under the
192 “Agreement between the NSW Department of Education and Training and the NSW Teachers Federation on Staffing of NSW Public Schools”, March 2002. Obtained by the Inquiry from officers in the DET. 193 Registered non-government schools must also apply to the Board of Studies for accreditation if they wish to present candidates for the School Certificate and Higher School Certificate. 194 See for example Administrative Guidelines for Commonwealth New Schools Committees and Joint Planning and Co-ordinating Committees (1993), Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training.
126 system of ‘planned provision’, schools were discouraged from establishing in any location where they would create an oversupply of student places and unnecessary and costly duplication of facilities195. New non-government schools that did not comply could be registered to operate as a school but receive no Commonwealth funding and minimum State funding. Since the restoration of the automatic connection between registration and funding in 1996, non-government schools receive public funds even if they operate next door to an existing government or non-government school196. They are also not required to meet minimum enrolment criteria or to publish annual reports. In addition, the financial probity of such schools is not subject to public scrutiny, although schools are required to complete a financial questionnaire in relation to Commonwealth funding, and to certify that funds have been spent appropriately, in relation to State funding197.
In response to substantial increases in funding from the Commonwealth government and growth in the number of non-government schools in NSW, a review was commissioned in early 2001 to develop a framework for the establishment, funding and regulation of non- government schools in the state. This review (the Grimshaw review) published its first report in April 2002, and made a number of recommendations with which the Inquiry is in full agreement198. These include the requirement that teachers in all non-government schools be appropriately qualified or supervised, and that all schools in receipt of government funding make public an annual report that includes information on the academic performance of students and “summary financial information showing income from all sources, including State and Commonwealth funding, and expenditure”199.
However, in three areas, the Inquiry is left with concerns. First, the Grimshaw review recommended that attention once again be given to the impact of new non-government schools on surrounding schools, but regrettably did not make this a condition of registration, and did not make it subject to planning decisions in respect of public education. Second, the review recommended the establishment of a Non-Government Schools Council, established through legislation. This Council would advise the Minister on reporting requirements of non-government schools, monitor these reports, and make recommendations to the Minister on the establishment of new non-government schools and the expansion of existing ones. And third, the Inquiry believes that all schools in NSW should meet anti-discrimination requirements.
Recommendation 12.7 That in moving to implement aspects of the Grimshaw review Part 1, the DET tighten requirements in relation to
195 Morrow, A., Blackburn, J. and Gill, J. “Public education: From public domain to private enterprise?” (1998) In A. Reid (Ed.) Going Public: Education policy and public education in Australia. Deakin, ACT: Australian Curriculum Studies Association; 196 The Inquiry has been informed of one school district where local council land adjacent to a primary school was sold to a private school to establish a secondary school, despite the proximity of a local high school. The smallest registered school in NSW, according to the Board of Studies, has two students. Current requirements for registering non-government schools are outlined in the Manual for the Registration and Accreditation of Individual Non-Government Schools in New South Wales. Revised November 2000. Sydney, Board of Studies, New South Wales. 197 The Board of Studies encourages non-government schools to be incorporated, and therefore subject to the Australian Securities and Investment Commission. About 5% do not comply. 198 Review of Non-Government Schools in NSW, Report 1 (2002). NSW Department of Education and Training (Office of the Minister), http://www.det.nsw.edu.au/reviews/ngsreview/welcome.htm. 199 See Review of Non-Government Schools in NSW, Op. Cit., http://www.det.nsw.edu.au/reviews/ngsreview/7_educfi.htm.
127 ‘cross-sectoral planning’ to make state government funding of non-government schools conditional on there being no negative impact on existing schools. In addition, that the DET oppose the establishment of a Non-Government Schools Council on the grounds that the DET itself is the most appropriate agency for determining requirements for non-government schools and whether or not they meet minimal conditions for registration.
DISTRICT OFFICES
District offices perform a pivotal role in the current system of governance of school education in NSW. District superintendents have listed the following as key activities and responsibilities in interviews with the Inquiry:
• To maintain standards and to provide educational services that enable every child to excel in his or her way;
• To promote public education;
• To reflect the priorities and plans of State Office and to assist schools to link their plans with those of the centre;
• To improve the quality of teaching in district schools;
• To work with schools in the implementation of the leadership strategy and other training and development programs;
• To provide expert advice to schools on aspects of the curriculum, including in relation to literacy and numeracy;
• To provide a range of student services and equity programs to schools and students, including home school liaison, community development, behaviour teams, Aboriginal education, special education, early intervention, guidance and student welfare;
• To operate as registered training organisations (RTOs) in relation to VET in schools and to strengthen networks with TAFE; and
• To provide administrative and personnel support to schools and teachers (including professional support for principals, industrial assistance in terms of efficiency programs for nonperforming teachers, occupational health and safety and rehabilitation services to teachers).
When District Offices were established in 1996, the Director-General informed the District Superintendents that their role was not to be change-agents at the school level, but to provide services for schools and teachers. The point of the comment was to separate the new role from that of the Cluster Directors who existed prior to the restructuring. Cluster Directors were primarily conceived as change-agents, working closely with a small number of schools, to assist the process of school renewal. They were required to
128 develop “close, regular, mutually supportive relationships with principals and other staff”, to “provide ‘at the elbow’ help when needed”, and generally to be “a stimulus to educational activities and interchange close to the school”200. District Superintendents and their staff, in contrast, were to work with teachers “to respond to school needs and implement the educational priorities of government”, to provide “one-stop-shop support for schools”, and to coordinate “training and development . . . in the context of system priorities”201. The District Office, therefore, was created as an integral part of a unitary State Office with a primary responsibility for supporting schools to implement central priorities and to maintain a line of accountability back to the centre.
The District Office is a crucial point of intersection between the school and the State Office. On the one hand they are well placed to alert State Office to important issues. This chapter has already recommended District Office involvement in a proposed Schools Management Group in the Department, and their inclusion in succession planning and leadership training. On the other hand, without minimising the leadership role of the school principal in the process of school reform, the Inquiry believes that the District Office can make a major contribution to the revitalisation of pedagogy discussed earlier in this report (Chapter 2). From this site, DET officers and consultants can work effectively with principals and teachers to solve issues of pedagogy and trial innovative solutions, adapted to local school conditions. The focus should be upon developing the professional learning of teachers, and increasing their capacity for self-reflection and innovation.
Do District Offices currently have the powers and capacities to play this role? In the seven years since they were established, District Offices have to some extent come to reflect the geographic and social character of the areas they serve. While this has produced a degree of variation in how they operate and relate to schools, they are still largely constrained by the State Office requirements described above. Although some District Superintendents have developed a distinct pedagogical role, in general District Offices function primarily as conduits for ‘system priorities’ such as literacy and numeracy, external tests, and the new standards curriculum framework. Furthermore, on a day to day basis, an inordinate amount of District resources are spent reacting to conflicts and crises around student welfare and behaviour, attendance, and complaints about teaching staff. While some principals report productive relations with District staff around teaching and learning, it was more typical for the Inquiry to be told that the District Office is remote and unaware of the particular character and needs of the school in question.
The strong emphasis upon accountability and the delivery of new policies and syllabuses also shapes the way that district consultants can interact with schools and teachers. From the perspective of the school, often consultants are perceived as ‘experts’ who disseminate information down the line to classroom teachers. This transmission model of teacher learning, where teachers are all too often regarded as passive recipients of knowledge, is generally not the most effective way to engage teacher learning communities in the task of pedagogical reflection and change. There is some evidence that a more situated approach that regards teachers as active agents in their own learning and as sources of learning for their peers is more effective in sustaining school level change. The justification for this view has been presented at several points throughout this report, especially in Chapter 2. This approach requires District Superintendents and
200 School-centred education: Building a more responsive State school system (1990) Op. Cit. pp 80-84. 201 NSW Department of School Education (1995) Proposed District and State Office Functions, Internal Memorandum, Sydney, NSW: Department of School Education.
129 consultants to work closely with teacher leaders within schools to create ongoing public conversations about teaching and learning. It means gaining the confidence of teachers and understanding their learning needs in the light of their prior knowledge and experience. This does not mean abandoning system priorities, such as the mandatory assessment regime, but rather situating these requirements in the classroom, the teachers' daily practice and the students' work. A recent study described the character of this relationship:
Learning involved teachers participating in inquiry and reflection about their practice and in solving pedagogical problems that were meaningful to teachers as learners. These conversations, grounded in teachers' own attempts to reform practice, were understood as opportunities for teachers to work together to figure out what practicing the standards might involve. They afford opportunities for teachers to gain the insights of others on the practical problems of putting reform ideas into practice and construct solutions to these problems together. Knowledge was not so much a commodity imported through the words and deeds of experts, but constructed in part through the reflection and thinking enabled by the interaction among peers about their practice and guided by the ideas and questions posed by experts202.
To cite a practical example, when the Inquiry visited Auburn Girls High School it was able to witness such a process at work. The school, which is located in metropolitan Sydney, has around 700 students of whom 95% are from Non-English speaking backgrounds. In 1994, the Executive and teaching staff used Disadvantaged Schools Program funds to release one of their colleagues from classroom teaching to research middle school strategies and to recommend new directions for the school. After visiting schools in Victoria and NSW, the teacher recommended that the focus should be on collaborative learning and the formation of teacher learning teams and student learning teams. Over the next few years, the teacher learning teams were established beginning with Year 7 teachers and moving on to later years. Each cross faculty team of four teachers plus the team coordinator met for one period a week to discuss a three point agenda - literacy strategies, cooperative learning and student behaviour and welfare. At each meeting, one of the team would report back to the group on their experience in trying a particular cooperative learning skill or literacy strategy with their own students.
In 2000, Auburn Girls High School was invited by its District Superintendent to be one of four schools to participate in a productive pedagogies project supported by the District Office, the Priority Schools Funding Program, staff from the University of Technology Sydney and the DET State Office. Building on the professional learning community that had been created through the teacher learning teams, and with the support of District Office consultants and university researchers, the staff are currently working through the different elements that contribute to productive classroom teaching and learning. As with the earlier work, there is a strong focus upon teacher research, feedback to peers, and discussion in teacher learning teams. A teacher summed up to the Inquiry her assessment of the result:
We have a culture in the school where we are all learning. We aren't experts but we are all sharing. We have a diversity of people at meetings - head
202 Spillane, J. (2002) Local theories of teacher change: the pedagogy of district policies and programs, Teachers College Record, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 393.
130 teachers, first year out teachers - all sharing. Just because you have been teaching for 30 years doesn’t mean that you know everything about teaching. A first-year out teacher can come in and blow you away with how good they are, and how they can get the kids on board. We are used to doing that all the time, and sharing ideas, and that’s very important because in a lot of other places teachers don’t get that opportunity for professional reflection.
While the changes at Auburn Girls High School cannot be mandated from above, they can be encouraged and supported by a District Office that works closely and strategically with principals and teachers to achieve pedagogical change. The Inquiry recommends that the role of the District Office should be redefined to include as a central element a responsibility to work with professional learning communities to improve pedagogy. This shift in focus implies a change in the pattern of resource allocation within the District Office. The current pattern supports a fragmented accumulation of programs and activities. The consultant's time is typically divided across a broad range of operational tasks, and overall, the ratio of teachers to consultants is very high. In the face of these pressures, consultants have little choice but to adopt transmission approaches to teacher learning instead of the more effective, but more labour intensive, models of change discussed above. District Superintendents also find it difficult to sustain a coherent focus on pedagogical and learning issues. They have very limited discretion over the selection and mix of the consultants who work within the District.
Recommendation 12.8 That the role of the District Office should be redefined to include as a central element the task of working with professional learning communities to improve pedagogy. As part of this redefinition, the District Superintendent should be required to develop a district plan (within the framework of the DET’s overall strategic planning) that articulates educational priorities for the district. In addition, the superintendent should be given greater discretion in the selection and mix of consultancy staff within the District Office. This should include the capacity to determine the seniority and mix of staff to meet the educational priorities of the District, up to a maximum of 10% of all District Office staff. (cost neutral)
SCHOOLS
Implicit in what has gone before is a belief that it is above all at the school level that governance that enables flexible and creative opportunities for teaching and learning needs to occur. It is the responsibility of the remainder of the education system to assist schools in undertaking this core business. The aim is to assist principals in becoming the most effective leaders possible. In considering governance at the school level in this section, the Inquiry will examine the resources available to the school in the exercise of its primary functions. This will be considered under the four headings: community participation in school governance, school staffing (teachers), school staffing (school administrative support staff), and school global budgets. The first of these concerns is how the school principal and school as a whole involves its local community in educational decision-making. The other three are not currently determined at the school level. The
131 Inquiry recognises that the provision of staff and a global budget is a responsibility of State Office. However, our interest is in the impact of staff and budget considerations on the operation of schools, and so the perspective brought to bear on these questions is in terms of school level governance. In a flexible and responsive system, each school’s needs in relation to staff and resources would exercise real influence in decisions made. While the recommendations of this section are directed at centralised systems within the DET, the hope is that they will begin a conversation between the centre and schools about how best to allocate resources in ways that meet school requirements. In what follows, while an outline of how different resources are allocated to schools is provided, the chapter focuses on a small number of specific anomalies that have been brought to the Inquiry’s attention, rather than providing a full-scale evaluation of resource allocation in the DET.
Community participation in school governance
In Chapter 8 the Inquiry considered some of the advantages of obtaining close community involvement in the life and management of schools. Those benefits included better student learning outcomes when parents participate in their children’s schools, improved student coping abilities when community agencies work more effectively with schools, and teachers incorporating a better understanding of neighbourhood culture into their approach to teaching.
