P

EXECUTIVE MEETING Friday 23 February 2018 Qantas Meeting Rooms, Qantas domestic T1 Mezzanine level, opposite Gate 1. 10.00 am — 3.00 pm AEDT

No Item Required Time 9.45 am Morning Tea

1 Meeting opening 10.00am 1.1 Apologies 1.2 Previous minutes (5 December 2017) 1.2.1 Confirmation Resolution 1.2.2 Matters arising • Elect vice-president Vote

2 Matters for decision 2.1 Research Grant Decision 10.20am 2.2 Treasurer’s report Accept 2017 10.50am Annual Report Review insurance 3 Matters for discussion 3.1 WA Space School 11.20am

12 noon Lunch 12.00pm

3.3 Actura presentation: joined by Charles Chung; Meetal 12.30pm Gandhi: Country Manager, Business Development; Heike Roehrer: Expedition Fulfillment Manager; Naomi Donohue: Manager, Program Management.

3.4 EO report 1.15pm • update on strategic plan • significant issues 3.5 Other matters for discussion 1.45pm • presentation of Honorary Membership

2.00 pm Afternoon Tea 2.00pm

4 Matters for noting 2.00pm 4.1 Final report: Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

4 In camera 2.10pm

5 Other business 2.40pm

6 Close 2.55pm Next meeting: 28 March 2018

P EXECUTIVE MEETING Tuesday 5 December 2017 Videoconference 12 noon AEDT

1. Welcome and apologies Apologies: Anne Johnstone Present: Fran Reddan, Ros Curtis, Briony Scott, Judith Tudball, Mary Cannon, Julia Shea, Kate Hadwen, Jackie Barron, Loren Bridge

2. Minutes of previous meeting (16 October) Minutes of the previous meeting were distributed in advance and approved as distributed.

Business arising • Review of branch events for 2017 Branches to review document and advise any changes before 31 December 2017. The event list will form part of the Alliance’s 2017 Annual Report.

• Review of draft operational plan 2018 Priorities for 2018: Online Introduction to Girls’ Schools; delivering high quality SLC and BEC; establish recognition awards.

• Proposal and costings for repositioning In Alliance Combine an e-zine microsite with 150 pp annual publication. Distribution of publication to extend beyond members with greater impact and reach. Costings included in budget.

• Executive meeting dates for 2018 Date for April meeting moved to March 28 (calendar appended).

• Branch meeting dates for 2018 QLD and WA provided. Branches wishing to call for proposals from member schools to present to advise dates.

• Update on online Introduction to Girls’ Schools course. Course outline provided. Program will be ready to launch by 22 January. Executive member schools to trial program prior to launch at BEC. Consider: accreditation; potential for schools to have fully certified staff; reference to mindfulness and connection with Carol Dweck.

3. Treasurer’s Report Financial statements for October were presented. 2018 Budget presented with 2.5% increase in subscription fee required to fund expenses include increase in wages. MOTION: that the 2018 Budget for the year ending 31 December 2018 be accepted. Proposed: Briony Scott Seconded: Ros Curtis Carried

4. Conferences and events: SLC 2018 – sold out – international students from NZ, , USA and BEC 2018 – registration has opened GF2 – call for proposals to present close 11 December; Cocktail function for attending members and alumnae on Monday 18 June at Australian Embassy

5. Officer Bearer positions Fran Reddan resigned from the Alliance Executive and position of President, Ros Curtis nominated and was appointed president. Position of VP vacant. Nominations will be sought before next meeting.

6. Other business New members: Otago Girls High School, NZ; St John Fisher College, Qld (total 167) An application for Australian Charities and Not for profits Commission (ACNC) has been lodged. Harris Black advised not to lodge a tax return until ACNC decision.

Next Meeting: Friday 23 February 10am to 3.00 pm AEDT, Qantas Meeting Rooms, Melbourne

2018 Executive Meeting and Conference Dates Date Venue SLC Bond University Wednesday 3 – Saturday 6 January Celebration Dinner 5 January FACE to FACE Melbourne Qantas Friday 23 February 10am to 3.00 pm AEDT Meeting Room Videoconference Wednesday 28 March, 12 noon – 1.30 pm, AEDT Biennial Educators Conference – Fearless Girls ACC Adelaide Strong Women 5-7 May FACE TO FACE TBC Adelaide Saturday 5 May, 11.00 pm to 4.00 pm AGM ACC Adelaide Sunday 6 May 4.30-5.30 pm GF2 Washington DC 18-20 June Face to face Qantas Meeting Room, Friday 3 August 10 am– 3.00 pm, AEST Sydney Qantas meeting rooms Videoconference Monday 15 October, 12.00 pm – 1.30 pm AEDT Videoconference Tuesday 4 December, 12.00 pm – 1.30 pm AEDT

Alliance Research Grant 2018

An allocation of $15,000 has been budgeted for a research project in 2018. Submissions have been received from:

Prof. Helen Forgasz and Prof. Gilah Leder, Monash University Building on and extending findings reported in Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways undertaken for the Alliance and completed in 2017. In this proposal we consider several caveats which seem particularly worthy of follow up research.

Dr Katherine Dix, ACER Building on ACER’s recent work into single-sex schooling (Dix, 2017; Rothman, 2017), this proposal seeks to strengthen the evidence-base regarding the comparison of single-sex and coeducational schools in around the policies and practices that optimise girls’ numeracy and reading outcomes.

Dr Rebecca English, QUT and Dr Raechel Johns, UC This study will explore the question: how are the academic and life outcomes of girls educated at all girls’ schools in Australia different from those girls who attend a co-educational school?

Julie Mencher Replicate a study conducted in U.S. and Canada girls’ schools that reviewed experiences and policy responses of girls’ schools as they navigate the changing gender landscape.

2018 (follow-up) research proposal Professor Helen Forgasz and Adjunct Professor Gilah Leder

Our overall aim in this application is to build on and extend findings we reported in Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways: Final report. FOR: Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia. In that report we highlighted some caveats in the conduct of our research. In this proposal we consider several caveats which seem particularly worthy of follow up research. As well, we focus on several issues which called out for closer scrutiny, best achieved via qualitative means, which were beyond the scope of the earlier study. With respect to the former (our caveats) we highlight: 1. STEM enrolment data In order to validate that our sample of respondents was representative of those focussing on STEM studies and careers, we requested data from the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) to disaggregate Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) Year 12 enrolment data in STEM subject areas by school type attended (single-sex or co-education) as well as by gender. VCAA did not allow further disaggregation by school sector, as there is only one single-sex boys’ school in the government sector in and the data disaggregated by this sector would not be anonymous. The VCAA data, however, have proven invaluable in establishing the validity of the sample. (See final report submitted)

We have now examined the 2018 Good Schools Guide (https://www.goodschools.com.au/) from which the following data for New South were extracted:

Table 1. schools by sector and gender composition

All schools Single-sex (Male) Single-sex (Female) Co-educational Government 402 21 24 357 Catholic 152 26 28 98 Independent 241 17 21 203

Goal: Assuming the relevant authorities will release the data to us, we aim to replicate the analyses we conducted in our earlier project for Year 12 enrolment data in STEM subjects in New South Wales. The higher number of single-sex government schools should enable us to disaggregate the data not only by school gender composition (as in our previous study) but also by school sector.

2. Sample of female respondents from single-sex government schools The number of female respondents attending single-sex government schools was small compared to the number from non-government (Independent and Catholic) schools. A consequence of this limitation is that we were unable to report findings by school sector for the female respondents attending single-sex schools. (See final report submitted)

Again, we have drawn on data from the 2018 Good Schools Guide. The data reveal a total of 32 single-sex female government schools Australia-wide (of which 24 are in NSW, 7 in Victoria, and 1 in ).

1

Goal: to make more robust comparisons between females attending single-sex non-government and government schools, we will recruit additional female respondents who attended single-sex government schools. Recruitment will be directly from schools which can distribute information about the survey to their alumnae.

3. Beyond the report submitted: Qualitative data In our previous study, participants highlighted issues that called for further explorations beyond the scope and analysis of data gathered in the research undertaken.

Goal: to interview stakeholders (other than parents) associated with single-sex girls’ schools, particularly with respect to enriching and better understanding findings from the first study.

Here we provide only two examples: i. Many respondents from single-sex schools who reported studying advanced level mathematics (and often physics) appeared to have chosen engineering and other physical science career paths less frequently than did those who had attended co-educational schools. Instead they had chosen biological and health-related fields.

We consider it important to broaden the evidence-base for this career choice pattern. For example, why did fewer respondents identify teachers and career advice than identified parents and being good at STEM subjects as influences on their choice of initial career? (see Table 2 – reproduced section of table in final submitted report).

Table 2.

Factors influencing the choice of initial career (in descending order): Females attending single-sex schools

Single-Sex Reason N % Parents 418 43.4 Good at ≥1 STEM subjects 362 37.6 Good employment prospects 307 31.8 Teachers 281 29.1 Career advice 225 23.3 Other 224 23.2 Wanted STEM occupation 176 18.3 Friends 130 13.5 Other family 119 12.3 Employer help 40 4.1

In a recent study, school staff members (classroom teachers, principals, deputy principals and senior teachers who spend some or most of their time in administration) were surveyed (Li & Koch, 2017). Participants were asked to rate the level of mathematics (university mathematics, year 12, year 10, basic mathematics skills) they thought would be required for a number of occupations. There were considerable variations in the responses provided, with many (more often females) appearing to overestimate the actual levels of mathematics required.

2

Thus, we consider it important to survey and interview other stakeholders from single-sex schools about their views on subject choice, career paths, and pre- requisites considered appropriate for STEM careers. The stakeholders will include those concerned with STEM-related education and students’ future pathways: principals, curriculum leaders, and careers advisers. ii. A further issue related to subject and career choice is captured by the following excerpt from our previous report:

The data about supporters and barriers of career trajectories were also informative. For the females (single-sex and co-educational backgrounds), but not for the males, the traditional gender stereotyped role expectations of females to serve as main carers for children were not only evident among older participants, but disappointingly also among younger respondents. These same gender stereotyped role expectations, as well as harassment/bullying in workplaces that are traditionally male dominated (e.g., engineering), also emerged as explanations for career changes. Clearly workplace cultures need to be addressed by those working in the pertinent fields. However, is there a role for schools to educate young women about their rights as employees in non-traditional fields, and how to report unacceptable incidents or practices in the workplace? (p. 42, emphasis added)

It is important that recommendations made are practical and realistic and thus to document what professionals consider appropriate and achievable with respect to advising and supporting students in their courses of study and future career options. In the interviews with stakeholders (principals, curriculum leaders, and career advisers), the emphasis for this part of the proposed follow-up study will be on managing environmental and personal factors.

4. Feedback from conference We look forward to discussions at the forthcoming Alliance conference, including reactions to our presentation. We assume that constructive discussions might well highlight further issues that could be explored as part of our follow up study. Where practical, these would be incorporated in this next phase of research. Budget No longer having work-related commitments and demands, both of us will have the time to undertake some of the data gathering and much of the data analyses to meet the three strands to the research we are proposing (1-3 above): NSW STEM enrolment data, expanding the sample of females from single-sex government schools; and interviewing principals, curriculum leaders, and careers advisers in single-sex girls’ schools. Please note that we have not included in the budget remuneration to us, to recompense us for the time we will spend on co-ordinating the work, analysing the data, and reporting the findings.

If successful, monies will be needed to support the conduct of the research as follows:

a. Research Assistant who will support us to: i. gather STEM enrolment data from the Board of Studies Teaching and Educational Standards NSW ii. approach single-sex government schools (and relevant educational authorities, if required) to request that they correspond with alumnae to complete the same online survey used in the first study

3

iii. identify potential stakeholder participants to interview: principals, curriculum leaders, and careers advisers iv. conduct some of the interviews with the stakeholders v. analyse the interview data

Estimated cost: $6,000

b. Interstate travel and accommodation In order to conduct interviews face-to-face across Australia, travel, accommodation, and associated costs will be required. We estimate that 10 days may be spent in interstate travel at a per diem rate (including flights) of $500.

Estimated cost: $5000

c. Other costs i. Transcription of audio-recorded interviews: $3000 ii. Miscellaneous and/or to take up research idea/s based on feedback from our conference presentation: $1000

Estimated cost: $4000 Budget total: $15,000

Reference Li, N., & Koch, I. (2017). Choose maths gender report: Participation, performance, and attitudes towards mathematics. Melbourne: Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute. Retrieved from http://amsi.org.au/publications/gender-report-2017-participation-performance-attitudes- towards-mathematics/

4

Alliance Research Grant Application Form

Personal details Full name, title and Dr Katherine Dix, current position Senior Research Fellow, Division of Educational Monitoring and Research Address of employer, The Australian Council for Educational Research Limited (ACER) company or university Head office: 19 Prospect Hill Rd, Camberwell VIC 3124 Dix located at Adelaide office: 186B Pulteney Street, Adelaide SA 5000 Telephone/mobile T: 08 8206 8633 M: 0400 798 005 Email address [email protected] Academic qualifications Post Graduate – 2014 Master of Philosophy in Physics, Adelaide University Year, Award, Institution 2008 Doctor of Philosophy in Education, Flinders University Graduate – 1998 Honours in Education, Flinders University Year, Award, Institution 1998 Bachelor of Education (Secondary), Flinders University 1991 Honours in Science (Geophysics/Maths), Flinders University 1990 Bachelor of Science (Geophysics/Maths), Flinders University Agreement with grant conditions I, Katherine Dix, agree with the conditions of the grant as outlined in the Research Grant Guidelines 2016.

Signature: Date: 24 January 2018

AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS OFFER:

Professor Geofferey Masters AO Chief Executive Officer The Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd 19 Prospect Hill Road, Camberwell, Vic 3124, AUSTRALIA [email protected]

Signature of Invitee’s Authorised Officer ......

Date of signing: 24 January 2018

Page 1 of 8 Single-Sex Schooling and Girls’ Achievement in Australia The Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) welcomes the opportunity to work with the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia (AGSA). It comes in response to an invitation in late 2017, by the AGSA Director of Research, to submit a proposal building on the preliminary results of Dix (2017).

1. Expertise and staffing The project will be managed and chiefly conducted by Dr Katherine Dix, Senior Research Fellow in the Educational Monitoring and Research division at ACER. Katherine brings diverse experience gained over 20 years in local and international educational research, with core expertise in questionnaire design, multilevel analyses, data translation, and real-time reporting that informs policy and practice. As a user of large national data sets (e.g. NAPLAN, LSAC, NSW-CDS), she has a strong interest in the impact of gender and schooling context and the factors that optimise student outcomes. A full curriculum vitae is provided (see Section 6). Additional expertise will be provided by Dr Petra Lietz, Principal Research Fellow, along with research assistance by Kashfee Ahmed and Toby Carslake, also in the Educational Monitoring and Research division at ACER.

2. Outline of proposed research

2.1 Relevance to the education of girls at single-sex schools in Australia and/or There continues to be considerable research and policy debate both in Australia and internationally about the impact of single-sex schooling on achievement outcomes (CESE, 2014). For example, Daly and Ainley (2000; Ainley & Daly, 2002) concluded no net effect of single-sex schooling after controlling for appropriate covariates; a line of analysis that has been carried on by others (e.g. Halpern et al., 2011; Sikora, 2014; Pennington et al., 2017). However, other researchers (e.g. Smyth, 2010; Doris et al., 2013; Pahlke et al., 2014; Dix, 2017) have concluded that there was an effect. Building on ACER’s recent work into single-sex schooling (Dix, 2017; Rothman, 2017), this proposal seeks to strengthen the evidence-base regarding the comparison of single-sex and coeducational schools in Australia around the policies and practices that optimise girls’ numeracy and reading outcomes. We propose a three-pronged approach in the resulting report.  Supported by a review of literature, the preliminary analysis reported in Dix (2017) will be refined and formally written up.  Schools emerging from the analysis, which illustrate higher than average value-add in terms of student outcomes given their student intake, will be identified (with their permission).  To stay within the scope of the current grant, a desktop review of the profiles of the identified schools and any relevant information which is readily available online, will be undertaken to provide some context to the identified schools. In depth case studies of the identified schools using structured interviews and school visits to identify effective practices and insights into these schools’ success could be the focus of a subsequent grant.

2.2 Longitudinal data set For the proposed analyses, it is suggested to use a dataset based on the Australian National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), obtained from ACARA. Preliminary analyses using this data set by Dix (2017) have shown that it is possible to compare results for students in single-sex schools with results for students in coeducational schools. The data set contains data on the NAPLAN performance for about 8,500 schools across Australia in 2010, 2011 and 2012, together with additional demographic information such as school type, sector, location, male/female student enrolments, and ICSEA. In order to accurately categorise schools as single-sex boy or girl schools or co-educational schools, available student enrolment data will be used

Page 2 of 8 and compared with data provided by the AGSA Director of Research (dated 13 Dec 2017 based on MySchool2016) and ACER’s 2017 sampling frame.

2.3 Outcomes being assessed The outcomes to be assessed in the proposed analyses will be growth in performance over time. The reliable measurement of growth requires analysis of data on at least three time points. Hence, it is proposed to analyse the change in performance within schools over three Year levels, namely Year 3 and Year 5 and Year 7, separately for reading and numeracy. In order to increase the validity of the comparisons, only schools that provide achievement scores at all three Year levels will be included in the analyses. School-level factors, such as socio-economic status (SES) will be included in the analyses to control for the type of schools’ student intake. In this way, so called “value-add” schools could be identified for which the growth in performance would be greater than expected given their student intake (CESE, 2014). ACER would discuss research questions and designs with AGSA before proceeding with any further analyses. ACER has in the past conducted analyses of these data sets for individual projects and is well- placed to conduct analyses for AGSA.

2.4 Comparison of girls with other cohorts The growth in performance for girls’ schools will be compared with that of boys’ schools and co- educational schools. Note that it will not be possible to compare at the student level, the differential performance of girls in single-sex schools and girls in coeducational settings using the available NAPLAN data set, which consists of aggregated student results at the Year level (3, 5, 7, 9), within schools.

2.5 Gender gap The nature of the analysis will allow for discussion of gender gaps and the differences between student numeracy and reading achievement in girls, boys and coeducational settings in primary and combined (K-12) schools. The review of literature will add further evidence.

3. Budget outline The cost of this work is $14,765 (ex-GST). The GST component is $1,476. Total cost, inclusive of GST, is $16,241. It is assumed that no travel is required, and travel costs are not included in the budget.

4. Timeline The work for this proposal will be conducted during the first half of 2018, although this timeline is negotiable. We propose that the report to AGSA be delivered no later than 29 June 2018.