Although general support was expressed during the Inquiry for the idea of parental and broader community involvement in school governance, little specific mention was made of one of the main structures intended to facilitate such participation, namely, School Councils. This was surprising given that, as previously indicated, more than 1,500 of them existed in NSW in 1998. Frequent mention was made of the role played by the P&Cs and parents generally in raising funds and providing ancillary services, but with barely an exception, there was little evidence of communities helping to shape their school’s educational program or influence other salient school management decisions.
Although the Schools Renewal project of the early 1990s supported the creation of School Councils and since then they have grown in number, on the face of it the existence of these structures would seem to be no guarantee of effective community participation. A tighter prescription of governance roles for Councils, backed by legislation of a kind that appears to have worked well in Victoria, could be one way forward. However, there is a history of structures of this type only being effective when teachers and local management extend a real invitation to parents and community members to participate in serious decision-making, and provide the information needed to gain a real understanding of the educational issues and decisions facing schools. Then parents and community members can show a strong interest and the schools authentically benefit from the varied ideas and experiences of participants.
The Inquiry believes that quality community participation of the kind described in Chapter 8 can be attained in a variety of ways, when supported by an appropriate attitude on the part of school management. This in our experience is more important than the structure within which participation occurs, a perspective illustrated by reference to the informal meeting between a principal and a school community observed within an Aboriginal Community Centre in Chapter 8. Therefore, it is proposed that as a first step on a path towards greater community involvement in school-based decision making, principals, as
132 school managers, include an account of the means by which their school is attempting to secure effective, serious community participation, and the material influence of that participation on school governance, in reports on the operation of their schools.
Recommendation 12.9 That school principals report formally in their Annual Report on strategies for gaining authentic community participation in the governance of their schools, and the outcomes of their endeavours, as outlined above and in the opening section of Chapter 8. (cost neutral)
School staffing (teachers)
In this section, three elements of the staffing system for teachers and school executives that impact on school efficacy will be examined. These are the application of the staffing formulae, with particular reference to small schools, the transfer system and the merit selection system.
Staffing formulae
In a system as big as the NSW public education system, schools are allocated numbers and kinds of staff according to set formulae. Usually these are based on student enrolments, although factors such as PSFP status are also considered. To give two examples:
• Primary schools must have 160 or more students to be entitled to a non-teaching principal.
• Secondary schools with between 150 and 600 students are entitled to one deputy principal with half-time release from teaching. Once over 700, they are entitled to two deputy principals with half-time release from teaching (PSFP schools do somewhat better)203.
The key complaint presented to the Inquiry was that the formulae that exist are too rigid, as well as sometimes inappropriate. For example, very small schools can find that a fall in enrolment of only one or two students can reduce their staffing from two teachers to one204. The current cut-off for small primary schools to receive a second teacher is 26. This would seem too high, given that the same teacher must fulfill the responsibilities of being principal of the school and teaching students in kindergarten through to year 6. The small country school occupies an honoured place in Australian society, serving remote communities that would otherwise be neglected. The DET is to be commended for its willingness to keep many of these schools open. However, the Inquiry believes that a modest adjustment to the staffing formulae for these schools would enable them to perform at a consistently high level.
203 Examples taken from tables provided by the DET. 204 In practice, the DET has indicated that there is a careful system of review instituted before schools lose staff.
133 Complaints have also been received about the teaching responsibilities of principals in somewhat larger schools. As comments presented earlier in this chapter illustrate, principals are both the educational and administrative leaders of schools. It is therefore surprising to the Inquiry that schools have to have 160 students before their principal becomes non-teaching. In order to have any time off class, principals in smaller schools must use some of the school’s allocation of RFF, possibly to the detriment of other staff in the school. This situation appears unsatisfactory. It is difficult to see how a principal can lead a school when they are on class all or most of the time. The following recommendation goes some way to alleviating the above two anomalies.
Recommendation 12.10 (a) That the DET reduce the cut-off point for the reduction in staffing to a single teacher in very small schools from 25 to 20, providing an additional half-time teacher for schools with enrolments between 20 and 25. Cost: $435,000 per annum205.
(b) That for schools with enrolments of between 100 and 159 students, the equivalent of an additional half-time teacher be provided, to release the principal to manage the school. Cost: $1.04 million206.
In primary schools a question has also been raised about the amount of release from face to face teaching (RFF) allocated to each school, which in the words of one principal “is never enough to cover all the teachers”. Several submissions were received from teacher/librarians and library associations complaining at the way in which librarians are used to take classes while the classroom teacher is on RFF. This can take up much of the librarian’s time, limiting their ability to manage the library and to assist other customers. In addition, it eliminates the potential for teacher librarians and classroom teachers to work together with students in creative ways involving information technology (because the class teacher is on RFF). Teacher librarians claim that there is a loss to the system as a whole when they have little time to develop library and teaching resources because of this. The Inquiry believes that this issue deserves attention.
Recommendation 12.11 That the DET review its RFF allocation to primary schools, and in the meantime advise primary school principals to minimise the RFF component built into the work of teacher/ librarians.
The Transfer System
It is a State Office responsibility to provide each school, as far as possible, with suitable and qualified staff to fill all of the positions in the school. The question of interest to the Inquiry is how much discretion principals have in determining the make-up of their staff.
205 Based on 25 schools with enrolments between 20 and 25, and Step 2 teaching salary figures for 2003. 206 Based on 60 schools with enrolments between 100 and 159 and Step 2 teaching salary figures for 2003.
134 As noted earlier, staffing of NSW schools is handled centrally, through the statewide staffing system. This system matches staff with vacancies in schools based first on whether or not they match selection criteria summarised in a list of codes, and second, on who has the highest number of transfer points (earned from spending time in hard to staff schools)207. This system is argued to ensure equity across schools by providing an incentive to teachers to work in remote areas and other less popular schools. Staffing the NSW public education system is a major logistical exercise, as indicated in Table 12.2 below.
Table 12.2 Number of teacher employment transactions in the Department of Education and Training, April 2001 – April 2002208
Position Form of employment Numbers
Classroom teacher Non-advertised 8177 Advertised 337 Total 8514 Executive Non-advertised 414 Advertised 1094 Total 1508 Principal Non-advertised 96 Advertised 304 Total 400
Grand Total 10422
Table 12.2 indicates that in the year from April 2001 to April 2002, more than 10,000 teaching staff were either appointed to the DET or changed position. In cases where the positions were advertised, a merit selection process was used, often based on the codes initially identified for the position. In cases where the position was not advertised, the situation was rather different. A breakdown of the way in which classroom teachers were appointed to non-advertised positions is provided in Table 12.3.
207 There are four types of codes: position level (e.g. classroom teacher, head teacher), subject/teaching area codes (e.g. English, Mathematics, Ancient History, Infants classes), special aptitudes codes (e.g. understanding the needs of Aboriginal or gifted and talented students), and areas of expertise codes (e.g. performing arts, sport). In addition, under the statewide staffing system, all schools in NSW are allocated a number of points, based on how hard they are to staff. Schools in Broken Hill, for example, have 6 transfer points, compared to 1 for most schools in metropolitan Sydney. This means that teachers are rewarded for spending time in isolated and/or hard to staff schools, by being given an advantage when they seek a transfer to a school of their choice. Transfer points thus operate as a form of currency in the DET. Promotions (or executive) positions are filled where possible by transfer, but may also be filled using a merit selection system. Such positions include Principal, Deputy or Assistant Principal and Head Teacher or Executive Teacher. 208 Information for Tables 12.2 and 12.3 provided by the School Staffing Unit in the DET, from the Teacher Staffing Status Report, 29 April 2002.
135 Table 12.3 Modes of appointment of NSW classroom teachers to non-advertised positions April 2001 – April 2002
Mode of appointment Number
Priority transfer 1985 Service transfer 3029 Employment209 3163
Total 8177
Table 12.3 indicates that nearly one in four of all non-advertised classroom teacher appointments (the vast majority of all appointments) were made by priority transfers, with the remainder divided between service transfers and the employment of new teachers In none of these cases does the principal have any say in the actual person appointed.
The Inquiry has heard frequent complaints from principals about the operation of the statewide staffing system. Principals feel that they are at times held hostage to the requirements of the system to the detriment of their individual school. They argue that in order to be managers of their schools, they should have the ability to select the mix of staff whom they feel will best meet the needs of their school. The situation at present is that even in respect of executive positions, the key leadership positions in schools, principals must first indicate their preference through the code system, and if there is a suitable candidate seeking a transfer (who matches the codes) that person will be appointed. Where there are several people who match the codes, up to the first four with the highest number of transfer points can be interviewed, and one of the four must be selected. Only where the code-matching system yields no applicants can principals advertise the position. It is notable, however, that in Table 12.2 the majority of executive positions in 2001-02 were advertised, suggesting that there is some flexibility at this level. The same cannot be said for classroom teachers. Here, the codes are often seen as unduly limiting. For example, secondary English has one code only, so that it is not possible to request a specialist HSC or middle school English teacher. In addition, there are no codes to indicate the extent of professional involvement and updating of skills engaged in by teachers, or whether or not they have experience in implementing innovative approaches to pedagogy. The Inquiry has been informed that the codes have recently been reviewed, but clearly some difficulties still remain.
The Inquiry unequivocally accepts the fundamental justice of the current system that combines codes and ‘points’, and believes that it should continue to account for the overwhelming majority of classroom teacher appointments. The principle of distributing learning opportunities on an equitable basis has been a dominant influence on the recommendations formulated in this report. However, at no stage has the Inquiry reduced
209 Priority transfers include incentive transfers (teachers who have earned the right to transfer from a hard to staff, high transfer point school), nominated transfers (teachers who no longer hold a substantive position in a school, for example, because of falling enrolments), compassionate transfers (of partners of teachers otherwise transferred), and transfers resulting from restructuring of schools (such as collegiates and Building the Future). Service transfers occur when a teacher indicates a preference to move to another school, there is a vacancy at that school, and the teacher codes match the school’s codes in terms of teaching area, special aptitudes and relevant expertise. The Employment category refers to the employment of new teachers.
136 the administrative choices available in a situation to a single value. Hence, when considering the issue of advanced learning opportunities in Chapter 4, weight was given to the pursuit of excellence as well as an overriding concern with the vales of social cohesion and equity.
In a similar fashion, some space has to be accorded to principals as managers of their schools, to develop particular strengths within their school programs. In the majority of cases this can be achieved within the framework of the codes and points system. However, on comparatively rare occasions the Inquiry has seen the desirability, if not necessity, of a principal being able to specify the area of knowledge required to fulfill the school’s purposes in more detail than is possible within the existing codes framework. If a carefully regulated and limited opportunity existed for a principal to be able to proceed directly to advertise some positions, the requirements of effective management could be reconciled with the preservation of the equity-promoting statewide staffing system. The Inquiry believes that a maximum number of 5% of classroom teacher appointments in a school at any one time might be filled in this way. The principal in these instances would be required to argue the case with the relevant District Superintendent, spelling out the specific expertise required to develop a particular capacity within the school, and justifying the need to go beyond the codes.
Recommendation 12.12 That all school principals be given the discretion, with the approval of the District Superintendent, and up to a maximum of 5% of classroom positions in the school at any one time, to fulfill particular school staffing needs through advertisement and merit selection rather than via the codes. Cost: To be absorbed by schools seeking this discretion
The Merit Selection System
This recommendation raises the issue of the way in which merit selection currently operates in the DET for those positions that are now advertised. The Inquiry has again heard complaints about the current system. The primary one is that the system favours teachers who can ‘talk the talk but cannot walk the walk’ – who may look good on paper but not be able to deliver in the classroom or in a leadership position in a school. This perception is reinforced by the fact that there is currently no on-the-ground assessment of applicants’ teaching abilities included in the merit selection procedures. It is the Inquiry’s clear position that if school executives (and others) are to be genuine leaders in relation to teaching and learning, then they must as a minimum requirement be excellent classroom teachers themselves. On a separate point, if they are to be leaders and managers, they must be able to demonstrate practical abilities in these areas also. In this context, there are several general selection criteria that apply to all promotions positions. These include having the “capacity to initiate improvement and monitor high educational standards”, the “ability to enhance staff performance” and “evidence of well developed planning, organisational and resource management skills210.” The Inquiry agrees that these are all relevant, but would also suggest the addition of a new criterion to cover professional
210 See Merit Selection Procedures Manual (2002), Op. Cit., p. 10.
137 leadership (such as involvement in a professional association and/or giving professional papers to conferences and seminars).
The Inquiry notes that under the current Staffing Agreement between the DET and the NSW Teachers Federation211 there is a commitment to explore possible mechanisms for on the job assessment of teachers applying for promotions positions212. The Inquiry understands that while negotiations are still at an early stage, options for consideration include classroom observation and/or assessment, a portfolio of achievement, evidence of continuing professional development activity, or some combination of these. It is possible that these requirements could become part of the actual merit selection procedure or have to be met before an applicant could apply. This initiative, currently supported by both the DET and the NSW Teachers Federation, is to be commended. In this context, the Inquiry respectfully suggests that the parties familiarise themselves with work undertaken in Victoria at Glen Waverley Secondary College on teacher appraisal and review.