Date 2018 Activity

March Refine database and conduct HLM analysis

March-April Undertake literature review, draft results and findings

April Identify and approach high-performing schools, interviews

May Synthesise findings and prepare report; presentation at AGSA Conference

29 June 2018 Submit final report (scholarly journal article) to AGSA

Page 3 of 8 5. References Ainley, J. & Daly, P. (2002). Participation in science courses in the final year of high school in Australia: The influence of single sex coeducational schools. In A. Datnow & L. Hubbard (Eds.), Gender in Policy and Practice: Perspectives on Single-sex and Coeducational Schooling (pp. 243-263). Routledge Farmer: New York. Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation (2014). Using value-added measures to identify school contributions to student learning. Learning Curve, Issue 6. NSW Department of Education and Communities. Daly, P. & Ainley, J. (2000). Student participation in mathematics courses in Australian secondary schools. Irish Journal of Education, 30, 70-95. Dix, K. (2017, September 28). Single-sex schooling and achievement outcomes. [rd] Research Developments (Australian Council for Educational Research). Retrieved from: https://rd.acer.org/article/single-sex-schooling-and-achievement-outcomes Doris, A., O’Neill, D., & Sweetman, O. (2013). Gender, single-sex schooling and maths achievement. Economics of Education Review, 35, 104-119. Halpern, D. F., Eliot, L., Bigler, R. S., Fabes, R. A., Hanish, L. D., Hyde, J., ... & Martin, C. L. (2011). The pseudoscience of single-sex schooling. Science, 333(6050), 1706-1707. Pahlke, E., Hyde, J. S., & Allison, C. M. (2014). The effects of single-sex compared with coeducational schooling on students’ performance and attitudes: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140 (4), 1042-1072. Pennington, C. R., Kaye, L. K., Qureshi, A. W., & Heim, D. (2017). Controlling for prior attainment reduces the positive influence that single-gender classroom initiatives exert on high school students’ scholastic achievements. Sex Roles, 1-9. Rothman, S. (2017). Comments on ‘The Effects of Single-Sex Compared With Coeducational Schooling on Students’ Performance and Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis’. Report to the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia, the National Coalition of Girls’ Schools and the Girls’ Schools Association. Melbourne: ACER. Sikora, J. (2014). Gender gap in school science: Are single-sex schools important? Sex roles, 70(9-10), 400-415. Smyth, E. (2010). Single-sex education: what does research tell us? Revue française de pédagogie, (2), 47-58.

Page 4 of 8 6. Curriculum Vitae: Dr Katherine Dix Name Key Projects and Experience Dr Katherine Dix GENDER DIFFERENCES IN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT Position Principal Researcher (2017) Senior Research Fellow since 2015 Undertake the preliminary design and analysis of data models comparing the effect of single-sex and co-ed schooling on numeracy and literacy outcomes in Australia using NAPLAN 2010-2012 data. Availability secured VICTORIAN AUDITOR-GENERAL’S OFFICE: SCHOOL COUNCILS IN GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS SURVEY Qualifications/Certifications Project Director (2017) • BSc Hons (Flinders University) Lead the design, online development, administration, analysis, and • BEd Hons (Flinders University) reporting of the first ever audit into Vic school councils. • MPhil Physics (Adelaide University) • PhD Education (Flinders University) VIC DET REDESIGN OF THE STUDENT ATTITUDES TO SCHOOL SURVEY • Systematic Reviewer (Joanna Briggs AND THE SCHOOL PARENT OPINION SURVEY Project Director (2017) Institute, Adelaide University) Lead the review, stakeholder engagement and redesign of the Location differentiated Student attitudes to school surveys and the School parent ACER Adelaide, Australia opinion survey, and School support resource. Key skills OECD-UNESCO SURVEY OF TEACHERS IN PRE-PRIMARY EDUCATION (STEPP)

• Data analysis Principal Researcher (2017-2019) • Design and develop questionnaire Questionnaire design, analyses and reporting. • Evaluation of impact • Evaluation of program/project OECD INTERNATIONAL EARLY LEARNING (FOR CHILD WELLBEING) • Literature reviews STUDY (IELS) • Systematic reviews Project Coordinator (2016-2020) • Cognitive interviews Coordinate and contribute to the design of the cognitive and non- • Data analysis cognitive tools to assess children, aged 5 years, in 6 countries. Support • Data base management project implementation and reporting. • Desktop publishing TALIS 2018 NPM AUSTRALIA • Design and develop questionnaire National Analysis & Reporting Coordinator (2016-2019) • Evaluation of impact The purposeful reporting and dissemination of findings that inform policy • Evaluation of program/project and support school improvement, and deliver learnings that enhance • Literature reviews future cycles of TALIS. • Longitudinal methods • Publishing E4L THINKING MATHS EVALUATION • Research - mixed method Principal Researcher (2016-2018) • Research - quantitative Undertake evaluation design, administration, analysis, and reporting. • Research design FLINDERS UNIVERSITY HEPPP EVALUATION • Research dissemination Principal Researcher (2016-2017)

• Statistical analysis Undertake the design, administration, analysis and reporting on the • Surveys (general) design, evaluations of the River Journey, Enrichment Program, Transition implementation and reporting Experience, and the Inspire Mentor program. • Web development • Write proposals SAUDI ARABIA PEEC MINSTER OF EDUCATION REPORT: ARABIC • Write research reports LITERACY Analyst and writer (2016-2018) Analyses and write-up of the principal, teacher, parent and student Key knowledge questionnaires chapters. • Disability issues in education • Early childhood education SAUDI ARABIA PEEC MINSTER OF EDUCATION REPORT: MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE • Educational assessment Analyst and writer (2015-2016) • Learning outcomes Analyses and write-up of the teacher and student questionnaires • Questionnaire design • School improvement initiatives THE AUSTRALIAN CHILD WELLBEING PROJECT • School surveys and questionnaires Researcher (2015-2018) • Scholarly publishing Prepare the technical report and undertake secondary data analyses for • Statistics journal publication.

Page 5 of 8 Educational Experience UNSW CHILD DEVELOPMENT STUDY Before joining ACER, Katherine was Chief Investigator (2014-2017) Senior Research Officer at Principals The impact of whole-school mental health promotion. Instrument Australia Institute, 2011-2015, development, administration, analysis, publication. supporting the national rollout of KidsMatter and MindMatters. Prior to CAMPBELL SYSTEMATIC REVIEW that, she was a Research Fellow and a Qualified reviewer (2015-2018) Lecturer in Quantitative Research Undertake the systematic review of interventions for anxiety in school- aged children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Methods and Educational Statistics at Flinders University School of ACER MONOGRAPH SERIES Education, where she still holds Full Editor (2015- ) Academic Status. Editorial services of ACER monographs to publication.

* * * PRINCIPALS AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE, ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA Senior Research Officer (2011-2015) • National project data management and reporting. • Consultant to Beyondblue for ACER MindMatters Evaluation Languages other than English • Project Manager and Statistical Analyst for the Ministerial Advisory none Committee: Students with Disabilities Project • Project Manager, Paivement data management system • Data Manager and Quality Assurance: KidsMatter Primary

* * * SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, FLINDERS UNIVERSITY, ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA Lecturer in Education (2010-ongoing Full Academic Status) Research Fellow (2007-2012) Casual Academic (1999-2009) • Coordinator of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation • PostGrad Teaching - Research Methods 1: Quantitative Approaches, Introduction to Educational Statistics, Multivariate and Multilevel Analyses • Research Supervisor • Research Fellow - Project manager and statistical analyst of KidsMatter Early Childhood Evaluation, KidsMatter Primary Evaluation, KidsMatter Primary Quality Assurance Scoping Paper, Ministerial Advisory Committee: Students with Disabilities Project, KidsMatter in Indigenous Communities Report, DECStech Learning Technologies Project Student Survey. • Lecturer: Child and Adolescent Development • Course facilitator: Teaching & Learning with New Technologies.

* * * PUBLICATIONS Dr Dix's publications are wide ranging, with a strong focus on student wellbeing and whole-school mental health promotion using multivariate and multilevel analyses. Selected works can be accessed at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Katherine_Dix https://works.bepress.com/katherine_dix/ Google Scholar profile