Recommendation 12.13 That the DET and the NSW Teachers Federation continue to develop and reach agreement on the inclusion of an on- the-ground assessment of teaching practice and achievement as a new requirement for all teaching staff seeking promotion to an executive position in a school through merit selection. (cost neutral)
School Staffing (School Administrative Support staff)
School Administrative Support (SAS) staff form an integral part of the school team and can make the difference between a school that is seen as responsive to its community, efficient and ‘on the ball’, and one that is out of touch. They are also crucial in providing administrative assistance to the principal. Over a period of time there have been significant changes in the role of SAS staff and their workload has increased. In recognition of the increased professionalism required in these positions, the DET recently commissioned a review of school assistants and senior school assistants to be undertaken by consultants PriceWaterhouseCoopers, under the auspices of a joint DET - Public Service Association (PSA) working party (the PSA is the relevant union covering SAS staff) 213. The review examined the roles and responsibilities of support staff in 20 schools located across NSW, and also interviewed key stakeholders, including school executives and staff in District Offices and head office. Early in their report, the consultants commented:
The work of school assistants and senior school assistants has evolved from being focused on a teachers’ assistant role through to office support incorporating an administration role that is equivalent to that of some of the more complex small to medium sized private sector enterprises214.
211 “Agreement between the NSW Department of Education and Training and the NSW Teachers Federation on Staffing of NSW Public Schools” (2002) Op. Cit. 212 Ibid. Clause 20, p. 7. 213PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2001) Department of Education and Training: Review of school assistants and senior school assistants. NSW Department of Education and Training, November, 2001. 214 Ibid. p. 7.
138 SAS staff who work in the school office undertake a range of responsibilities in the areas of financial management, school administration and interactions with students and staff. In addition to SAS office staff, all schools are allocated a general assistant, who is responsible for minor maintenance and grounds, specialised assistants who work, for example, with science staff in the preparation and cleaning up of chemicals in laboratories, and teachers aides, such as teachers aides (special) who assist teachers with students who have disabilities.
A number of findings presented by the consultants resonated with the experience of the Inquiry in talking with principals and SAS staff and in reading submissions. In general, the clear impression gained by the Inquiry was that in recent years, the roles and responsibilities of SAS staff have expanded considerably and that current allocations of staff are inadequate, at least in some schools. This is exacerbated by the fact that full- time SAS staff are presently only employed for 31.25 hours per week. The Department’s information management system, OASIS, is also out of date and adds enormously to the workload of SAS staff. For example, several submissions indicated that SAS staff are forced to run wasteful second finance/data systems because OASIS cannot cope with current requirements (it is not even Windows compatible). It is unclear to the Inquiry how much time might be saved across the system if OASIS were upgraded. For small schools, with limited SAS resources, the review commended the Small Schools Finance Model, whereby several small schools fund a financial service centre, as has happened in the Forbes area and most recently in the Albury, Deniliquin and Griffith districts215. This would appear more cost-effective than existing arrangements.
On other points, there was widespread dissatisfaction among SAS staff at the amount and nature of training they had received. The PriceWaterhouseCoopers review indicated a particular need for more training in relation to the technology, with over 50% of school assistants and senior school assistants indicating a need for such training216. In relation to general assistants, the Inquiry has heard time and again about the strange allocation of general assistants to schools on the basis of school enrolments only, with no consideration of the size or condition of the school or school grounds, despite the general assistant being responsible for looking after them. This has led to clear anomalies in some schools. And finally, there was a general view that in large schools, such as some high schools and collegiates, the level of financial management was such that a bursar/ bookkeeper position is justified.
In the Inquiry’s view, a number of recommendations from the PriceWaterhouseCoopers review deserve immediate attention, and much of the package deserves to be implemented. This would be an important step in providing schools and principals with the level of administrative support that they now need.
Recommendation 12.14 That the DET move to implement the package of recommendations in relation to school assistants and senior school assistants contained in the recent review of these positions. In particular, that the DET:
215 See: Finance centre is on the money NSW Department of Education and Training Media Release 11 August, 2002. http://www.det.nsw.edu.au/newsroom/yr2002/aug/fincance.htm. 216 PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2001) Op. Cit.
139 • Negotiate with the PSA to align the award structures for school assistants with those for administrative and clerical officers, to provide career paths for SAS staff; • Immediately recalculate the allocation of general assistants to schools to take account of the size and characteristics of each school site as well as the number of students; • Undertake a trial commencing in 2003 in 20 large schools and/or collegiates of the position of business services manager as outlined in the consultancy report; • Immediately upgrade OASIS so that it is windows compatible and can handle current requirements for financial information, or tender for a new information management system; • Explore the feasibility of increasing the workload of some full-time SAS staff to 35 hours per week; and • Review the allocation of SAS staff to all schools, with a particular emphasis on primary schools and small schools. Cost: Some of these tasks are already in hand and budgeted for within existing resources. A trial of 20 business services managers would cost $812,500217.
Recommendation 12.15 That the DET undertake to provide OASIS and other necessary job-related technology training to all SAS staff who have yet to receive it by the end of 2003. Cost: To be absorbed from within existing resources
The School Global Budget
The school global budget provides funds to schools for day to day expenses for everything from textbooks and casual replacement staff to plumbing (see Footnote 5). Significantly, it does not cover salaries for teaching or administrative staff (these are paid centrally), but does cover casual replacement staff (e.g. when teachers are sick, on professional development or on release from face to fact teaching - RFF). As indicated earlier, global budgets were devolved to schools as part of the Scott reforms. The global budget allows schools to choose how much of their funds they spend on different areas, at least in theory218. In practice, this is not without its problems. Expenditure in relation to some elements of the global budget, for example, can be beyond the school’s control. For example:
217 This figure assumes 31.25 hours per week at $25.00 per hour, times 52 weeks, times 20 schools. 218 There is another significant source of funding that some schools obtain. This comes in the form of tied grants, including funds provided under the Priority Schools Funding Program (for which about 20% of schools are eligible), the Country Areas Program for isolated schools and the Funding Support Program (for inclusion of students with disabilities). While schools invariably lament the amount of these funds, a greater source of concern has been expressed to the Inquiry by those schools that just miss out on tied funding.
140
• The global budget is expected to fund the first ten days of a teacher’s sick leave, for any instance of illness (if staff are absent for longer, the DET pays for casual replacements). Principals have told the Inquiry of staff being sensitive about taking sick leave, because to do so directly depletes the school’s resources. If several staff experience several illnesses in one year, this can seriously deplete the school’s budget219.
• On another matter, in theory, schools do not have to pay for vandalism (and in practice, still pay little if windows are broken). But for other vandalism, the Treasury recently raised the threshold payment per claim from $100 to $300. This means that each time a significant incidence of vandalism occurs, the school pays the first $300. For some schools, this is academic. For others, the increase has been significant (school global budgets have not been increased to cover the rise from $100 to $300).
In addition, in relation to technology, there is a widespread view that the increase in the number of computers in schools, while in itself positive, has increased costs for maintenance, and in some cases cabling, without adequate recompense. In relation to professional development, as a consequence of the allocation of approximately $25.60 per staff member for professional development, schools either have to forgo development or supplement funding from monies that are otherwise earmarked for textbooks or much needed library resources. The Inquiry knows of one primary school that budgets $14,000 a year for professional development, despite receiving a notional allocation of less than $1000. This same school assumes each year that it will receive exactly the same amount from fundraising undertaken by the P&C. The P&C contribution of $14,000 in a sense compensates for the system’s failure to adequately fund professional development, and ensures that staff at the school remain up to date. Schools can raise additional funds through fundraising activities and by requesting a ‘voluntary’ contribution from parents (e.g. of $100 per annum). Schools can also charge students for course materials (although not tuition), but cannot insist on payment. Some schools receive over 90% of fees charged for courses and for the so-called ‘voluntary’ contribution. Others have told the Inquiry that they are lucky if they receive 15%. This anomaly is an important one to address in any consideration of school global funding. For schools that have a limited capacity to raise additional funds through other sources, any significant professional development has to be taken from other necessities within the global budget.
Total government expenditure on school global budgets increased from $241.1 million in calendar year 2001 to $252.6 million in 2002, an increase of 4.8%220. In addition, the NSW State budget for 2002-03 went some way towards recognising the pressures being experienced by many schools in relation to the global budget. It announced $10 million additional targetted funding “for schools which have specific needs in meeting service delivery requirements at the local level221.” While this money has yet to be distributed, the Inquiry understands that while all schools may experience some additional benefit, most of the funds will go to less well endowed schools, such as PSFP and isolated schools.
219 Information provided by officers of the DET, who noted that if a school has a run of bad luck, the DET will bail them out, after considering whether or not they have any unspent funds to allocate to the overspent area (i.e. there is a safety net). 220 Information provided by officers of the DET. 221 New South Wales Government Budget 2002-2003: School Education, Department of Education and Training, Budget Overview. p. 3. http://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/highlights/pdf.
141 The $10 million will be available for the next four years. This top up funding, although temporary, is to be commended.
However, the consistency of complaints about the adequacy of the global budget in allowing schools to perform their primary educational functions raises a bigger question, concerning whether or not the global budget in its entirety is adequate for schools today. Only one section of the global budget has been reviewed in this regard in the past five years; this is the amount available for payment of utilities. In this case, patterns of expenditure were examined, and adjustments made to school budgets over several years, with some schools receiving an increase and others a reduction in funding. This item is now carefully monitored, reducing school’s flexibility. In Chapter 1 of the current report, the Inquiry also surveyed the professional development needs of teachers and proposed a per capita sum that better reflects their needs.
In relation to the rest of the global budget – the general operations grant (the major component) and special factor loadings (e.g. for technology high schools and isolated schools), there has been no review in the past five years. This means that the capacity of this funding to meet contemporary school needs has not been assessed. If, for example, it has become significantly more expensive for schools to manage their information technology, as many claim, this has not been considered. The Inquiry believes that a useful and fair way to proceed, consistent with strong leadership on the part of the DET, would be to undertake a bottom up examination of what schools today need in order to provide an excellent learning environment for their students. This would include current costings for updating textbooks and other resources, servicing information technology systems and so on. It should also, in the Inquiry’s view, include an assessment of the capacity of different schools to raise additional funds that can purchase necessities. This should not be used to penalise schools, but rather to compensate those whose capacity is less. While the implications of such an exercise might be costly, it would enable the DET to better target schools in most need.
Recommendation 12.16 That the DET undertake a needs assessment of school requirements in relation to the general operations grant and special factor loadings of school global budgets, in order to assess the extent to which they give schools the ability to provide students with a high quality education, regardless of the socio-economic circumstances or geographical location of their student body.
______
142 CHAPTER 13 INVESTING IN YOUNG PEOPLE AND OUR FUTURE: A TEN-YEAR PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE NSW PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM
The recommendations presented in the preceding twelve chapters of this report represent more than a series of discrete investments in improving particular aspects of the NSW public education system. Together the recommendations constitute a plan for renewing and extending some of the major purposes of public education. The evaluation of the changes that have been proposed requires not only consideration of the rationale provided for them in earlier chapters, but also the contribution that each recommendation makes to the overall functioning of the system.
Before embarking on that exercise the Inquiry needs, in general terms, to address the question of the scale and cost of the recommended changes. From even a cursory examination of the estimated costs, the amounts involved could seem high, particularly if one were unfamiliar with the magnitude of State and Commonwealth expenditures on ‘big ticket’ items like health and education. For example, NSW has budgeted to spend more than $5.5 billion on school education in the financial year 2002/03. Some would be reassured by the scale of such expenditures, believing that they reflect this country’s commitment to education and knowledge generation in its varied forms. Many Australians are accustomed to thinking of their country as being a relatively well-educated nation that invests substantially in knowledge development. They generally believe that we are well placed to compete in the global knowledge economy because of that sustained investment222.
One’s response to the scale of the additional investments in school education recommended by this report could be coloured by beliefs of the aforementioned kind. The Inquiry believes that in order for balanced judgements to be made about the reasonableness of the recommended expenditures a number of issues, some broad and bearing on Australia’s standing as a knowledge nation, others focused more narrowly on our spending on public education, must first be considered:
1. How, in fact, does our nation rank internationally as an investor in the generation and dissemination of knowledge?
2. What place does education occupy within the general picture of government expenditures?
3. How is the investment in school education distributed, especially between the public and private sectors, and with what consequences for social equity?
4. What social and economic benefits derive from investment in education and what ‘opportunity costs’ are associated with alternative expenditures?
5. What opportunities exist for re-directing investments i. within the education sector, and ii. across sectors, in support of the improvements recommended by this report?
222 Callan, P. M., Finney, J. E., (2002) “Assessing educational capital: an imperative for policy,” Change, July-August, V34, i4, p. 25
143 1. KNOWLEDGE INVESTMENT
Comparison of knowledge investment Key points: i. Australia is falling behind most of the major developed nations in investing in knowledge. Should Australia’s level of investment in sectors contributing to the knowledge economy continue, the economic future of the country appears bleak; ii. Australia ranks 14 out of 19 OECD countries in a comparison of the proportion of young people who are not in full-time education and not in full-time employment.
A recent report coordinated by the Monash Centre for Research in International Education (2001)223 throws light on the issue of Australia’s level of investment in knowledge. The report identifies three things as being crucial to a nation’s short-term economic capability within the global knowledge economy. They are education, research and development, and information and communications technologies. These three areas comprise what the OECD calls an index of “Investment in knowledge.” OECD data shows that considered in this broad way, Australia is falling behind most of the major developed nations in investing in knowledge. According to the Monash report, education policy has in recent times been dominated by the drive to reduce fiscal costs at the expense of national capacity:
Once an above-average investor in education, Australia is now well below the OECD average. Private investment has increased sharply, but largely in the form of student fees rather than industry funding. Public funding has been depressed so effectively that total (private and public) funding has continued to fall as a proportion of GDP … Pre-school funding and participation are lamentable by international standards224.
Viewed from this general perspective of investment in knowledge, in the mid-1990s Australian investment of that kind as a share of GDP was 30.4% below that in Sweden, 23.8% below that in the USA and 18.4% below that in a group of countries including Finland, Denmark, France, the UK and Canada. The available evidence indicates that investment in knowledge in Australia has fallen further relative to international trends since 1995.
Turning specifically to investment in education, an OECD tabulation of public expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP reveals that Australia occupies a very modest 22nd rank position among the 29 countries listed225. With respect to the place of school education within the knowledge economy, the Monash report states that to do well a country requires a literate, numerate and inventive workforce. Participation in pre-school has a bearing on the attainment of that goal. In 1998 Australia spent 0.1% of GDP on pre-school education which was considerably less than the 1.1% spent in Denmark, 0.7% in France and 0.6% in Norway and Sweden. At the other end of the school years, the number of Australian students reaching Year 12 reached a high of 77.1% in the early 1990s but thereafter slipped backwards to 71.6% by 1998226. By 2001 Australia ranked in the bottom half of OECD countries with respect to school
223 Considine, M., Marginson, S., Sheehan, P., Kumnick, M., (2001) The Comparative Performance of Australia as a Knowledge Nation, Melbourne, Monash Centre for Research in International Education 224 Ibid., p.3 225 OECD, (2001) Education at a Glance, OECD Indicators Paris, p. 80 226 Ibid., p. 15
144 retention (ranking 17 out of 28 countries).227 Australia appears to be the only OECD country in which school participation rates have been falling in the 1990s228.
Of particular concern, both from the points of view of the prospect of leading an unfulfilling life as well as marginal participation in the economy, are those young people of post-compulsory school age identified as being ‘at risk’229. These are young people who are not in full-time education and not in full-time employment. Australia ranks 14 out of 19 OECD countries in a comparison of the proportions of ‘at risk’ 15-19 year olds230.
Table 13.1: Proportion of 15-19 year olds not in education and not in full-time work (1999) % 15-19 yr. OECD country Rank olds ‘at risk’ Poland 1 7.5 Denmark 2 9.8 Germany 3 11.3 Belgium 4 11.5 Greece 5 11.8 Finland 6 13.9 United States 7 15.2 Portugal 8 16.0 Switzerland 9 16.1 Netherlands 10 16.6 Hungary 11 16.8 Canada 12 17.2 Sweden 13 18.1 Australia 14 19.4 Spain 15 23.5 Mexico 16 23.6 Czech Republic 17 23.6 Italy 18 23.8 France 19 25.9
The Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce had in mind the young people behind the above Australian statistic when urging that “We must invest in a system of education, training and community support which equips all young people with the capacity to participate in the social and economic life of their community. Failure to do so condemns some young people to life on the margins”231. The previously cited Monash report, taking a more explicitly economic view of the situation, declares that should Australia’s low level of investment in sectors contributing to the knowledge economy continue, the economic future of the country appears bleak. Australia will fail to become a leading producer of knowledge economy products and services with further adverse consequences for our trade position, and for the level and character of jobs and opportunities. This conclusion is
227 Cited in Dusseldorp Skills Forum., (2001) How Young People are Faring. Key Indicators 2001, http://[email protected]/papers/o1/hypaf01/hypaf2001.htm 228 Spierings, J., (1999) “A crucial point in life: learning, work and young adults,” (pp.5-27) in Dusseldorp Skills Forum, Australia’s Young Adults: the Deepening Divide, Dusseldorp Skills Forum 229 Dusseldorp Skills Forum, (2001) op. cit., pp. 3-5 230 Based on OECD, 2001, Education at a Glance, Tables E3.1 and E4.1, cited in Dusseldorp Skills Forum, 2001, p.15 231 Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce, (2001) Footprints to the future, Summary Report, Canberra, AusInfo, p. 8
145 supported by the findings of a recent OECD study of economic growth that indicated that the economy-wide returns to investment in education may be larger than those experienced by individuals232.
Consideration of the effects of education would be incomplete without reference to the social benefits for individuals and the community at large233. A range of such benefits is considered below. First, the level of investment in school education by Australia and New South Wales is examined in the context of social expenditures generally, and a comparison is made of those investments with the outlays on school education of comparable countries and economic competitors.
2. EDUCATION AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES
General government expenditure
Government expenditures compared Key points: i. Australia ranked 20 out of 28 OECD countries compared on public social expenditure in 2001; ii. While Australia occupies a mid-position on the OECD ranking of government expenditures on school education the statistics cover both private and public education.
The capacity of any country or state to invest in knowledge is obviously affected by the revenues at its disposal. The latter can be shaped not only by economic fortunes but also by policies concerning the proportion of wealth generated that is used for public purposes. Over the past two decades in Australia, Commonwealth Government expenditures (‘payments’) expressed as a percentage of GDP, have tended to decline, as shown in the following table. The point for present purposes is not the wisdom or otherwise of the policies behind the statistics, but only that such policies have consequences for spending on public administration. The same observation can be made about the revenue consequences of the sale of government enterprises, the current Commonwealth budget papers declaring “The decrease in consolidated PNFC (Public non-financial corporations) revenue and expenses as a share of GDP in recent years is partly attributable to the privatisation of PNFCs by both the Commonwealth and state/local governments” 234:
Table 13.2: Commonwealth payments235 1982/83 - 2001/02 and 2002/03, as %GDP
1982/83- 1987/88- 1992/93- 1997/98- 2002/03 1986/87 1991/92 1996/97 2001/02 27.7% 24.5% 26.0% 23.8% 22.7%
232 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, (2000) “Links between policy and growth: Cross-country evidence,” Economic Outlook, December, Issue 68, pp. 133-154 233 Stacey, N.,(1998) “Social benefits of education ” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, September, Vol. 559, pp. 54-63 234 Budget Paper No. 1, (2002-03) Statement 8: Trends in Public Sector Finance; Part II: Fiscal balance, p.1 235 Based upon Budget Paper No. 1,Statement 13, Table 1: Commonwealth general government sector cash receipts, payments and surplus. From 1999-00 onwards, data are derived from an accrual ABS GFS reporting framework.
146 Australia is among the countries where public spending as a proportion of GDP is low. For example, Australia ranked 20th out of 28 OECD countries compared on public social expenditure in 2001236. The OECD points out that in countries where public spending is low as a proportion of GDP, such as Australia, Ireland, Korea and Mexico, the proportion of public expenditure devoted to education is relatively high237. While Australia occupies a mid-position on the OECD ranking of government expenditures on school education238 the statistics cover both private and public education. The relative investment in each sector is not known for OECD countries. So far as Australia is concerned, a factor to be kept in mind is that in 1995/96 direct Commonwealth expenditure on schools as a proportion of GDP was 0.65%, public schools receiving 0.27% and private schools 0.38%. By 2000/01 the total outlay had reached 0.75% of GDP, with public school expenditure declining to 0.26% and private school expenditure rising to 0.48%239.
Expenditure on education in New South Wales: public schools
Funding for public education in New South Wales comes from two sources: funds provided through the Department of Education and Training and funds from private individuals. In relation to funds from parents and carers, the DET does not aggregate these in terms that enable a state level of contribution to be gauged. However, comparative figures of per capita amounts collected in groups of high, medium and low socio-economic schools were presented in an earlier chapter of this report and are briefly revisited below. In addition, the NSW Department of Transport funds the School Student Transport Scheme, which provides free transport to school for eligible students. This is briefly described below in a section on possible offsets to proposed new expenditure outlined in this report.
Comparison of state expenditures Key points: i. Within a nation with relatively moderate to low levels of knowledge investment, New South Wales spends significantly less per primary student than all states except Western Australia, and significantly less than the national average; ii. New South Wales spends less than any other state on secondary education, and significantly less than the national average.
Funding through the DET includes general recurrent grants provided to the states by the Commonwealth government and specific purpose grants provided to New South Wales by the Commonwealth specifically for education through the States Grants (Primary and Secondary Education Assistance) Act 2000. Expenditure on government schools in New South Wales constitutes the largest component of New South Wales expenditure on education (which totals over $7.5 billion). In 2002-2003, this figure is estimated to be $5585.8 million (or just over $5.5 billion), which compares with an expenditure of $5447.1 million for the previous year, a difference of $138.7 million.
236 OECD, (2001) Education at a Glance, OECD Indicators, Paris, p. 97 237 ibid., p. 100 238 Primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education 239 Department of Education, Science and Training, Senate Legislation Committee – Questions on Notice 2001-2002 Additional Estimates Hearing, DETYA Question No. E309
147 It is in considering sums of this magnitude that those unfamiliar with the scale of government budgets need to exercise caution lest seemingly large allocations of money to particular areas of administration cloud the issue of comparative expenditures. It is essential to relate the $5.5 billion in question to the size of the student population and compare the per student expenditures with those of the other states. First, between 2000-01 and 2001-02, actual expenditure on government schools and pre-schools in New South Wales increased from $5178.3 million to $5477.1 million, an increase of $298.8 million, or 5.8% before taking inflation into account. These figures suggest a small increase in funding for education in New South Wales, one largely likely to reflect increasing costs (such as salaries and consumables) rather than significant new activity. Table 13.3 below provides a breakdown of this expenditure. This table indicates that very little funding is provided to students in pre-schools attached to government schools in New South Wales, as noted in Chapter 3 of this report. In fact, less than 2,300 students attended such pre-schools in 2001-02. This is an area in which the Inquiry urges the state government to increase its investment. Second, the table indicates that between 2000-01 and 2001-02 funding for primary education increased by 5.9% and for secondary education by 5.6%.
Table 13.3: Revised budget estimates/actual expenditure on government schools, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03240
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 (actual) $000 (actual) $000 (estimate) $000
Pre-school education services in 15,599 16,376 18,072 government schools
Primary education services in 2,655,402 2,812,041 2,850,001 government schools
Secondary education services in 2,507,259 2,648,653 2,717,774 government schools
Total 5,178,260 5,477,070 5,585,847
These figures translate into indices that enable comparisons between the provision of public education in New South Wales and in other states. Table 13.4, taken from the National Report on Schooling in Australia: 2000, gives the average per capita expenditure on students in primary and secondary government schools for the financial years 1998-‘99 and 1999-‘00.
240 Ibid. and Budget Estimates 2002-2003 New South Wales, Budget Paper No. 3 – Volume 1. Figures are taken from the relevant pages covering expenditure and estimated expenditure in the two major government school funding programs, pre-school and primary education services (which breaks down into pre-schools and primary education) and secondary education services.
148 Table 13.4: Per capita funding of students in government schools by state by level of education, 1998-99 and 1999-00, accrual accounting (in dollars)241
1998-99 1999-00 1998-99 1999-00 Primary Secondary NSW 5,741 6,092 7,987 8,113 Vic 6,528 6,662 8,501 8,753 Qld 6,825 7,249 8,409 8.896 SA 6,326 6,578 8,569 8,637 WA 5,547 5,950 8,041 8,217 Tas 6,685 7,017 8,121 7,935 NT 10,025 11,266 15,299 15,021 ACT 6,512 6,728 8,911 8,995 Australia 6,258 6,585 8,328 8,540
As expected, Table 13.4 indicates that more is spent on secondary students than primary students, in part because of reduced class sizes and specialist teachers associated with upper secondary school. When these figures are compared with those of other states, two observations deserve mention. First, on the latest available figures (1999/2000), New South Wales spends significantly less per primary student than all states except Western Australia, and just under $500 per student less than the national average. Second, New South Wales spends less than any other state on secondary education, and over $400 less than the Australian average. A range of factors affects the cost of educating a student in each state. For example, it costs very much more to educate students in the Northern Territory, due to distance, a larger number of smaller schools and isolation. Because of relatively small numbers of students in the Northern Territory compared with the other states, the national average is little affected by the inclusion of the Territory’s costs. According to the Productivity Commission,242 part of the explanation for the New South Wales position is due to comparatively lower expenditures in the ‘out of school’ category243. However, on the face of it, there would seem to be no clear reason why New South Wales should be so far behind states like Victoria, Queensland and South Australia.
Budget consequences of NSW investing at national average/student Key points: i. If NSW’s investment in primary students matched the Australian average that would add (conservatively) $218 million to the state’s education budget; ii. If NSW’s investment in secondary students matched the Australian average that would add (conservatively) $100 million to the state’s education budget.
In calculating the budget implications if New South Wales were to invest in primary and secondary students at levels equal to the national averages, the Inquiry believes it should err on the side of being conservative. Therefore, it acknowledges the increased expenditure on New South Wales school education between 2000/01 and 2001/02 of 5.8%. It can be assumed that cost pressures have affected state education budgets generally but for the present purposes the differences between
241 Source: National Report on Schooling in Australia: 2000. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), Appendix 1: Statistical Annex, Table 27, p. 30. Figures for 1998-99 have been recalculated in terms of accrual accounting. 242 Report on Government Services 2002, Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision: www.aeufederal.org.au/Debates/index2.html (May, 2002) 243 NSW has lower ‘out of school departmental overheads’ or administrative costs than other states.
149 New South Wales average expenditures and the corresponding national averages will be reduced by half of the above-mentioned New South Wales increase, that is, ½ x 5.8% = 2.9%. Furthermore, of the figures presented in Table 13.4 covering average expenditures for consecutive years, the two NSW/national average comparisons that are most favourable to New South Wales will be used. That is to say, the difference of $493 for primary school students in 1999/2000 will be discounted to $478.70 ($493.00 - 2.9% or $14.30), and the difference of $341 for secondary school students in 1998/99 will be reduced to $331.10 ($341 - 2.9% or $9.90).
After making the above adjustments the Inquiry (conservatively) estimates that if New South Wales were to invest in the education of primary and secondary school students at the level of the national average, the state’s school education budget would need to be increased by the following amounts244: Primary………$478.70 x 455,914 students = $218 million Secondary..…$331.10 x 303,709 students = $100 million Total $318 million
Teacher/student ratios Key point: i. Staff/student ratios are higher in NSW primary schools than in primary schools elsewhere in Australia.