Page 6 of 8 SELECTED PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

Books and Commissioned Reports Dix, K.L. (2017). VAGO School Councils in Government Schools Survey Final Report. Commissioned report for the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office. ACER, Melbourne. Carslake, T., Dix, K.L. & Lietz, P. (2017). Evaluation of the Flinders University Inspire Mentor Program. ACER, Melbourne. Dix, K.L., Carslake, T. & Lietz, P. (2017). Evaluation of 3 Student Access Programs at Flinders University. ACER, Melbourne. Dix, K.L. (2017). School Support Resource: How-to-guide on using Survey Data for School Improvement. Report for the Victorian Department of Education. ACER, Melbourne. Dix, K.L., Fullarton, J., Ahmed, K, Carslake, T., Urbach, D. & Lietz, P. (2017). Evidence Report: Redesign of the Student Attitudes to School Survey. Report for the Victorian Department of Education. ACER, Melbourne. Dix, K.L., Fullarton, J., Ahmed, K, Carslake, T., Urbach, D. & Lietz, P. (2017). Evidence Report: Redesign of the Parent Opinion Survey. Report for the Victorian Department of Education. ACER, Melbourne. Lietz, P., O’Grady, E., Tobin, M., Murphy, M., Macaskill, G., Redmond, G., Dix, K. and Thomson, S. (2015). Australian Child Wellbeing Project Technical Report. ACER, Melbourne. Dix, K.L. (2014). Best Practice Blended Learning: Insights from KidsMatter Primary. Principals Australia Institute, Adelaide. Dix, K.L., Slee, P.T., and Murray-Harvey, R. (2012). A Nested Quality Assurance System for KidsMatter Primary: Scoping Paper. Beyondblue: Melbourne. Dix, K.L., Jarvis, J.M. & Slee, P. (2013). KidsMatter and Young Children with Disability: Evaluation Report. Ministerial Advisory Committee: Students with Disabilities, Adelaide. Slee, P., Murray-Harvey, R., Dix, K., Skrzypiec, G., Askell-Williams, H., Lawson, M., et al. (2012). KidsMatter Early Childhood Evaluation Report. Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Slee, P., Skrzypiec, G., Dix, K.L., Murray-Harvey, R. and Askell-Williams, H. (2012). KidsMatter Early Childhood Evaluation in Services with High Proportions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children. Adelaide, South Australia: Shannon Research Press. Shute, R.H., Slee, P.T., Murray-Harvey, R., & Dix, K.L., ed. (2011). Mental Health and Wellbeing: Educational Perspectives (pp. 343-346). Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Dix, K.L., Keeves, J.P., Slee, P.T., Lawson, M.J., Russell, A., Askell-Williams, H., Owens, L., Skrzypiec, G. and Spears, B. (2010). The KidsMatter Primary Evaluation: Technical Report and User Guide. Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Dix, K.L., Shearer, J., Slee, P.T. and Butcher, C. (2010). KidsMatter for Students with a Disability: Evaluation Report. Ministerial Advisory Committee: Students with Disabilities, Adelaide. Slee, P.T., Lawson, M.J., Russell, A., Askell-William, H., Dix, K.L., Owens, L., Skrzypiec, G. and Spears, B. (2009). The KidsMatter Evaluation: Final Report. Beyondblue, Melbourne. Chapters Dix, K.L. (in press). Chapter 5: Student views; Chapter 6: Parent views; Chapter 7: Teacher views; and Chapter 8: Principal views. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia National Assessment Program Report to the Ministry of Education 2016 National Assessment Program Arabic Reading Literacy Grade 3 and Grade 6. Prepared for the Education Evaluation Commission by the Australian Council for Educational Research. ACER Press, Melbourne. Dix, K.L. (2016). Chapter 7: Student views (pp.137-162); and Chapter 8: Teacher views (pp.163-185). Kingdom of Saudi Arabia National Assessment Program Report to the Ministry of Education 2015 National Assessment Program Mathematics and Science Grade 3 and Grade 6. Prepared for the Education Evaluation Commission by the Australian Council for Educational Research. ACER Press, Melbourne. Dix, K.L. (2014). Chapter 16. Helping Kids with Disability. In H Street & N Porter (Eds) Better Than OK: Helping Young People to Flourish at School and Beyond (pp.107-114). Fremantle Press, Perth. Dix, K.L. & Keeves, J.P. (2013). Home, School and Specific Learning Difficulties: A Systemic Approach. In I.G.N. Darmawan and C. Aldous (Eds). The Processes of Change on Learning Literacy and Numeracy in South Australian Primary Schools. SIMERR-SA, Volume 3 (pp.82-114). Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. (2011). Students with a disability: The potential of KidsMatter. In Shute, R.H., Slee, P.T., Murray-Harvey, R., & Dix, K.L., ed. Mental Health and Wellbeing: Educational Perspectives (pp. 41-52). Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. (2009). Identifying categories of student mental health with multiple measures and multiple informants using Latent Class Analysis. In B. Matthews and J.A. Gibbons (eds) The Process of Research in Education: A Festschrift in Honour of John P Keeves AM. Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Refereed Journals Dix, K.L., Green, M., Tzoumakis, S., Dean, L., Harris, F., Carr, V. & Laurens, K. (in review). The Survey of School Promotion of Emotional and Social Health (SSPESH): A brief measure of the implementation of whole-school mental health promotion. School Mental Health. Lietz, P., Dix, K.L., Tarabashkina, L., O’Grady, E., & Ahmed, S.K. (2018). Family fun: A vital ingredient of early adolescents having a good life. Journal of Family Studies, 1-18. doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2017.1418410 Lietz, P., Kos, J., Dix, K.L., Trevitt, J., Uljarevic, M. & O’Grady, E. (2018). Protocol for a Systematic Review: Interventions for Anxiety in School-aged Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). The Campbell Collaboration Library. https://campbellcollaboration.org/library/anxiety-in-school-aged-children-with-autism-spectrum-disorder.html Carr, V., Harris, F.,… Dix, K., Dean, K., Laurens, K. & Green, M. (2016). Cohort Profile: The New South Wales Child Development Study (NSW-CDS) – An Australian multi-agency, multi-generational, longitudinal record linkage study. BMJ Open, 6(2):e009023. Page 7 of 8 Askell-Williams, H., Dix, K., Lawson, M. and Slee, P. (2013). Quality of implementation of a school mental health initiative and changes over time in students' social and emotional competencies. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 24(3), 357-381. Dix, K.L., Slee, P.T., Lawson, M.J. & Keeves, J.P. (2012). Implementation quality of whole-school mental health promotion and students’ academic performance. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 17(1), 45-51. Slee, P., Dix, K. & Askell-Williams, H. (2011). Whole-school mental health promotion in Australia. International Journal of Emotional Education, 3(2), 37-49. Dix, K.L. (2011). Does it matter that I have friends and can share my feelings? SERUpdate, 21(3), 7-10. Askell-Williams, H., Lawson, M.J. & Dix, K.L. (2011). What is professional development for mental health promotion in schools like? Perspectives from school leaders and teachers in 100 Australian KidsMatter Primary schools. Clute Institute. The 2011 Barcelona European Academic Conference. Barcelona, Spain. Jun 2011, pp. 1241-1251. Askell-Williams, H., Russell, A., Dix, K.L., Slee, P.T., Spears, B.A., Lawson, M.J., Owens, L.D., & Gregory, K. (2008). Early challenges in evaluating the KidsMatter national mental health promotion initiative in Australian primary schools. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 10(2), 35-44. Conference Presentations and Invited Addresses Dix, K.L. & Lietz, P. (2017). Big data-What can it reveal about gender differences in academic achievement? 2017 IBSC Annual Conference - International Boys' Schools Coalition, 14 September 2017, Prince Alfred College, Adelaide. Dix K.L. (2017). Wellbeing research and international directions. Invited presentation at ACE Education on the Square, 5 July 2017, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. (2015). Population-level approaches to increasing mental health and wellbeing in schools: KidsMatter and MindMatters. Paper presented at no2bullying Conference, June 2015, Gold Coast. Dix, K.L. (2014). Every Face has a Place: Disability, Mental Health and KidsMatter. Keynote address, RISE Conference, November 2014, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. (2014). Optimising the wellbeing of children through a national whole-school approach to mental health promotion that engages families and communities. Family & Relationship Services Australia Conference, Nov, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. & Cahalan, P. (2014). Disability and children’s mental health through the KidsMatter lens. Special Education Expo: Inclusive Practice, July 2014, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. & Zilm, T. (2014). Mental health promotion and wellbeing in schools: Everyone’s right to feel safe. Paper presented at no2bullying Conference, April 2014, . Dix, K.L. (2013). Social and emotional wellbeing outcomes for children involved in the evaluation of KidsMatter Early Childhood. Infant and Early Childhood Social and Emotional Wellbeing Conference, Nov 2013, Canberra. Askell-Williams, H., Murray-Harvey, R., Slee, P., Dix, K., Skrzypiec, G. and Lawson, M. (2013). Young children's mental health outcomes: Flinders University Evaluation of an Australia-wide 2-year mental health promotion initiative in Early Childhood and Care settings. 16th European Conference on Developmental Psychology. Lausanne. Sept 2013. Dix, K.L. & McDonald, S. (2013). Mental health promotion and early intervention in rural and remote Australia through the KidsMatter Initiative. Paper presented at the Australian Rural and Remote Mental Health Symposium, October 2013. Dix, K.L. & Gaboritt, B. (2013). DataMatters: Project Data Management solution for KidsMatter Primary. Keynote address to beyondblue and the Australian Psychological Association. July 2013, Melbourne. Dix, K.L. (2012). Assessing the implementation quality of mental health promotion in educational settings and its influence on differential outcomes. Melbourne: Australian Research Alliance for Children & Youth. 1st Biennial Australian Implementation Conference. Melbourne, Australia. Oct 2012. Askell-Williams, H., Dix, K.L., Lawson, M.J., & Slee, P.T. (2011). Quality of implementation of a mental health initiative in Australian primary schools. The 3rd ENSEC Conference, 29 June - 3 July 2011, University of Manchester, UK. Dix, K.L. (2011). Growing warmer or staying the same? 11th Annual Conference: Australian Psychological Society's Psychology of Relationships Interest Group, pp. 1-15. Dix, K.L. & Shearer, J. (2010). Supporting school-based mental health services for children and students with a disability. RISE Conference, Flinders University, 5 November, Adelaide. Dix, K.L. (2010). KidsMatter Primary Pilot Evaluation: Improving Mental Health. The 27th Conference of the International Congress for Applied Psychology, 11-16 July 2010, Melbourne. Lawson, M.J., Askell-Williams, H., Dix, K.L., Slee, P.T., Skrzypiec, G. and Spears, B. (2009). Implementing a new initiative in mental health in Australian primary schools. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, December 2009. Dix, K.L., Askell-William, H., Russell, A., Lawson, M.J. & Slee, P.T. (2009). School-based influences on student mental health: Components of the KidsMatter Initiative. Poster presentation at Transforming Australia for our children's future: Making prevention work. The Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY) National Conference, Melbourne, 2-4 September 2009. Askell-Williams, H., Dix, K.L., Slee, P.T., Russell, A. & Lawson, M.J. (2009). School-based influences on student mental health. In Transforming Australia for our children's future: Making prevention work. ARACY conference 2009. Lawson, M.J., Askell-Williams, H., Dix, K.L., Slee, P.T. & Skrzypiec, G.K. (2009). Implementing a mental health initiative in Australian primary schools. In P. Jeffery, ed. Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education. Canberra 2009. Dix, K.L., Askell-William, H. & Lawson, M.J. (2008). Different measures, different informants, same outcomes? Investigating multiple perspectives of students’ mental health. In P.L. Jeffery, Changing Climates: Education for Sustainable Futures. Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Brisbane 2008.

Page 8 of 8 Alliance of girls’ schools Australasia Research Grant 2018

Proposal prepared by: Rebecca English (QUT) Raechel Johns (UC)

1 Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1

Research aims and questions ...... 1

Data Sets ...... 2

Plan ...... 4

Budget ...... 6

Publication of research outcomes and potential follow up study ...... 7

Researchers’ biographies ...... 7

2 Introduction This study will explore the question: how are the academic and life outcomes of girls educated at all girls’ schools in Australia different from those girls who attend a co-educational school? Relying on data from several data sets, analysed using a Cochrane Review style analysis and a meta-analysis, the study will explore the overall academic and life outcomes for girls educated in single-sex schools compared with girls educated in co-educational schools. It will be measured by indicators including (a) national/international testing results, (b) tertiary entrance scores, (c) level of post-school qualifications, (d) occupation, (e) wages and (f) labour force participation. As the two researchers met at an all girls’ school in the 1990s, we are especially interested in the results of the proposed study.