Another way of looking at this differential, one that provides a possible clue in relation to primary students, comes from another table in the National Report on Schooling, which looks at full-time equivalent student-teacher ratios. Table 13.5 below presents these figures.
Table 13.5: Full-time equivalent (FTE) student: teacher ratios by level of education by state, 2000245
Primary Secondary NSW 17.7 12.5 Vic 16.9 12.5 Qld 16.7 12.4 SA 17.2 11.3 WA 17.3 12.5 Tas 15.8 12.9 NT 13.8 10.8 ACT 17.0 12.5 Australia 17.1 12.4
Table 13.5 indicates that staff-student ratios are higher in New South Wales primary schools than in any other primary schools in Australia. This is in part because of larger class sizes in the infant years in New South Wales schools. In Chapter 3 of the report, the Inquiry has recommended a significant reduction in class sizes in kindergarten through to Year 2, commencing in areas of socio-economic disadvantage.
244 Student figures derived from most up-to-date source, National Report on Schooling in Australia: 2000, op. cit., 245 Ibid. Table 20, p. 23.
150 In relation to secondary schooling, it is less easy to interpret the smaller comparative expenditure in New South Wales. As Table 13.5 suggests, staff-student ratios in New South Wales secondary schools are similar to those in other states and to the national average. Various aspects may be relevant, including the average size of secondary schools in the different states, and aspects such as isolation, as noted above. It is relevant to recall that compared with Queensland and Victoria, New South Wales has lower retention rates to Year 12246. This means that there are fewer students in the more expensive upper secondary years. While this may reduce the per capita average, it would be false economy to suggest that this is positive. It simply means, as outlined earlier in this chapter, that there may be proportionately more students in New South Wales at longer term risk as a result of failing to complete school, than in those other states.
Funding from individuals
The second component of expenditure on public education in New South Wales is provided by individuals. There are three main kinds of payments made by parents of students in government schools and by the local community: course fees, ‘voluntary’ contributions, and funds provided to schools by P&C associations or in relation to fundraising ventures by schools such as canteens, uniform shops, raffles and fetes, and fees for community use of school facilities. As indicated, it is not possible to provide a total ‘individual expenditure on public education’ figure for New South Wales. However, in Chapter 8, the Inquiry compared the funds raised by parents in high, medium and low SES schools. The total amount of school-generated revenue for the 120 schools in the survey was $23.82 million, suggesting a significant amount of such revenue raising. But these figures indicated clearly that how much each school raised was closely related to the socio-economic status of the school, with schools in high socio-economic areas outperforming those in medium and low socio-economic areas very significantly. This underscores the importance of the government providing sufficient funds for all public schools to have the teachers, textbooks and other resources that they require, as well as adequate physical facilities in which to teach and learn.
3. DISTRIBUTION OF THE PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN SCHOOL EDUCATION
NSW Government expenditure on non-government schools
Government expenditure on non-government schools Key points: i. The state government provides considerable recurrent funding for non- government schools. The estimate of state funding for non-government schools in 2002-’03 is $543 million; ii. NSW spends 25% of the average recurrent funding per government school student on non-government school students; iii. Students with special needs, requiring additional funding, are more concentrated in public schools.
246 For the year 2000, NSW had a male estimated retention rate to Year 12 of 59% and female rate of 72%. This compares with 61% (male) and 76% (female) in Victoria, 68% (male) and 77% (female) in Queensland, and average figures for Australia as a whole of 61% (male) and 74% (female). Source: National Report on Schooling in Australia: 2000. Ibid. Table 38, p. 41.
151 Funding for non-government schooling in New South Wales takes three main forms: Commonwealth funds provided through the state budget, direct Commonwealth funding to non-government schools and school systems (through the States Grants Act), and funding by individuals. In considering state expenditure below, it is important to note that direct Commonwealth funding to non-government schools has always been proportionately greater than state funding, and has increased very considerably since 2001, due to the new SES (socio-economic status) funding model now used to calculate the funding for non-government schooling in New South Wales.
The state government provides considerable recurrent funding for non-government schools. The estimate of state funding for non-government schools in 2002-03 is $542.9 million. Actual expenditure for 2000-2001 was $479.6, and for 2001-02 was $513.1 million, an increase of 7%. This is a higher increase than for expenditure in government schools, due in part to an increase in enrolments in non-government schools, and in part to the legislative requirement that non-government schools receive, on average, 25% of the average per capita cost to the state of educating a child in a government school. There are some expenditures on government schools that do not flow on as part of the 25% provision. On the other hand, there are expenditures incurred for government school students, for example, in relation to curriculum development that also benefit non-government students but are not included within the 25% linkage scheme. By way of comparison, direct Commonwealth expenditure to non-government schools for calendar year 2000 was $973 million (see below).
The disaggregation of state funding to New South Wales non-government schools is presented in Table 13.6 below. Table 13.6 shows, as expected, that the largest proportion of the increase in funding for students in non-government schools has occurred because of an increase in per capita payments for those students. As noted in Chapter 12 (on governance), the number of students in non-government schools in New South Wales has risen steadily for a number of years. During the ten years from 1991 to 2000, the proportion of full-time students in non-government schools rose from 28% to 30.6 %247. In addition, as noted in Chapter 4, the number of new non-government schools in New South Wales increased significantly between 1991 and 2000 (by 100 or 44, depending on whether or not separate campuses of schools are counted), while the increase in government schools was minimal (11)248.
247 National Report on Schooling in Australia: 2000, Op. Cit., Appendix 1, Table 3, page 3. 248 Report on Government Services 2002, Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision [online] Available
152 Table 13.6: Actual/estimated NSW government expenditure on non-government schools, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 ($000)249
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 (actual) (actual) (estimate)
Per capita funding, primary students 178,514 190,267 197,248 Per capita funding, secondary students 229,397 247,892 270,352 Interest subsidies on loans for new buildings 35,227 36,379 38,044 Back to School allowance 16,710 17,425 17,831 Textbook allowances 7,806 8,253 8,689 Other grants/expenses 11,905 12,835 10,742
Total 479,559 513,051 542,906
The 25% per capita funding linkage between government and non-government schools is important and of concern. This figure means that every time average per capita expenditure on students in government schools increases, recurrent per capita funding to students in non-government schools also increases. In New South Wales, this funding is distributed to non-government schools by pooling the total amount, and allocating funds to non-government schools on the basis of the resources available to a school for recurrent purposes (based on 12 categories of funding level). This means that schools that charge lower fees receive more funding from the New South Wales government, and schools with higher fees, less.
While these arrangements may sound fair, in practice, they contain anomalies. In particular, a linked percentage increase assumes that on average, students in non- government schools cost about the same to educate as those in government schools. There is much evidence to suggest that this is a false assumption. Three examples will illustrate this point.
First, statistics indicate that 4.2% of students in government schools in New South Wales have disabilities, but only 2.6% of students in non-government schools250. The New South Wales Government has significantly increased funding to students with disabilities in recent years. This means that the average per capita expenditure for students in government schools has risen, and this causes the 25% figure for students in non-government schools to rise as if the numbers of students with disabilities were equivalent in the two kinds of schools. Second, Indigenous students make up 3.9% of students in New South Wales government schools but only 0.9% of students in non-government schools251. Many indigenous students require additional assistance with literacy and numeracy, or live in isolated areas, and so are more expensive to educate, and yet any increase in funding for these students benefits students in non-government schools, few of whom are indigenous.
Third, and most important in terms of its impact, the proportion of students from low socio-economic backgrounds is significantly skewed towards government schools. A recent research paper analysed this by comparing the proportion of
249 Budget Estimates 2002-2003 New South Wales, Op. Cit., Budget Estimates 2001-2002 New South Wales, Op. Cit. 250 Ibid., Table. 12. 251 National Report on Schooling: 2000, Op. Cit. See Appendix 1, Statistical Annex , Table 4, page 4 and Table 5, page 5.
153 students enrolled in government, independent252 and Catholic schools according to socio-economic status (SES) broken down into deciles. In Figure 13.1 below, if students from all socio-economic backgrounds were evenly distributed among the three types of schools, the graph would be flat along the 10% line. Instead, students from lower SES backgrounds (the bottom half) are more likely to be in government schools than Catholic or independent schools. In contrast, students from the top 50% in terms of SES are more likely to be in Catholic schools than government schools. However, the most extreme trend relates to SES and attendance at an independent school. Here, more than half of all enrolments in independent schools are of students from the top two SES deciles (the highest 20%). In addition, less than 30% of independent school enrolments are of students in the bottom 50% SES.
These trends become even more dramatic in relation to secondary school enrolments. In the case of independent schools, less than 10% of students from the poorest 50% of families attend independent secondary schools. In contrast, just over 20% of the second richest 10% of families, and nearly 40% of the wealthiest 10% of families attend independent schools. Elsewhere in this report, evidence is provided of the additional educational needs of students from low socio-economic backgrounds. However, the point to be made here is that any additional funds provided to poorer schools in New South Wales through programs such as the Priority Schools Funding Program, also benefit wealthier students in independent schools through the 25% funding linkage. In other words, whenever the government tries to improve the lot of disadvantaged students in government schools, students who attend non-government schools, many of whom are not disadvantaged, automatically benefit through a follow-on effect.
30
25
20 Proportion of Government schools system 15 Catholic schools enrolments % Independent schools 10
5
0 12345678910 Socio-economic Status
Figure 13.1 Proportion of students from different socio-economic groups enrolled in government, Catholic and independent schools
The 25% figure has remained stable since 1992, despite the fact that the Commonwealth government has significantly increased its contributions to non- government schools over the same period. The point at issue here is not the fact of support for any one sector but rather the distribution of resources in support of the fundamental principle that all children and young people should have an equal opportunity to fulfil their educational potential. The present report has identified many impediments to the realisation of that principle within the public education
252 Independent schools include those that are not part of the Catholic system. Some of these are small Christian and other religious schools. Most of the wealthiest non-government schools in Australia are also included with the independent school category. Mukherjee, D. 1999, Socio-economic Status and School System Enrolments. Australian Centre for Equity through Education. [online] Available www.aeufederal.org.au/Debates/index2.html [May 2002]
154 system. The Inquiry, accordingly, has recommended a range of improvements that have as their ultimate justification the enhancement of students’ learning. Those improvements cost money and one of the issues for government is whether sustaining the 25% per capita funding linkage without regard for the resources available to non-government schools is denying public school students the equal opportunity to which they should be entitled. If it could be demonstrated that even with Commonwealth funding and private fees, some non-government schools in New South Wales have fewer recurrent resources than do government schools, then top-up funding could more readily be justified on a targeted basis for those schools. However, in practice, all non-government schools in New South Wales receive some per capita funding from both the Commonwealth and the state governments, even though a significant number have recurrent resources (to say nothing of buildings, grounds and facilities) greatly in excess of those of most government schools. This is explored in more detail below in relation to Commonwealth funding of non-government schools.
The second area of funding by the New South Wales Government to non- government schools is provided in the form of interest rate subsidies on capital loans. When non-government schools borrow to build new school facilities they are automatically entitled to have their interest payments subsidised by the state government up to a maximum rate of 10.5%. The only conditions on receipt of the interest subsidy are that the loan should not exceed 85% of the capital cost and that the building standard not exceed the current optimal standard applying to buildings in public schools. There is no means test and schools may borrow for additional facilities while in receipt of a Commonwealth Capital Grant or while in receipt of a New South Wales interest subsidy on a previous loan. A list of schools receiving loan subsidies in 1998/99 and 1999/2000 shows the advantage taken of the scheme by wealthier independent schools. Approximately 10% of the independent schools highest on the Commonwealth’s SES index received over 20% of the $30 million annual total. While improved standards have been set for government schools the majority of schools in the government sector will wait many years for their amenities to be upgraded (see Chapter 6 of this report).
The third component of New South Wales Government funding to non-government schools in Table 13.6 above takes the form of the back to school allowance. This comprises an annual payment of $50 by the government to each child at school, regardless of socio-economic need. The Inquiry can see no reason why this expenditure (which totals $58 million for all students in NSW) should not be better targeted, and discusses this at the end of the chapter in a section on possible offsets for proposed additional expenditure. The next item on the list, the textbook allowance, has been rolled into the school global budget for government schools, and is itemised here for students in non-government schools. The ‘other payments’ item includes funding for the transport of students with disabilities, and other smaller sums.
Direct Commonwealth funding to non-government schools
Commonwealth funding and its effects Key points: i. In 2000, two-thirds of the $1.5 billion allocated to NSW under the States Grants (Primary and Secondary Assistance) Act, 2000, went to non-government schools, ii. In recent years the Commonwealth government has substantially increased its commitment to funding non-government schools. In the case of independent schools the Commonwealth support can provide up to 70% of the cost of educating a student in a government school,
155 iii. When the NSW Government component of 25% of recurrent funding is added, Catholic schools in NSW receive on average at least 80% of the average recurrent cost in public schools; several of the comparatively wealthy independent schools receive between 50% and 60% of the recurrent average cost. This does not include the income the independent non-government schools receive from fees which when added to the previous sum can mean that these schools operate at levels of recurrent expenditure that are more than double that of many government schools, iv. Over the decade to 2005/’06, Commonwealth funding for non-government schools will increase by 128% in real terms compared to an increase in government school funding of 50%.
In order to assess the impact on the education system in New South Wales as a whole of state government spending on non-government schools, it is essential to consider the Commonwealth contribution to these schools, and to assess recent changes in the level of Commonwealth funding.