As will be discussed in the following application, our study will examine the academic and life outcomes of girls in single-sex schooling and compare those outcomes with girls who attended co-educational schools. We will also explore the gender gap and how boys and girls fare differently in schooling. This question of the gender gap will allow us to address the secondary objective of the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia: whether the gender gap is closing or has closed between girls and boys, and where gender disparities still exist.

In what follows, we outline our research aims and questions, the data sets we will access, the plan of our project focusing on the timeline and the budget, the publication plan and finally the biographies of the researchers.

Research aims and questions The study sets out to explore two aspects of girls’ experiences of single sex education: their academic outcomes and their life outcomes. It will focus on data over the last 20 years from 1997 to 2017. Its interest is in how girls’ experiences are different based on whether they went to an all girls’ school or a coeducational school.

The research aim is to ascertain the academic and life outcomes associated with single sex education for girls compared with girls who attend co-educational schools. Our specific research question is what are the academic and life outcomes of girls educated in single-sex schools and how does that compare with girls educated at co-educational schools? However, as this is a comparative study, the research questions are related to specific academic and life outcomes of single- sex education in comparison with co-educational school settings for girls. In each of the following categories, academic and life outcomes, data will be collected on girls who experienced both single sex and coeducational settings facilitating a comparison of the outcomes for girls from single sex and coeducational school settings.

Academic Outcomes: 1. Senior secondary achievement (year of exit) 2. Senior secondary achievement (Tertiary admissions rank equivalent score) 3. Subject scores/results of standardised tests relative to other students

1 4. Completion rates of Year 12 5. Numbers of girls enrolled in STEM subjects 6. Tertiary preferences 7. Highest qualification Life Outcomes: 1. Study status 2. Number of courses attempted 3. Number of courses completed 4. Employment status (where reported) 5. Occupation 6. Marital status 7. Home ownership (where reported) 8. Number of children (where reported)

Further, in line with the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia research grant guidelines’ secondary objective, we will explore the gender gap by analysing data related to the outcome of boys’ single-sex schooling to ascertain whether the gender gap is closing or has closed between girls and boys, and where gender disparities still exist.

Data Sets Several data sets will be drawn on for this research project. In the following table, data sets are tabulated with the expected data that will be collected from each set.

Data set Anticipated data from the set ACARA • Numbers of students who graduate at year 10 and year National 12 by school and by sex (for comparison between boys reports on and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co- schooling educational schooled girls) • Ranking scores assigned by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Subject scores/standardised test results by school (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Completion rates of year 12 by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Enrolment in STEM subjects by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Tertiary entrance numbers by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) Myschool • Enrolments by school and by sex (for comparison data between boys and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls)

2 • VET outcomes by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Senior secondary outcomes by by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • ICSEA (Index of Community Socio Economic Advantage) value by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co- educational schooled girls) • Sector by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • NAPLAN results in comparison with like schools Universities’ • Number of applications by applicants’ background (both Australia data boys and girls) • Course completion rates (both boys and girls) • Course change rates (both boys and girls) • Number of courses attempted rates (both boys and girls) • Non-completion rates (both boys and girls) • Destination post-study (both boys and girls) • Satisfaction with course rates (both boys and girls) TISC data • Number of applications by applicants’ background (both (Tertiary boys and girls) Institutions • Course completion rates (both boys and girls) Services • Course change rates (both boys and girls) Centre) • Number of courses attempted rates (both boys and girls) • Non-completion rates (both boys and girls) • Destination post-study (both boys and girls) • Satisfaction with course rates (both boys and girls) NCVER data • Number of applications by applicants’ background (both (National boys and girls) Centre for • Course completion rates (both boys and girls) Vocational • Course change rates (both boys and girls) Education • Number of courses attempted rates (both boys and girls) Research) • Non-completion rates (both boys and girls) • Destination post-study (both boys and girls) • Satisfaction with course rates (both boys and girls) ABS data • Numbers of enrolments by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Numbers of enrolments by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) • Numbers of enrolments by school and by sex (for comparison between boys and girls and between single- sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls)

3 Independent • Tertiary entrance by girls from single-sex schools Schools’ • Tertiary entrance by girls from coeducational schools council data • Tertiary entrance by boys from single-sex schools Longitudinal • Employment reports (both boys and girls) Survey of • Education reports (both boys and girls) Australian • Study reports (both boys and girls) Youth data • Work reports (both boys and girls) • Social indicators (both boys and girls) Australian • Home ownership data (both boys and girls) Clearinghouse • Youth employment data (both boys and girls) for Youth • Youth wellbeing and satisfaction data (both boys and studies girls) • Economic and social wellbeing data (both boys and girls) ACMA youth • Social indicators (both boys and girls) and teens • Use of technology (both boys and girls) online studies • Satisfaction with technology (both boys and girls) Mission • Tailored reports on issues faced by youth (both boys and Australia’s girls) research • Tailored reports on challenges faced by youth (both boys and girls) • Socio-economic, cultural and geographic data by school (for comparison between boys and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls) Existing • Meta-analysis of existing research into the correlation research in between academic and life outcomes and school attended journals (for comparison between boys and girls and between single-sex schooled girls and co-educational schooled girls).

Plan The following plan is split into two sections. The first deals with a timeline outlining the phases of the research project and the second section is a Gantt chart of the specific activities by phase.

Timeline by project phases The project is timed around a 12-month completion. In what follows the phases of the project are outlined.

Phase/ Activities Justification for activity Step

One Statistical data collection Statistics will be accessed from the from government and sources listed above. Those sources non-government sources include: • ACARA National reports on schooling • Myschool data

4 • Universities’ Australia data • TISC data • NCVER data • ABS data • Independent Schools’ council data • Longitudinal Survey of Australian Youth data • Australian Clearinghouse for Youth studies • ACMA youth and teens online studies • Mission Australia’s research Two Meta-analysis of existing Existing studies will be accessed from academic data the sources listed above. These sources include: • Australian Clearinghouse for Youth studies • ACMA youth and teens online studies • Mission Australia’s research • Database searches of journal articles Three Data analysis of statistical Following the format of the Cochrane data using a Cochrane Review, we will conduct a systematic Review review of the primary research conducted by the organisations, both government and non-government listed in phase one, to assess the question guiding the study, namely what are the academic and life outcomes of girls educated in single-sex schools compared with girls educated at co-educational schools? All the existing primary research that can be accessed from these organisations will be collated and used to assess the evidence for single-sex schooling for girls. The evidence will be analysed by a comparison with the outcomes of girls in co-educational settings. In addition, the gender gap will be analysed by assessing the outcomes for boys in all boys’ schooling. Four Compiling data from both Data from both sources will be compiled Cochrane Review data and and findings from both sources will be meta-analysis complied into a table. Five Reporting of data Data will be reported in several ways: 1. A report for the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia

5 2. Academic journal articles will be prepared 3. Academic conference papers will be prepared 4. Non-academic papers will be prepared for both popular press and for principals’ journals.

Gantt chart

Phase and Activity Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 Collect data from government sources 1 Collect data from non-government sources 2 Meta-analysis of existing studies 3 Perform Cochrane Review 4 Compile data 4 Analyse data 5 Report data

Budget

Item Explanation Costing Total calculation

Research Gathering of literature and 63 x $45.42 = $2862 assistance data, preliminary analysis $2862 and coding, proof-reading and editing. Teaching relief To analyse literature and 30 x $152.25 = $4568 – Rebecca undertake review of data, $4568 Marking relief compile data and prepare 20 hours x $50.74 $1015 – Rebecca reports. = $1015 Teaching relief To analyse literature and 20 x $135.84 = $2717 – Raechel undertake review of data, $2717 Marking relief - compile data and prepare 20 hours x $45.28 $906 Raechel reports. = $906 Airfares To allow Raechel to present $470 $470 (Canberra to findings to Alliance of Girls’ Brisbane) Schools Australasia and to write report. Flights based on Qantas.com Total $12538

6

Publication of research outcomes and potential follow up study Our publication plan is based around three key outcomes, (1) academic publications, (2) publications in popular press and (3) reports to the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia.

Academic publications will be two-fold; the first is to aim to have two academic publications in journals such as the Australian Educational Researcher (ISSN: 2210-5328) and the Journal of School Choice (ISSN: 1558-2167). Both of these journals are concerned with contemporary issues in education, education choices and education effectiveness. The second aim is to present at a conference, such as the AARE (Australian Association of Research in Education) conference in Melbourne in 2016. Further conference papers and journal articles may arise from the data analysis.

The second outcome is for publications in popular press. These outcomes will include articles for principals in secondary schools, as they will likely benefit from the findings of this study. Journals include Principal Matters: The Official Journal of the Secondary Principals’ Association of Australia (ISSN: 1322-2481) and, if possible, international journals such as Principal Leadership: The Journal of the [US] National Association of Principals (ISSN: 2039- 934). We would like to present our findings at the 2016 Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia conference.

A report would be prepared for the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia and we would like to personally present our findings to member schools interested in hearing of our findings and asking us questions.

In addition, we believe there is a chance for this to develop into further research. An ARC Linkage grant would be a natural follow on from this project, as this project would serve as a pilot study. It would be useful to undertake a longitudinal qualitative study using focus groups and semi-structured interviews with graduates at several points after their graduation (for example first year out of school, five years out of school, ten years out of school, 20 years out of school and 30 years out of school) to follow women who have experienced all girls’ schooling. The project would provide a useful compliment to the work of the Alliance and would afford the Alliance evidence based practices that would demonstrate the effectiveness of girls’ schooling in the medium to long term.

Researchers’ biographies The project application is for two researchers, Dr Rebecca English ( University of Technology) and Dr Raechel Johns (University of Canberra). In what follows, their biographies are outlined.

Dr Rebecca English Dr Rebecca English is keenly interested in the topic of all girls’ private schooling and its impact on academic and life outcomes. Her interest stems from her parent’s choice of a single-sex girls’ school to improve her life chances. She grew

7 up in one of Brisbane’s lowest socio-economic suburbs and, by attending an all girls’ school, she was able to capitalise on the opportunities afforded to her to be the first in her family to attend university on graduating from school.

She is a Lecturer in the School of Curriculum: Faculty of Education at QUT. Her primary research area focuses on education choice. Specifically, her work questions why parents and children make the educational choices they make and how those choices impact on life outcomes.

Rebecca’s work draws on her experiences in schools as a teacher and school marketing coordinator, Rebecca’s work considers how parents and children work together to make educational choices that suit their needs and that allow them to achieve the life outcomes they wish to achieve. She has been concerned with questions of education choice, education satisfaction and the ways that markets operate in education for 20 years. Much of her work has been in mainstream schools, however she has also explored the impact of choice in non- school and alternative school settings.

Rebecca’s research projects are diverse, representing an interest in multiple areas of education. Some of her recent projects include: • The choices parents and children make about the educational settings that work for their families • The impact of schooling on experiences post-school • How school choice impacts on social and emotional well-being post- school • The effect of school choice on motivation, career pathway and engagement with community post-school • Mothers’ use of technology • Women’s use of technology • School promotion • The impact of social media on education Rebecca’s work is widely published in journals and she has contributed to three books. She has been invited to present on her research internationally, and has an edited book with Raechel Johns. Both Rebecca and Raechel have worked on projects exploring the engagement of parents and children with schools’ social media messages.

Rebecca is a mother of three young children.

Dr Raechel Johns

Dr Raechel Johns is an Associate Professor in Marketing and the Head of the School of Management at the University of Canberra. Her primary research area focuses on service delivery and customer value. Recently Raechel has commenced exploring education from a service delivery perspective, co- researching with Rebecca English.

Raechel has considerable research experience in both qualitative and

8 quantitative research. Raechel’s PhD explored the impact of self-service technologies on interfirm relationships. Her interest in customer value, wellbeing and relationships has seen her research transition toward a community focus, more recently.

Raechel’s research projects demonstrate an interest in community relationships and customer value. Some of her recent projects include:

• Mothers’ use of technology • Women’s use of technology • School promotion • Responsible gambling promotion • Reduction of smoking rates, particularly focused on the increasing use of e- cigarettes • Water management in regional Australia • Tourism promotion • Ageing customers and their use of technology

Raechel has published a number of journal and conference papers, and has co- authored three books. She has taught Marketing in Australia, China, , and Bhutan and has been invited to present on her research internationally. She has won a number of awards for both her teaching and research.

Raechel is a mother of four children, and has a keen interest in education environments within Australasia. Raechel and Rebecca attended the same all girls’ school.

9 Researchers’ CVs Dr Rebecca English Education: 2012 – Doctor of Philosophy Griffith University 2010 – Graduate Certificate of Research Management Southern Cross University 2005 – Master of Education (Research) Queensland University of Technology 1998 – Post Graduate Diploma in Education (English and Studies of Society and Environment) University of Queensland 1997 – Bachelor of Business (Advertising and Public Relations) Queensland University of Technology Work experience: 1999-2005 – Teacher 2006 – present – Lecturer in Education, Queensland University of Technology Publications: Edited Books: English, Rebecca & Johns, Raechel (2016). Gender Considerations in Online Consumption Behavior and Internet Use. IGI Global: Hershey, Pennsylvania. Forthcoming. Book Chapters: English, Rebecca M. (2017) Anti-vax truthiness: How social Media echo chambers reinforce anti-vax beliefs in parents. In Ahern, Terence C. (Ed.) Social Media: Practices, Uses and Global Impact. Nova Science Publishers Inc, New York, pp. 173-193. English, Rebecca (2016). Techno teacher moms: Web 2.0 connecting mothers in the home education community. In English, Rebecca & Johns, Raechel (Eds). Gender Considerations in Online Consumption Behavior and Internet Use. IGI Global: Hershey, Pennsylvania. Forthcoming. English, Rebecca; Nykvist, Shaun & Reeves, M. (2016). Looking at the other side: Families, public health and anti-vaccination. In English, Rebecca & Johns, Raechel (Eds). Gender Considerations in Online Consumption Behavior and Internet Use. IGI Global: Hershey, Pennsylvania. Forthcoming. English, Rebecca; Johns, Raechel & Dwyer, Angela (2015) Two mums and some babies: Queering Motherhood. In Burton, N. (Ed) Natal Signs: Cultural representations of pregnancy, birth and parenting. Demeter, Ontario: Canada. Forthcoming English, Rebecca (2015) Too cool for homeschool: Accessing underground homeschoolers with Web 2.0. In Karen Trimmer, Ali Black, Stewart Riddle (Eds) Mainstreams, Margins and the spaces in between: New possibilities for education research. Routledge, NY: USA. Pp. 112-124. Journal Articles: Johns, Raechel & English, Rebecca (2016) Transition of self: Repositioning the celebrity brand through social media—The case of Elizabeth Gilbert. Journal of Business Research,69(1), pp. 65-72. English, Rebecca (2015). Use Your Freedom Of Choice: Reasons For Choosing Homeschool In Australia. Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning,

10 9(17) http://jual.nipissingu.ca/wp- content/uploads/sites/25/2014/06/v91171.pdf Johns, Raechel & English, Rebecca M. (2014) Mothers influencing mothers : the use of virtual discussion boards and their influence on consumption. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 10(3), pp. 319-338. English, Rebecca (2014) Rent-a-crowd? Crowdfunding academic research. First Monday, 19(1). English, Rebecca M. (2013) The most private private education : home . Homeschool Researcher, 29(4), pp. 1-7. Dumenden, Iris E. & English, Rebecca M. (2012) Fish out of water: Refugee and international students in mainstream Australian schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 17(10), pp. 1078-1088. English, Rebecca M. (2009) Selling education through “culture”: Responses to the market by new, non-government schools. The Australian Educational Researcher, 36(1), pp. 89-104. Other: English, Rebecca— (2015) Education department: No term time holidays for students — (2015) Should Aussie kids go on US-Style camps — (2014) How to prevent your child’s summer brain drain — (2014) Principal: School doesn’t work for most kids — (2014) Democratic schooling: Teachers, leave them kids alone A full list of publications is available on request. Current HDR Students: Master’s of Education (Research): Exploring the choice of a Muslim School: Analysis of two schools’ marketing materials. Supervisors: Rebecca English and Shaun Nykvist. Expected Completion 2016 Master’s of Education (Research): Why can’t we start Sudbury Schools in Australia? An analysis of the political and practical implications of Sudbury style schooling in Australia. Supervisors: Rebecca English and Gordon Tait. Expected Completion 2016. Awards 2009: Nominated for a Vice Chancellor’s award for excellence. 2012: Nominated for a Vice Chancellor’s award for excellence. Grants: 2016-2017: $8, 014, Brisbane Catholic Education Office competitive research grant: Social media and family communication: Enhancing BCEO communication with Families using Social Media 2015-2016: $10,000, Steiner Association Australia competitive research grant: Tertiary, Workplace and Life Fulfilment of Waldorf/Steiner Graduates 2015: $10,000, Women in Research grant: Finalising an edited book. 2013-2014: $7,000, Teaching and learning grant: Exploring the use of blogging in university teaching. 2013-2014: $2,000, A Centre for Children and Youth seed grant: What is the link between vaccine choices and school choices?

11 Dr Raechel Johns Employed at the University of Canberra since 2003 Associate Professor in Marketing and Head of School, School of Management 2015 – present Education Doctor of Philosophy University of Western Sydney – December 2011 Certificate IV in Frontline Management University of Canberra College, 2011 Master of Higher Education Australian National University –2007 Graduate Certificate in Higher Education University of Canberra – 2004 Master of Marketing Management Griffith University (Brisbane) - 2002 Bachelor of Commerce (Marketing) Griffith University (Brisbane) - 1997 GRANTS AND ACHEIVEMENTS: 2015: $8,014, Catholic Education, Social Media Engagement: Rebecca English and Raechel Johns 2015: Recipient of the Vice Chancellor’s Award for Equity and Diverstiy 2014: $47 377, The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation: Raechel Johns, Naomi Dale, Lubna Alam, Byron Keating 2014: Recipient of Faculty of Business, Government & Law’s Emerging Research Leader Fellowship 2014: Recipient of the Faculty of Business, Government & Law’s Growing Track Record funding 2014: Recipient of the Vice Chancellor’s Award for Unit Satisfaction 2014: Recipient of Dean’s Award for Emerging Research Star 2102: $20 000 Early Career Researcher Grant, University of Canberra 2012: $96,845 Murray Darling Basin Futures Research Grant – Raechel Johns, Birgit Muskat, Matthias Muskat

12

Higher Degree Research Student Supervision Type of Year/s Topic Supervisors Expected degree supervised completion DBA in 2011 - 2016 Understanding Deborah Blackman Complete Tourism resort hotel and Raechel Johns clientele through segmentation: A study of Thailand PhD in 2011 - 2014 Employee's Raechel Johns and Complete Management perception of Doug Davies internal marketing in relation to their organisational commitment and competency building Honours 2012 – 2013 Social Media and Birgit Muskat and Complete Tourism – the case Raechel Johns study of Orange, NSW DBA 2014- current Innovation in a Fiona Buick and December 2018 banking sector Raechel Johns PhD in 2012 - Relationship Raechel Johns and December 2018 Management current Marketing in the Anton Kriz tourism industry - relationships between Australian and Chinese tour operators Honours 2015 Social media in the Raechel Johns Complete not-for-profit sector PhD in 2017 – Diversity in the Raechel Johns and 2020 Management current Australian Defence Michael Walsh Force PhD in 2015 – Service Raechel Johns, Early 2019 Management current Management in the Lubna Alam and Australian Public Fiona Buick Service DBA in 2014 – Singaporean’s Raechel Johns and Early 2019 Management current attitudes to Petra Bouvain imported products

Numerous Masters and Undergraduate research projects

Publications: A full list of publications provided upon request

13 SINGLE-SEX SCHOOLS IN A MULTI-GENDER WORLD: WHAT’S A GIRLS’ SCHOOL TO DO? Research Proposal Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia Julie Mencher, MSW February 2018

ABSTRACT

"What are other girls' schools doing about transgender students?" is the first question I get in my work as a gender diversity consultant. Educators are left scratching their heads as the intrinsically binary mindset of girls’ schools collides with a 21st century gender revolution which replaces categories of female and male with a spectrum of multiple gender identities. Understandably, many schools worry that including transgender students may challenge the very mission of single-sex schools, disrupt school culture and traditions, and obscure the definition of what IS a girl. As they strive to develop best practices, administrators are seeking guidance and inspiration from peer schools. Yet because this remains a controversial topic, many schools have been reluctant to share their approach publically. To provide schools with this crucial data, I conducted a study last year that compiled 33 U.S. and Canada girls' schools' experiences and policy responses as they navigate the changing gender landscape. The current project would replicate that research study in Australia and New Zealand, through a combination of instruments and dissemination tools. Armed with this data, member schools could then develop their approach to being a single-sex school in a multi-gender world with courage, creativity, and prudence. Nothing short of a cultural revolution is taking place around gender as we know it. We used to think gender was something crystal clear. From the very moment of birth, the first thing we knew about a new life was: Is it a boy or girl? And in every stage of life onward, gender – as sorted into male or female – was a salient, static, and binary dimension of human life.