Figures for the year 2000, prior to the SES funding change, show that the Commonwealth Government provided over $1.5 billion for schools in New South Wales. As shown in Table 13.7, almost $1 billion, or two thirds of the total allocated to New South Wales went to non-government schools, which educate about one-in- three students. The major portion of these funds ($900 million) was in the form of general recurrent per capita grants designed to assist non-government schools in the day-to-day education of students. The table includes Commonwealth funds to government schools in New South Wales for comparison purposes (although in practice, these are rolled into the overall state budget figure of $5.5 billion).
Table 13.7: Commonwealth financial assistance granted in 2000 to government and non-government schools in NSW, under the States Grants (Primary and Secondary Education Assistance) Act, 1996 ($000) Program Non-Government Government Catholic Independent $000 General recurrent grants 586,052 312,968 385,902 Capital grants 21,130 7,315 75,754 Literacy/numeracy grants 15,975 4,608 60,167 Asian, community and priority languages 3,340 1,139 11,651 Special learning needs (special education 9,309 8,404 16,116 and students with disabilities) ESL new arrivals 1,246 73 14,154 Country Areas program 923 23 5,116 Full Service Schools program - - 2,459
Total 637,975 334,530 571,319
Evidence exists that in recent years the Commonwealth government has substantially increased its commitment to funding non-government schools at the expense of government schools. Since 2001, the SES funding model has operated in relation to non-government school funding in New South Wales. This funds non- government schools on the basis of the socio-economic status of the census units from which the school’s students come. This area-based approach has been used by governments for similar purposes for decades but it must be noted that it does
156 not specifically include the actual income of the student’s family, the significant levels of private income generated by non-government schools, the assets of non- government schools, and the actual needs of each non-government school. The new funding model means that while Catholic schools (that are outside its ambit) attract funding at the rate of 56.2% of the average cost of educating a student in a government school, other non-government schools can be funded up to 70% of this amount. Added to the 25% recurrent funding automatically provided by the state government, this means that Catholic schools in New South Wales receive, on average from all sources, at least 80% of the average recurrent cost in public schools from government sources. Funding for independent schools varies. For example, on current projections, several small faith-based schools in New South Wales, of varying religious persuasions, will by 2004 receive more than 85% of their funds from the Commonwealth and State governments. Several of the wealthiest independent schools will receive between 50% and 60% of the average recurrent cost in public schools from government. This does not include the income they receive from fees, which when added to the above amounts can mean that these schools operate at levels of recurrent expenditure that is more than double that of many government schools.
To illustrate the funds available to schools the following table compares six New South Wales secondary schools, three government and three non-government, paired in terms of similar size and similar location. The point of the table is to compare the average funds available for educating students, given the society’s declared goal of providing the opportunity for each child to develop to the extent of her or his abilities. The table shows recurrent funds received from Commonwealth and State governments and income received through fees and in the case of government schools, through parent contributions. The marked differences between the high SES schools will be even greater by 2004. Targeted specific purpose funding has been excluded from the calculations.
Table 13.8: Comparison of funds available to comparable government and non-government schools
Socio Non a b c Economic Govt Commonwealth State Per Total Govt. Per cap. 02. Status School Recurrent Recurrent student a.b.c. School Govt plus 253 Funds ‘02 Funds Fees $ Private 254 255 $ ‘02 ‘02 funds256 $ $ $ High Ng A 1,565 726 12,187 14,478 GS A 6,744 Med Ng B 2,698 1,306 5,800 9,738 GS B 5,699 Low Ng C 4,107 1,596 4,300 10,003 GS C 6,989
In relation to the earlier discussion of interest rate subsidies, it should be noted that the high socio-economic status independent school referred to in Table 13.8 received interest rate subsidies over two years (1998/99 and 1999/2000) of more than $500,000, and the three non-government schools together over these two years received nearly $1.6 million in interest subsidies.
253 Department of Education, Science and Training, Senate Legislation Committee – Questions on Notice 2001-2002 Additional Estimates Hearing, DETYA Question No. E304 254 NSW DET 255 Guide to Schools 2002/2003. 9 th Edition. Johnson Media Management Pty.Ltd 256 NSW Department of Education and Training
157 Importantly, over the period 2001 to 2004, it is estimated that $815 million nationwide will be given in additional funds to non-government schools. Over the period 1995-96 to 2005-06, this will mean an increase in funding for non-government schools by the Commonwealth of 128% in real terms, compared to an increase in Commonwealth funding to schools of 50%257. This represents a very significant redistribution of funds from the Commonwealth government to non-government schools in Australia. It is also possible to demonstrate that combined Commonwealth and State government expenditure on non-government schools has increased disproportionately in New South Wales when compared to funding for government schools.
Table 13.9: Total expenditure (Commonwealth and State) on government and non-government schools after taking account of enrolment changes (NSW, 1996-97 and 2000-01)
GS Actual ($m) 3307.2 NGS Actual ($m) 962.5 GS enrolments 760,078 1996-97 NGS enrolments 305,269 GS $ per student 4,351 NGS $ per student 3,153
GS Actual ($m) 4210.20 NGS Actual ($m) 1531.58 GS enrolments 759,623 2000-01 NGS enrolments 334,693 GS $ per student 5,542 NGS $ per student 4.576
Comparison $ Per student increase GS 1,191 $ Per student increase NGS 1,423 % Per student increase GS 27.4% % Per student increase NGS 45.1%
Table 13.8 clearly indicates that after allowing for enrolment changes, the percentage increase in per capita funding for students in non-government schools up to 2000-01 has been 45.1%, whereas the equivalent increase for students in government schools is 27.4%. Assuming that additional Commonwealth increases mooted above to 2005-06 are accurate, this differential is likely to increase in coming years. These figures translate into tangible advantages for many private schools over their public counterpart. This in turn puts pressure on parents to choose a private education for their children, even when this may not be their preferred position. Over and again, parents and teachers have reminded the Inquiry that government and non-government schools do not compete on a level playing field. At every stage of the present Inquiry there have been reminders of the degree of imbalance in the resources currently available to private and public schools, which makes comparisons of their respective outcomes fraught.
257 “Commonwealth Funding for Schools Since 1996.” (2002) Department of the Parliamentary Library, Research Note 2001-02, No. 48, 25 June. Calculations on which the figures are based were taken from Budget papers and answers to questions asked in Senate Estimates hearings.
158 It is appropriate to ask why non-government schools require a substantial amount of additional expenditure. From the Karmel report in 1973 to the1990s, the main aim of Commonwealth funding to non-government schools was to bring them up to an equivalent standard to government schools. This meant that ‘need’ formed the basis of both recurrent and capital payments during those years. However, during the late 1990s, the arguments for funding shifted from ‘need’ to ‘entitlement’. Under this argument, parents who opt out of the public education system should be accorded the same entitlement to public support for their children’s education as parents of children in the government school system258.
While the Inquiry accepts the reality in Australia of continuing aid from both the Commonwealth and State governments to non-government schools, it believes this aid is creating a system in which inequities are being exacerbated rather than ameliorated. It is unrealistic to expect schools that have been in receipt of aid, even if they have comparatively high levels of resources at their disposal, to suddenly and completely forgo government funding. On the other hand, the Inquiry’s detailed analysis of the current state of New South Wales public education indicates that higher levels of investment are needed to bring the system up to an appropriate standard. Otherwise one group of children and young people - those attending state schools - are going to be denied the opportunity to develop to their full capacity. Governments have four main choices available to them: i. Let the system continue to drift until public education is confirmed in the role of being a residual system for those who cannot afford something better. This situation does not yet exist and is totally avoidable if appropriate levels of investment are made in improvements such as those summarised later in this chapter; ii. Increase the funds available to the state system although as things stand at present, there will be an automatic flow-on of funds to the non-government system; iii. Taper the level of support for the non-government schools by giving greater weight to the criterion of need and targeting aid to those schools where funds are needed to avoid disadvantaging the education of young people. The resultant savings could then be directed to the public system to ensure that equality of opportunity also applies to that sector; and iv. A combination of options (ii) and (iii).
With respect to available ways in which the targeting mentioned in option (iii) could be effected, the Inquiry indicates some of the ways in which savings could be achieved later in this chapter. In the final analysis, the choices from among the available options are political ones. However, failure to increase funding to the state system will be tantamount to choosing the ‘drift’ or first option outlined above.
4. THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION
Early school leaving entails costs not only for the individual but also for society generally. A number of studies indicate that the number of completed years of formal schooling is a more important predictor of health than occupation or income259. Education develops habits, skills, resources and abilities that enable people to
258 “The Commonwealth’s Role in Public and Private School Funding” (2001), Submission by the Australian Education Union to the Inquiry. 259 Grossman, M., (1972) The Demand for Health: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation, New York, Columbia University Press
159 achieve a better life, including the attainment and preservation of health.260. Investment in sustaining young people’s schooling increases human capital, “the productive capacity developed, embodied and stocked in human beings themselves”261. From the point of view of reducing social outlays, education decreases infant mortality262, the age-specific rates of morbidity, disability and mortality263. Education is associated with children’s nutritional intake, and in adults, exercise, moderate drinking, weight control and avoidance of smoking264. Females who have their first child as teenagers are more likely than those who delay childbearing to have low educational attainment, and subsequently these young mothers are more likely to become unskilled workers, and more likely to be unemployed and dependent on welfare265. Child abuse and neglect are associated with incomplete high school education266.
There is evidence of some crime reducing effects of education although the causal pathway remains unclear. The general socialising and supervisory roles of schools are of importance,267 so too, it appears, are those acquired characteristics that help with problem solving (for example, mental flexibility, classifying and perseverance). Less subtle (and more difficult to dismiss) is the stark evidence of low levels of literacy within the ever-increasing prison population. In America, adult literacy surveys have found that two-thirds of prison inmates are at the lowest levels of literacy268. In New South Wales, the Department of Corrective Services states a similar conclusion: “60% of inmates are not functionally literate or numerate,” and “60% of inmates did not complete year 10”269. A disproportionate number of those inmates are Aboriginal. However, when the rates of imprisonment of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people are analysed in terms of employment and education status, the two last mentioned factors exert a major influence on the likelihood of imprisonment. For example, the Indigenous person who has not completed secondary school has over thirteen times greater chance of imprisonment than has her or his better educated Aboriginal counterpart270.
It bears consideration that when the projected state prison population of 10,000 is realised within the next three years271, for approximately every six students
260 Mirowsky, J., Ross, C. E., (1998) “Education, personal control, lifestyle and health: a human capital hypothesis,” Research on Aging, July, V20, No.4., http://80- web2.infotra…/purl=rcl_EAIM_0_A208430114&dyn=39!ar_fmt?sw_aep=uns 261 Ibid., p. 416 262 Grossman, M., Kaestner, R., (1997) “Effects of Education on Health,” in Social Benefits of Education, (ed). J. R. Behrman and N. Stacey, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press 263 Kindig, D. A., Seplaki, C. L., Libby, D. L., (2002) “Death rate variation in US subpopulations,” Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 80 (1), pp.9-15; Feldman, J. J., Makuc, D. M., Kleinman, J. C., Cornoni-Huntley, J., (1989) “National Trends in Educational Differentials in Mortality,” American Journal of Epidemiology, 129:919-33 264 Ross, C. E., Bird, C. E., (1994) “Sex Stratification and Health Lifestyle: Consequences for Men’s and Women’s Perceived Health,” Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35:161-78 265 Olausson, P. O., Haglund, B., Weitoft, G. R., Cnattingius, S., (2001) “Teenage Childbearing and Long-term Socioeconomic Consequences: A Case Study in Sweden,” Family Planning Perspectives, March, V33, i2, 70-74 266 Moore, K., (1994) cited in Stacey, N., op. cit., (1998), p. 55; Finkelfor, D., (1994) “Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Abuse,” Future of Children, 4: 32-53 267 Stacey, N., (1998) op. cit., p.58 268 Lewis, A. C., (1996) “Breaking the cycle of poverty,” Phi Delta Kappan, November, V78, No. 3, p. 187 269 NSW Legislative Council, (2001) Select Committee on the Increase in Prisoner Population, Final Report, November, Sydney, NSW Parliament, p. 20 270 Walker, J., McDonald, D., (1995) “The over-representation of Indigenous People in Custody in Australia,” Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, Canberra, Australian Institute of Criminology 271 Ibid., p. 10
160 completing the HSC in New South Wales, there will be one person in gaol. The cost of imprisoning that single individual (around $60,000 per annum)272 would cover the cost of educating seven to eight senior high school students each year. It would also cover the cost of hiring an additional teacher.
There is more than a little irony in the current projection of crime and education as the two major political issues of the day273. That deficiencies in both areas are closely linked was shown by the findings of the previously cited 1999 study of the geographic distribution of social disadvantage throughout New South Wales274. When 578 NSW postcodes were assessed in terms of nine socio-medical indicators of disadvantage, of the twelve locations with the highest disadvantage scores, nine re-appeared on the list of twelve postcodes with the highest rates of court convictions. Six of the twelve most disadvantaged areas were also on the list of twelve postcodes with the highest rates of young people leaving school by 15 years of age.
To the above examples of the social costs of early-school leaving, a Canadian authority has added the following: - Increased administration costs of social welfare programs, - A less efficient operation of markets, - Decreased participation in the electoral and political process, - Decreased level of charitable giving, and - Decreased social cohesion275. The last mentioned cost is substantial because it enhances many, if not all, of the separately itemised social costs discussed above. For Australia as a whole, one year’s early school leavers are estimated to cost $2.6 billion, leading to the conclusion that “reducing the number of early school leavers would be a very sound investment for government, for the individuals concerned, and for the country as a whole” 276.