Not anymore. We now live in a world where your students can choose to identify themselves from over 50 gender categories on Facebook, where pop music icons like Miley Cyrus are identifying themselves as “gender-fluid,” where the American Common Application for colleges asks high school seniors to declare their “sex assigned at birth” AND gives them the option to claim a separate gender identity. (And K-12 U.S. applications are quickly following suit). We now live in a world where the historically conservative Boy Scouts is now accepting natal female, transgender boys as scouts.

The transgender movement is the first social justice and diversity topic to come of age in the social media era. As a result, the pace of public awareness and social change has been viral. My school clients in the U.S. and Canada – as well as many parents -- tell me that it feels to them like the kids are speaking another language where gender is concerned. The adults have had to play catch-up with the kids to avoid a generational chasm.

Parents choose girls’ schools because of your well-deserved reputation for inspiring girls, promoting a multi-generational sisterhood, empowering girls to challenge convention in order to achieve their fullest selves, and insulating their daughters from sexist cultural constraints. Families and students benefit from how much girls’ schools put the student at the center, how dedicated you are to doing right by your students.

But when gender is no longer seen as a binary of male/female but as a spectrum, when identity exploration for some students means questioning one’s sex assigned at birth, when some applicants may identify as a girl while having been born a boy, my girls’ school clients tell me their mission and values may be called into question as they struggle to ‘do right’ by students who aren’t quite the ‘girls’ they’re used to. Some students are even asking that we stop assuming that all girls’ school students ARE girls.

While welcoming and supporting trans kids is a challenge for all schools, for single-sex schools, the challenge is unique. Single-sex schools, whose very mission is grounded in the gender binary of female/male, are torn between protecting their contract with families, alums, and other stakeholders that they remain single-sex, and, on the other hand, facing a world in which the binary is increasingly obsolete, particularly among youth.

And girls’ schools may very well have it the worst. While boys’ schools would rarely be viewed as hospitable environments for trans students, protective parents may seek girls’ schools as havens for their trans kids. Natal male transgender girls are likely to seek out girls’ schools, and natal female transgender boy students are likely to want to remain at all-girls’ schools.

This research project will enable the Alliance to take leadership and provide crucial support on how schools can address the changing gender landscape. Girls’ schools feel caught in a clash of values around doing right by gender nonconforming students, adherence to social justice principles of inclusion and respect, and feminist support of girlpower and sisterhood.

With my assistance, the National Coalition of Girls’ Schools (NCGS) has shepherded their member schools from ignorance to well-informed policy and practice development in just three years. Like NCGS, the Alliance can spearhead dialogue and offer pioneering direction toward best practices for member schools on this potentially mission-challenging topic.

Before many single-sex schools were even discussing trans students, a specially-designated NCGS Transgender Task Force studied, consulted with experts, and issued an NCGS Position Statement in 2015. At that time, I began to collaborate with NCGS in a rich partnership to educate and guide member schools on how to respond to transgender students and applicants. I developed tools for the NCGS website and went on to lead six NCGS conference presentations, including a half-day training institute.

Since 2015, NCGS has offered tremendous leadership around the transgender topic to their member schools, developing a full set of web-based resources, consistently offering trainings and policy discussions at every conference, and updating their Position Statement to address the rapid cultural changes that affect girls’ schools.

There was still something missing, though. When a head of school stood up at the end of a 2016 three-hour NCGS training with a plaintive request that other schools please reveal what they’re doing about trans students, I knew that many of her colleagues shared her curiosity but were reluctant to go public because of the mission-challenging controversies involved. At NCGS conferences, administrators kept repeating the same ‘urban legends’ about trans inclusion: the school where the Board fired the Head for allowing a student to wear pants to graduation; the school where a female-to-male transgender student became the student body president; the school where the Board president stonewalled the process of coming up with even the most benign statement of policy.

I decided to mount a research project to replace urban legend with actual data, gathered in confidential interviews with independent girls’ schools in the U.S. and Canada, and shared as anonymous aggregate findings at the 2017 NCGS Annual Conference. I went on to publish “When the White Dress Doesn’t Fit: What Are Other Girls’ Schools Doing about Transgender Students?,” a white paper discussing my research findings (see attached). Building on the success of the North American research project, with this grant I would replicate the research with Australia and New Zealand girls’ schools.

While the trainings I conducted at girls’ schools had taught me that administrators and trustees were interested in the topic, my research revealed just how quickly these girls’ schools have stepped up to study, consider, and make changes to deal with trans students in their communities. With 29 of the 33 girls’ schools in my study reporting that they already have students who identify as transgender, many of them are bringing in gender diversity training, appointing transgender task forces, and carefully crafting policy and practice to guide a girls’ school response to a rapidly changing 21st century gender landscape.

These schools have recognized that trans students may be the most at-risk in their communities. Australian statistics track closely to American data on the mental health consequences of ignoring this population of youth:

n Almost half of Australian trans youth have attempted suicide: 48.1%, 20 times higher than the general youth population n 74.6% have been diagnosed with depression, 10 times higher than the general youth population n 72.2% have been diagnosed with anxiety, 10 times higher than the general youth population n 74% have experienced bullying

And both school support and parental support -- the two most crucial factors for mitigating the mental health impact for trans youth – are missing for these teens:

n 78.9% of Australian trans youth had issues with their schools n 65.8% lacked family support

As my participant schools recognized, the invisibility and isolation of trans students put the students at risk to be sure, but also put the schools at risk. For schools, it’s not a matter of IF you’ll have trans students, it’s a matter of WHEN. Many schools seek to get prepared through professional development and careful policy consideration that retains the single-sex mission with attention to both trans students and the needs of multiple stakeholders in their school communities. Armed with the research data and training from this project, girls’ schools in Australia and New Zealand could begin to answer these questions with expertise and confidence.

METHODOLOGY

The project would begin with my design of a survey which would be emailed to all your member schools, to collect data on whether they have trans students, what changes the school has made in response to this topic, if they have any formal policy or practice in place, and how the school’s many stakeholders have responded. I would then deepen the data by selecting those schools which are furthest along in their training and policy discussion to be interviewed via Skype.

Work products would include 1) an interim report on the survey data, to be issued within three months of start date, and 2) a research report, similar to my attached white paper, including an infographic, findings, and discussion of findings, within six months of start date. The Alliance could disseminate this document to member schools and post it on the website.

Finally, the dissemination component would include my traveling to Australia and New Zealand, to present one-day workshops at one city in each country. In these workshops, I would provide a general training on transgender youth, zero in on the salient challenges for girls’ schools, and present the findings of the research project. (Outside the scope of the grant, I could also make myself available to do trainings at individual schools if there is interest).

The two prongs of the project, research and dissemination, are key to ensuring that Alliance members are well-equipped to launch their own school’s consideration of trans students. Knowing what other schools are doing is crucial, but does not substitute for school administrators coming together in a community of learners to wrestle with these challenges. Training and discussion with sister schools promotes an enduring collaborative network around this complicated, sensitive topic, establishes a platform for sharing resources, and enables a head of school to tell her/his Board, ‘We are not alone in tackling this challenge.’

FUNDING

The research grant would fund my time in data collection and analysis, statistical assistance in survey design and data analysis, preparation of the work product, travel to and around Australia and New Zealand (including meals and lodging), and two one-day workshop presentations.

IMPACT

By supporting this project, the Alliance would provide groundbreaking leadership toward pioneering best practices for dealing with transgender students at girls’ schools in Australia and New Zealand. If anything can be learned from the American experience, it is that NCGS taking on the seemingly impossible conundrum of transgender inclusion at girls’ schools provided the crucial foundation for member schools to address this mission-challenging topic. Similarly, the Alliance could embolden and support single-sex member schools to wrestle with the complexities of the 21st century multi-gender world, while remaining loyal champions of girls’ education.

BIOGRAPHY

Julie Mencher, MSW is a psychotherapist, trainer, and consultant and a pioneer in LGBT education and advocacy. She developed and held the position of Transgender Specialist at Smith, a women’s college, over fifteen years ago. As a nationally recognized speaker and consultant, Ms. Mencher serves as a strategic advisor to organizations on gender diversity and sexuality. With a specialty in working with single-sex institutions, Ms. Mencher has helped girls’ schools and women’s college navigate the changing gender landscape while also staying true to their mission. With her publication of “When the White Dress Doesn’t Fit: What Are Other Schools Doing about Transgender Students?, findings from her research on 33 girls’ schools, Ms. Mencher became a national expert on independent girls’ schools’ response to trans students. A member of the Smith College School for Social Work faculty for over twenty years, she was also a Visiting Scholar at the Stone Center at Wellesley College. She trains graduate students and professionals in social work, psychology, and psychiatry. She is the author of numerous articles and book chapters on LGBT issues and a contributor to Huffington Post and Salon. She lives in Northampton, Massachusetts, where her clinical practice includes a specialty in working with trans youth and their families. She can be reached through www.juliemencher.com or at [email protected].