5. OPPORTUNITIES FOR RE-DIRECTING INVESTMENTS WITHIN THE EDUCATION SECTOR AND ACROSS SECTORS
In this section the Inquiry outlines some possible sources of savings that could help to offset the cost of the investments in public education recommended by this report. Several of the options identified relate to the education sector but the final one considered draws upon the foregoing discussion of the opportunity costs of limiting investment in education.
The School Student Transport Scheme
A significant source of funding for school children in New South Wales comes from the state Department of Transport, in the form of the School Student Transport Scheme (SSTS). It is estimated that $427.2 million will be spent on the Scheme in 2002-03, at an average cost per beneficiary of $628.30277. This constitutes an
272 $64,485 for maximum security prisoners, $58,095 for medium security prisoners, and $49,459 for minimum security in 1999/2000; NSW Legislative Council (2001) op. cit., p.71 273 NSW Opposition Leader Mr John Brogden speaking on ABC Breakfast Radio, 2/10/2002 274 Vinson, T., (1999) op. cit., 275 Conference Board of Canada, (1992) Dropping Out: The Cost to Canada. Ottaea, The Conference Board of Canada 276 ibid., p.21 277 Source: Budget Estimates 2002-2003, Op. Cit., Volume xx, p. 19-6
161 $11 million or 2.6% increase on the previous year. While this looks modest, equivalent increases have been occurring for many years (the cost of the SSTS in the early 1990s was $264 million). The SSTS provides free transport to all eligible students in New South Wales. This means that students who live more than about 1.5 - 2 kilometres from their school obtain free transport, and the scheme also includes a private vehicle subsidy for students who have no public transport access to school278. In relation to these figures, data provided by the Department of Transport indicates that about 58% of recipients of the SSTS attend government schools and receive 56% of the benefits, while 42% of recipients attend non- government schools and receive 44% of the benefits. This suggests that students in non-government schools benefit disproportionately from the scheme (as they make up a little over 30% of students). The average benefit per student also varies depending on type of school. In 1999, the average cost per beneficiary of the SSTS was $545 per student in a government school, $593 per student in a Catholic systemic school, and $584 per student in an independent school279.
Due to its exponentially increasing costs, the NSW Legislative Assembly Public Accounts Committee recently reviewed the SSTS280. The report provides some important statistics concerning the SSTS. First, compared with other states in Australia, New South Wales provides free school travel to more than twice the proportion of students in any other state (over 60% of students in New South Wales receive free school transport compared to less than 30% in all other states except Tasmania, which subsidises just over 30% of students)281. This translates in New South Wales into 664,100 student beneficiaries in 2001-02282. The reason for the differential between New South Wales and other states is that compared to most other states, New South Wales has no restrictions on eligibility for the scheme other than living beyond a minimum distance from one’s school of choice. Other states impose various limits, including possession of a health care card (indicating the parent is a pensioner or on a low income), attendance at nearest appropriate school or nearest government school only, or geographical location (rural and urban fringe areas only).
In relation to SSTS costs, the Committee concluded:
Education policies such as improved retention rates, school location, or a student’s choice of school have an impact on the size of the SSTS. However, a range of factors under the control of the Department of Transport appear to have driven the cost of the SSTS, at least over recent years283.
The committee made several recommendations on how the Department of Transport might limit SSTS costs. A number of these related to contracts with bus and other transport suppliers, and included tightening up contractual performance requirements, monitoring and auditing reimbursement claims more effectively, the possible rationalisation of bus services (especially in rural areas), considering the competitive tendering of contracts, and subsidising real rather than ‘phantom’ travellers (students who possess a pass but rarely use it). Recommendations were
278 NSW Department of Transport “Travel Concessions and Grants - School Student Transport Scheme (SSTS)”, http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/concess_grants/ssts.html. 279 Figures provided by officers in the Department of Transport. 280 Inquiry into the School Student Transport Scheme (2002), New South Wales Parliament, Public Accounts Committee, Report No. 131 [No. 13/52]. 281 Ibid. p. 65. 282 Ibid. p. viii. 283 Ibid. p. x.
162 also made about the management of the scheme, including the need for accurate records (including the possibility of electronic ticketing) and greater coordination between the Departments of Transport and Education and Training. All of these make sense and are supported by the Inquiry, although sensitivities and employment implications of tightening up the number of private bus contractors and their funding are noted.
At this point it needs to be emphasised that the Inquiry’s primary concern is to see public education provided on a more equitable basis. That requires additional funding to acquire the improvements identified by the Inquiry as being necessary to bring the public education system up to standard. Since there are inequities to be addressed it is appropriate to focus attention on possible offsets to help pay for the additional investments that are needed. Hence, the Inquiry is interested in the options for limiting eligibility for the STSS canvassed by the Parliamentary Committee. These include extending the distance criteria, for example for urban students, to those living more than 4.5 kms from their school, or more than 3 kms for primary students, which, according to the Parliamentary Committee would enable annual savings of between $52 million and $83 million, but might result in inconsistencies disadvantaging some students. The introduction of a maximum distance criterion was also considered. This could also result in very considerable savings (more than $100 million), but the Committee considered this proposal to be inequitable, as it might discriminate against students in particular need (e.g. socio- economically disadvantaged students attending selective or specialist high schools far from home). The notion of limiting travel to either the nearest government school, or nearest ‘appropriate’ school, was also considered, but rejected as limiting parent choice of school284. And finally, the application of socio-economic criteria to limit eligibility was explored, but rejected due to privacy and equity concerns (for example, the inequity of assuming all parents of students in non-government schools are more affluent). In other words, when it came to the more vexed issue of limiting eligibility for the SSTS, the Committee failed to make any recommendations.
While any change to the SSTS must ultimately be a political decision the Parliamentary Committee’s failure to recommend any of the cost reducing options considered in the face of objections is, to say the least, unfortunate. The Committee did not have before it the full picture of system inequities depicted in this report. Had its analysis included considerations at that level it might have accorded less weight to recurring objections to contemplated SSTS economies because of the alleged ‘loss of equity’ or ‘infringement of privacy’ entailed for individuals. The potential transfer of costs will inevitably provoke objections of one kind or another and their occurrence does not resolve whether the envisaged course of action should proceed.
Furthermore, in the Inquiry’s view, there are reasonable ways of accommodating the objections that were raised with the Parliamentary Inquiry without unduly disadvantaging any particular group of students. A basic entitlement for all students to travel to any school within a limited radius of their home (2-5 kms for urban and regional centre students, 2-20 kms for rural students, or a greater distance when the nearest school is even further away, combined with a minimally intrusive socio- economic criterion for students who choose to attend more distant schools, would seem to the Inquiry to meet the multiple requirements of financial accountability, parental choice and fairness. The recommended socio-economic criterion is the
284 Tasmania is the only other state beside NSW that places no limitation on the school type. The others specify that transport is limited to either the nearest school or the nearest state school.
163 possession of a health card either because of receipt of Centrelink benefits or fulfilment of Centrelink’s family income test285. The data needed to estimate the savings that would result from adoption of this proposal has not been available to the Inquiry. However, from the Parliamentary Committee’s estimates the saving should be substantial, probably in excess of $50 million and possibly as much as $75 million. This saving would mean that a majority of students receiving the benefit would continue to do so, and only those choosing schools some distance away from home, and who do not qualify on the basis of need, would be required to pay.
Back to school allowance
There is another expenditure option available to government that affords the opportunity for selectively supporting economically disadvantaged families while at the same time investing in the overall improvement of the public system to the advantage of students generally. At present the New South Wales Government spends $56 million on its $50 ‘back to school” allowance. The expenditure is distributed in the following way: Primary schools $22.727 million Secondary schools $15.442 million non-government schools $17.831 million TOTAL $56.000 million
The $50 allowance is potentially of greatest value to the estimated one third of households in New South Wales with one or more children, and incomes of $35,000 or less, entitling them to possess a Centrelink Health Card. It is arguable that thereafter the greatest benefit is derived from pooling the remainder of the $56 million and using that sum to improve the quality of the public education system. When the current expenditure is re-allocated on the afore-mentioned bases, the results are as follows: i. Total government + non-government students in NSW 1,089,000 ii. Estimated no. eligible students (above income test) 544,500 iii. Current cost of subsidy $56 million iv. Revised cost ($50 x 544,500 = $27.2 million) v. Estimated budget saving $28.8 million
25% per capita funding linkage
Earlier it was explained that every time average per capita expenditure on students in government schools increases, recurrent per capita funding to students in non- government schools also increases. The bases for questioning the necessity or fairness of this arrangement have also been presented. The Inquiry believes that legitimate grounds exist for government to adopt the third of four previously outlined options, namely:
Tapering the level of support for the non-government schools by giving greater weight to the criterion of need and more tightly targeting aid to those schools where funds are needed to avoid disadvantaging the education of young people. The resultant savings could then be directed to the public system to ensure that equality of opportunity also applies to that sector.
285 The levels of income for a family to be eligible are $573 per week where there is one child and $34 for each additional child.
164 The adoption of the above course, either with or without additional funding for public education, is a choice available to government. It does not hold promise of substantial immediate savings but rather the accumulation of offsets over time. At present there are 12 funding categories for the per capita allowances for primary and secondary students in non-government schools. The categories reflect the average level of recurrent resources available to educate a student in each school. The recommended “tapering” of support needs to be undertaken with at least two things in mind: (i) current Commonwealth funding of non-government schools and changes since 1990 when the state’s per capita linkage payments increased from 20% of standard costs to 25%; (ii) the need to avoid sudden alterations to the financial circumstances of non-government schools.
One way of achieving greater system equity would be to preserve the flow of 25% linkage payments to the least well-off non-government schools and hold the monetary value of the payments to the others at the 2002 level, subject to a review after a period, say, of five years. Such an approach would seem fair and equitable but is complicated by the inclusion of the entire Catholic system within the tenth or third bottom-funding category. As the table 13.9 below indicates, this results in a massive concentration of the current allowances within the very category that, if it were used in a more discriminating way, would arguably be the starting point for preserving the flow-on of the 25% linkage funding. No doubt, some of the Catholic schools classified as ‘10’ could more accurately be classified as 11-12. If the three bottom categories accounted for 20-25% of total funding (rather than 76.4%) then that would seem an appropriate demarcation of schools entitled to special consideration in the form of continuation of the 25% linkage funding.
What is really required is a ‘needs’ benchmark in non-government schools that would result in pooled ‘flow-on’ funding being directed to schools with the most urgent claims, probably concentrated within the present categories 10-12. These issues are currently being addressed by a MCEETYA project and the Inquiry requests that the ‘comparative needs’ principle espoused immediately above, but also throughout its whole consideration of an equitable distribution of governmental funding of school education, will be taken into account in formulating New South Wales’ position.
Table 13.10: Per capita payments to non-government schools (1/7/2001-30/6/2002)
CATEGORY SHARE OF TOTAL FUNDING % 1 3.3 2 1.4 3 4.4 4 0.3 5 0.6 6 2.7 7 1.6 8 3.2 9 6.1 10 66.7 11 4.9 12 4.8 TOTAL 100.0
165 Another approach available to the government would more immediately yield offsets. The approach would be based on recognition of the improved level of Commonwealth funding for non-government schools since the introduction of the new SES funding formula in 2001. If New South Wales funding were restored to the original level of support (that is, 20% of the standard cost), then in the first year of its application, this approach would yield approximately $22 million.
Interest rate subsidies
Loan subsidy payments on new loans in 2000 amounted to approximately $8.5 million. This expenditure is linked to the current maximum allowable assistance rate of 10.5%. Government assistance /relief in some other important areas is linked to the NSW Treasury bond rate. For example, assistance for primary producers under the Natural Disaster Relief Scheme is provided by way of a loan at a concession rate equivalent to half the 10-year bond rate. Support to landholders through the New South Wales Rural Assistance Authority and the Department of Land and Water Conservation in relation to conservation measures includes the provision of loans at concession interest rates 25% below the 10-year bond rate. If the same framework were to be used and the interest subsidy on school borrowings matched the bond rate of approximately 5.6%, the Inquiry believes that would result in a saving of approximately $5 million per year. The long term prospect is for accumulating savings for the Government of up to half ($15 million) of the annual subsidy bill after a decade.
Overview of potential savings within education system i. Controls on school transport $60 million (range $50-$75 million) ii. Targeted back-to-school allowance $29 million iii. Per capita payments to non-govt. schools$22 million + iv. Reduced loan subsidy $ 5 million (accumulating) Total (conservatively) $116 million
Saving across sectors
Under the heading The Social and Economic Benefits of Investing in Education, the Inquiry has used a number of sources of information, from criminological and social research to the educational attributes of those incarcerated in New South Wales prisons, to illustrate the close connection between limited education and becoming an offender. Yet while the rate of imprisonment per 100,000 in New South Wales rose by 64% between 1981 and 2000, and 21% between 1995 and June 2000,286 expenditure on the education policy area as a percentage of all New South Wales Government expenditure declined from 28.4% in 1989-90 to 22.0% in 2001/02287. Over the period 1994-2000 the annual expenses of the Department of Corrective Services increased by 37% in real terms288. Present Government policy is based on an acceptance that the investment in incarceration will continue to expand but it is important for the Inquiry to make clear that such a choice has its financial, as well as social implications.
286 NSW Legislative Council, (2000), op. cit., p.15 287 Pie Chart Series, for Budget Paper No. 2 288 Ibid., p.73
166 TEACHERS’ SALARIES
In Chapter 1 of this report it was acknowledged that the issue of teachers’ salaries has an important bearing on the restoration of the professional identity of teachers and the successful implementation of many of the recommendations made by the Inquiry. The opinion was expressed that:
The revitalising of public education will demand a willingness on the part of teachers to venture into unfamiliar and somewhat threatening territory. It is hard to see how that step will be taken without evidence of positive employer identification with the tasks and recognition of the scale of what is required. The industrial climate…has evolved to the point where no other gesture can be an effective substitute for increased salary.
Completion of the discussion of salaries was deferred until this final chapter in order for the matter to be considered in the context of the overall costs of recommended changes and possible cost offsets. The details of current levels of remuneration for teachers and comparisons with other occupations were presented in Chapter 1. Apart from more adequately recognising the social value of the role performed by teachers, appropriate salaries will be important for attracting quality new recruits to the profession, especially in the circumstances where substantial numbers of teachers are expected to retire in the near future.
Again the size of the New South Wales public education system inevitably means that the cost of a ‘catch up’ increase in teachers’ pay, completely separate from the already agreed increment due in January 2003, although warranted in the light of the salary comparisons tabled in Chapter 1, will be formidable. The intended ‘catch up’ is not meant to delay or otherwise interfere with future standard salary negotiations. The Inquiry has remained parsimonious in arriving at the overall range of expenditures recommended throughout the report and summarised below. It has no desire to change direction in this final part of the report but has difficulty seeing how anything less than a 5% increase, resulting in annual gains of the order of $2,000 - $3,000 for the majority of teachers, would be both just and supportive of the scale of system change recommended. The estimated cost of a ‘catch up’ increase of this scale would, by the Inquiry’s own reckoning, be approximately $225 million. This is a substantial sum but like the estimated cost of implementing the specific recommendations made by the Inquiry ($153 million - see the following summary), it needs to be considered within the context of the earlier comparisons between New South Wales recurrent per capita student expenditures and the national averages for primary and secondary students. The state’s school education budget would need to be increased by an estimated $318 million if New South Wales were to match the national average rate of recurrent expenditure on each student. Account also needs to be taken of the possible offsets detailed earlier in this chapter. Depending on the political decisions taken, there is scope for potential savings in excess of $100 million.
167 OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEIR COSTS
RECOMMENDATIONS COSTS $
PROFESSIONALISM: $48 Million p.a. 1.1: Create staff development committees - 1.2: Professional development funds 48M p.a. 1.3: Reporting requirements re. alleged misbehaviour by teachers in-house 1.4: Development of teacher performance template in-house 1.5: Initiate professional performance management scheme in-house 1.6: Initiate remedial professional performance scheme see Rec:1.2 1.7: Support creation of Institute of Teachers -
PEDAGOGY: $1.35 Million p.a. next 3 yrs 2.1: DET strategic plan focusing on pedagogy in-house 2.2: Create pedagogy Clearinghouse 350K p.a. 2.3: Review of Clearinghouse in-house 4.1: Develop academic extension programs in all comprehensive schools, 1M and using expert consultants, professional development funds, Rec:1.2, 2.2 Clearing House and 10 Lighthouse schools over three years 4.2: Longest established selective high schools and 4 agriculture rural high - schools preserved; some selectives become partial selectives but more flexible; begin selectives outcomes research; review remaining fully and partially selective schools after 10 years 4.3: Amend Selective High Schools Test - 4.4: Halve number Opportunity Classes; begin research effects OCs; in-house review remaining OCs in 2010 4.5: No additional formal specialist high schools be established -
WELFARE/DISCIPLINE : $ 7.9 Million first year $13.2 Million second year $18.5 Million third year $21.2 Million fourth year thereafter additional $5.3M p.a. counsellors 5.1: Three year trial of specialist discipline/welfare role 1.4M p.a. 5.2: Internal collaborative evaluation see Rec: 1.2 5.3: Increase no. school counsellors by 700 over ten years additional 5.25M p.a. 5.4: Appoint mental health liaison officers in six Districts 480K 5.5: MoU between Health/DET specifying services, reporting - 5.6: Assessment of service outcomes by researchers, staff in-house 5.7: Proactive approaches to discipline project, 45 schools, 700K p.a. and 3 years, including role of Clearinghouse Rec: 2.2
INTEGRATION: $15.7 Million p.a. 9.1: District reporting on increased inclusion of students - 9.2: Trial inclusion coordinators in ten high need Districts 750K p.a. 9.3: Streamline applications for support, disability confirmation potential savings 9.4: Develop and disseminate teaching materials via Clearing House see Rec: 2.2 9.5: Professional development for teachers, specialist/generalist skills see Rec 1.2 9.6: Make greater use of specialist teachers and/or consultancy re-direct existing support, especially for students with lower support needs funds 9.7: Training module for teachers aides (special) 300K 9.8: Increase fixed element of Funding Support budget 7.6M p.a. 9.9: Create 100 f/t STLD positions for high needs schools 7M p.a. 9.10: Train STLD teachers in-house and Rec: 1.2
168 EARLY EDUCATION: $ 48.5 Million p.a. short-term $225 Million longer-term 3.1: Locate DET-run pre-schools in socially disadvantaged areas - 3.2: Increase no. Pre-schools to 140 (extra 40, say 20 within 3 years) 4M 3.3: (i) K-2 small classes in disadvantaged schools 47M 3.3: (ii) K-2 small classes in other schools 178M
INSTITUTE: recommendations in support of policies already adopted 1.7: Create Institute of Teachers, registration, training, accreditation, - community and professional relations 11.1: Orientation for overseas educated teachers in-house 11.2: Basic knowledge, skills, for beginning teachers - 11.3: Supervision, guidance for new teachers -
BOARD of STUDIES: no additional costs, potential savings 2.4: Integration of B of Studies within the DET - 2.5: Ownership of curriculum, other documents vested in DET potential savings 2.6: Test new curricula before system-wide adoption in-house 2.7: Increase membership of Board of Studies -
COLLEGES: no additional costs 4.6: Senior College in W. Sydney - plan with other schools - 4.7: Junior campuses focus on appropriate pedagogy, transition; research in-house net benefits over well resourced comprehensive high schools
BUILDINGS: possible minor costs for 6.2 6.1: Construct unmet needs indicators (schools buildings and their in-house maintenance) 6.2: Supplement operating funds of some schools with recurring in-house emergency maintenance needs
COUNTRY: $10.2 Million p.a. 7.1: Country schools educational opportunities grant 10.2M p.a. 7.2: Increased Performances for Country Schools Program in-house
FLEXIBLE SCHOOLS: $600,000 p.a. for three years 7.3: (i) Pilot four rural Community Education Centres as joint 600K p.a. DET/Premier’s Department (Strengthening Communities) projects, for three years (ii) Establish three schools as Community Learning Centres in-house within sites for three proposed NSW Government Priority Regional Communities Projects
DISADVANTAGE: $11.5 Million 3.2: Increase ‘attached’ pre-schools to 140 within six years not costed 8.2: Expansive strategies to combat effects of disadvantage PSPF funds and Rec: 2.2 8.3: Incentives to attract experienced teachers disadvantaged areas rising to 5M 8.4: New selection process for principals to schools with significant in-house numbers Aboriginal students 8.5: Upgrading of Aboriginal Education Assistants in-house 8.6: Identify trainee teachers with commitment to Aboriginal students in-house 8.7: Increase number of ESL teachers rising to 6.5M 8.8: DET to distinguish achievements of LBOTE students who - have lived in Australia 4 years or less 8.9: Provide a mentor in schools for children ‘in care’ in-house
169 TAFE / VET: $400,000 10.1: ‘Failsafe’ review of utility of TAFE’s amalgamation after a range in-house of positive measures attempted 10.2: The Board of Studies to review the VET industry curriculum framework - to ensure requirement of intellectual analysis 10.3: Establish Working Group on overcoming administrative barriers - to TAFE/ schools cooperation 10.4: District Superintendents develop Memorandum of Cooperation between - District Offices of the DET and TAFE Institutes using an existing model of successful cooperation 10.5: Adjust transfer of school/TAFE funds when TAFE services provided, in-house on basis that acknowledges schools’ continuing responsibilities for their students 10.6: Examine feasibility of cross campus transport. estimate for Note - where adopted there would be additional costs 20 Districts but scale would depend on local arrangements. 400K 10.7: Revise mandatory work placement requirement for VET industry in-house curriculum framework courses 10.8: VET in Schools Directorate identify range non-industrial learning sites - particularly for rural students to acquire work-related skills, knowledge 10.9: recognition and support for VET coordinators and teachers in-house 10.10: Develop inter-departmental protocols to manage in-house a five-year transition broker pilot project 10.11: Establish clear admin. Procedures for managing ‘second chance’ in-house educational programs for ‘at risk’ young people
GOVERNANCE: $3.5 Million 12.1: Create Program Planning, Innovation, Evaluation Directorate in-house 12.2: Expanded Schools Management Group in-house 12.3: Focused interchange program in-house 12.4: Succession planning and leadership training program 1.2M p.a. 12.5: Consideration in all decisions of impact on the standing of public education 12.6: Development of protocol re. next wage negotiations - 12.7: Tying State Government funding of new schools to no negative impact on existing schools; oppose Non-Government Schools Council - 12.8: District Office to work with professional learning communities - 12.9: School principals report on strategies to involve community - 12.10: Staffing of very small schools/ schools enrolments 100-159 1.44M 12.11: Review of RFF allocation to primary schools - 12.12: Principals to have limited discretion, subject to conditions, appoint small number of classroom teachers by advertisement , merit selection in-house 12.13 Development of executive appointment procedures in-house 12.14: School assistants, senior school assistants, trial of 20 business services managers 812,500 p.a. 12.15: Computer training for SAS staff in-house 12.16: Review general operations grant in-house
AVERAGE ADDITIONAL OUTLAY FOR EACH OF NEXT THREE YEARS $153 Million p.a.
170 S T A G E D I M P L E M E N T A T I O N P L A N
REMAINDER OF 4.2: Review DECADE continuing need for segregated selective schools.
SECOND
TRIENNIUM 5.3: Increase 9.1: District
E number school reporting on counsellors by increased 4.2: Some 700 over 10 inclusion. 3.3: Small K-2 selectives partially years. classes/general. N selective; half number OCs. 4.4: Implement 9.2: Special Ed.
I advanced ed. coordinators in FIRST opportunities all high need TRIENNIUM comprehensive Districts.
schools. 9.4: Develop and L disseminate teaching
4.2: Partially materials.
E selectives more 9.5 (from 1.2): flexible; begin 5.7: Positive Prof. Dev. for 1.4/1.5/1.6: Teacher selectives discipline/school teachers.
M performance outcomes wellbeing project. management. research. 9.7: Train T.Aides (Special) 4.1: Develop Adv 5.4/5.5/5.6: 11.1: Orientation
I Ed. opportunities Mental health 9.9/9.10: Increase for overseas 4.7: Multi- 6.1: Construction 2.1: Pedagogy-centred all comprehensive liaison officers. no. STLDs/train. 3.1/3.2: Increase trained teachers. collegiates of unmet needs corporate plan. schools. no. state pre- 11.3: Supervision, research. indicators (school
T 9.3: Streamline schools in guidance of new buildings and their 5.1/5.2: Trial application for disadvt. areas teachers. 2.7: Membership 4.6: Senior maintenance). welfare/discipline support. 11.2: Basic B of Studs. college West 6.2: roles in 20 knowledge, skills 2.6: Pilot curric. Sydney/other Supplementation 1.3: Complaints re 2.2/2.3: Pedagogy schools. 9..6/9.8: Increase for beginning changes. schools – dev. for emergency teachers. Clearing House. specialist support teachers. plan. maintenance 1.1/1.2: Professional for teachers; 3.3: K-2 small 1.7: Create 2.4/2.5: Re- some schools. development Increase low classes/disadv. Institute of integration of funds/ctee(s). support funding. schools. Teachers. office of BoS. WELFARE/ EARLY PROFESSIONALISM PEDAGOGY INTEGRATION Institute B of STUDIES COLLEGES BUILDINGS DISCIPLINE EDUCATION
171
8.7/8.8: Increase 12.5: Impact of no. ESL teachers. decisions on 10.5: Adjust standing Pub Ed. transfer of school - TAFE funds. 10.6: Cross- 12.10/12.11: campus transport. Small schools; 10.11: ‘second RFF prim.schools. chance’ ed 12.4/12.13: Exec. 8.6: Trainee Appts. teachers with 10.1: Review 12.3: Focused commitment to utility of TAFE inter-change Aboriginal stds. amalgamation 12.9: Comm. 8.4: Selection of Invol. principals. . 12.14/12.15 Aboriginal 10.10: transition : SAS/bus.serv. schools. broker scheme. Managers. 8.5: Upgrade 10.8/10.9: 12.16: Review Aboriginal Ed. Strategy for Ops. Grant 8.1: Urban comm. Assistance appropriate work 12.12: Princips. learning centres. 8.9: Children ‘in placements & limited discretion care’ mentor in work roles. in appointments. 7.3 (b): Comm. schools. 10.7: mandatory 12.6: Wage negot. ed. centres – 8.2: Multi-layered work placement. 12.8: Dist. Office/ remainder (rural). strategies to 10.2: BoS review learning comms. overcome effects VET industry 12.7: non-gov. of disadv. curriculum school funding 8.3: Incentives framework. 12.2: Expanded attract 10.3/10.4: Management Gp. 7.1/7.2: Country 7.3 (a): Comm. experienced Working Grp on 12.1: Create schools ed. opportunity ed. centres – teachers to barriers to Planning, Innovat. grant. Warialda. disadv. areas. cooperation. Eval. Directorate FLEXIBLE COUNTRY DISADVANTAGE TAFE/VET GOVERNANCE SCHOOLS
172