WHEN THE WHITE DRESS DOESN’T FIT: WHAT ARE OTHER GIRLS’ SCHOOLS DOING ABOUT TRANSGENDER STUDENTS? A Research Project Julie Mencher, MSW

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS October 2017

Educators and parents are struggling to play catch-up with a 21st century gender revolution which replaces categories of male and female with a spectrum of gender identities – and refutes the longheld notion that gender is determined by sex (specifically, by external genitalia). Nowadays, youth can choose from over 50 gender categories on Facebook, and some common applications for colleges and independent schools offer prospective students the option to claim a gender identity which is different from their biological sex. Facing a viral pace of change around gender, single-sex schools have been challenged to stay true to mission while responding to the students of today.

Administrators face such fundamental questions as:

! What IS a girl? Is a girl someone who identifies as a girl? Or, is a girl someone who was born with female genitalia? ! If gender is a spectrum, then are single-sex schools soon to be extinct? ! How do we stay true to our girl-centric mission if we include transgender students?

Considering the needs of multiple constituencies (alumnae; donors; students; parents; faculty), with differing allegiances to traditional notions of gender, becomes a high-stakes delicate balancing act on such a mission-critical issue.

In 2015, the National Coalition of Girls’ Schools pioneered the discussion of transgender students, issuing a Position Statement which outlined areas of consideration for schools. In just two years, many girls’ schools have taken up the challenge of single-sex education in a multi-gender world with courageous, thoughtful, and prudent consideration. As they strive to develop best practices, administrators have sought guidance and inspiration from peer schools. Yet because this remains a controversial topic, many schools have been reluctant to share their approach publicly.

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 1 To provide schools with this crucial data, I initiated a research study in the Spring of 2017, gathering confidential information in phone interviews with 33 independent girls’ schools. Schools ranged in type (boarding/day), age of students, and location -- urban, suburban, and rural, south and north, east and west and in between in the U.S. and Canada. No self- identified Catholic or religious schools are represented, but there are schools with religious affiliation or origin.

While the schools varied in type, philosophy, and degree of engagement with the topic, several key findings emerged:

! Almost all (29 out of 33) schools reported that they currently have or have had trans students. ! Only eight schools had gone the distance to approve final guidelines or policy (though many were in process). ! Many girls’ schools are finding their way to both admitting MTF transgender girls (natal boys) AND allowing FTM transgender boys (natal girls) to remain as students, under certain circumstances which are mostly yet to be worked out. ! Twice as many schools report that they would admit MTF self-identified trans girls with male genitalia as those which report they will definitely support FTM current trans students with female genitalia until graduation. ! Most schools acknowledge that nonbinary/genderqueer students are the next outpost on the gender frontier -- one which they have yet to consider. ! Reportedly, high-level administrators at three schools lost their jobs at least in part because they were perceived to be too progressive around transgender inclusivity.

Most of the schools had initiated some discussion of the topic, but varied widely on where they were in the process of developing policy and practice. A few schools were just beginning their discussions.

In the not-so-distant past, it was a student coming out as trans that would occasion the school initiating some exploration of the topic. However, more and more schools are beginning to tackle the process before being in the thick of it with a student. Most schools (27) have had training or policy consultation from outside consultants or have it planned for this year; almost all said they had out LGBQ faculty or staff; only one said they had an out faculty member who was not cisgender.

There were some outliers as well: administrators from three “No Biggie” schools couldn’t see what all the fuss was about, as they saw the issue as fairly straightforward. For them, sometimes it was simple because the school decided that once a student identifies as male, he is asked to leave; for others, sometimes it was simple because, “You have to identify as a girl when you get here, but once you’re a member of our family, we’ll support you no matter what.”

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 2 WHO ARE THE TRANSGENDER STUDENTS? TRANS is an all-inclusive, umbrella term which describes all gender-creative people whose gender identities or gender expressions do not traditionally match with the sex they were assigned at birth. GENDER NON-CONFORMING kids (formerly known as ‘sissies’ or ‘tomboys,’ terms which are now seen as problematic) go against stereotypically gendered behavior in their play choices, dress, appearance, movements, or choice of playmates. They do not experience distress about their bodies or feel that they have a different gender identity from their sex assigned at birth. CROSS-GENDER IDENTIFYING kids tend to consistently, persistently, and insistently identify as the opposite sex from an early age and are likely to desire medical intervention. They see gender in very binary terms and feel distress at having been born into the wrong body. NON-BINARY, GENDERQUEER, or AGENDER kids identify as neither male nor female, in both gender expression and gender identity. This rapidly growing population rejects the gender binary, instead viewing gender identity as a spectrum. FTM/TRANSMASCULINE describes the direction of a shift in gender identity for a person assigned female at birth (AFAB) but moving away from a female gender identity. MTF/TRANSFEMININE describes the direction of a shift in gender identity for a person assigned male at birth (AMAB) but moving away from a female gender identity.

THEMES

WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO OUR TRANS STUDENTS, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE A GIRLS’ SCHOOL. Everyone spoke of their struggle to do right by trans students on the one hand, and to remain steadfast in their commitment to preserve the unique character, culture, and mission of a girls’ school on the other. As one HOS put it, “I can’t see kicking out a student but I don’t really want trans boys here in numbers that would change our character as a girls’ school.” Another HOS worried, “I’ve seen a revering of masculinity as some students have come out as trans boys, as well as a sexual titillation around that masculinity – that feels like a danger to the unique character of the girls’ school space.”

WE WON’T GIVE UP CALLING OUR STUDENTS “GIRLS.” Administrators saw “girls” as more than a descriptor, but as a term of empowerment and crucial signifier that ‘this community is one of those rare spaces where girls come first.’ Heads of School spoke passionately on this point, including “We will not abandon the language of sisterhood,” and “The second we stop referring to our students as GIRLS is a danger sign. We don’t want to include trans boys to the extent that we’re no longer empowering girls.”

THERE’S NO ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APROACH FOR TRANS INCLUSION AT GIRLS’ SCHOOLS. Schools wanted to learn what others were doing, but frequently saw, for example, the guidelines of an upper day school in California as not applicable to a in the South. Each school had to consider the changing gender landscape in the context of their own institution’s mission, history, values and priorities, stakeholders – as well as their local legal restrictions.

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 3 WE NEED TO ALWAYS KEEP THE STUDENT AT THE CENTER. With 87% of transgender high school students reporting bullying and the CDC reporting that fully half of transgender individuals attempt suicide by age 20, administrators recognize that these students are among the most at-risk kids in their schools. Heads of School spoke of the need to balance general policy and practice discussion with constant attention to the experiences of their trans students. Five schools had developed a Gender Support Plan – a protocol to follow when a student comes out as trans – as a way to support the student and work with the community.

DO WE WANT TO DEVELOP A PHILOSOPHY? POLICY? PRACTICE? PARAMETERS? A PROCESS? Administrators mostly resisted the creation of policies that could be overly constraining. Instead, they favored something like guidelines or parameters that would offer a measure of flexibility that can adapt to various student situations and to the rapid changes we’re experiencing around gender diversity. At the same time, they also acknowledged the hazards of people not knowing where the school stands -- students may be afraid to be out as trans, and faculty may stray far afield in one direction or the other or feel unsupported by the leadership.

WE NEEDED TO BE EDUCATED, AND SOME OF US NEEDED IT OVER AND OVER. Almost everyone spoke of the grown-ups needing to catch up with the kids on this topic. Many noted that the adults’ learning needed to be scaffolded and take place over time.

THE PROCESS OF COMING UP WITH OUR GUIDELINES TOOK MUCH LONGER THAN EXPECTED. Administrators were surprised by how complex the issues were, and that stakeholders often needed time to come to terms with change.

U.S. SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS WERE SURPRISED THAT THE 2016 ELECTION COMPLICATED THEIR COMMUNITY’S CONSIDERATION OF THIS TOPIC. As one HOS put it, “The political climate is so hot right now that we’re walking a tightrope around every social issue.” Many schools experienced an emboldening of some more conservative voices in their communities which altered the discussion of trans students and sometimes required a slowdown in policy development.

SPECIFIC ISSUES

ADMISSIONS (See chart on page 9)

Schools were actively tackling the question of whether biological boys who identify as trans girls would be considered for admission. Most schools hadn’t changed their policies; for those who had, they shifted to consider “anyone who identifies as a girl” as eligible for admission, signaling their willingness to admit transgender girls who had been assigned male at birth. However, as one HOS recognized, “We haven’t made any changes, but in effect, we’ve actually always had a transgender admissions policy. Since we don’t ‘look under the hood’ or require proof of biological sex, anyone who says she’s a girl can apply.”

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 4

Administrators often brought up the importance of the age of the student. For example, they worried that very young (MTF) trans girls might later change their minds and identify as boys. Others raised concerns about admitting MTF students who might ultimately go through male puberty. As one Head put it, “It’s one thing to graduate a student wearing a tie – it’s another to hand a girls’ school diploma to a senior with a beard.”

Most schools had not taken up the question of admitting non-binary or gender-fluid natal female FTM students (who may go by they/them/their pronouns), but many acknowledged that such a discussion is warranted since this is the fastest-growing group of trans youth. One Head of School who’s spent four years developing an approach to trans students commented, “Just when we thought we’d figured it all out with the girls who were transitioning to boys, now there’s this whole other category of kids we have to consider.”

RETENTION (See chart on page 10)

Around the question of what to do if a girls’ school student comes out as trans, administrators reported that where they started was often quite different than where they ended up. On the one hand, some initially felt that it was self-evident that a trans student should leave a girls’ school. On the other hand, there were many administrators who started off by feeling that every student is a cherished member of the community, so they would never ask a trans student to leave. Both groups agreed, however, that once they started educating themselves, they learned that the retention questions were far more complex:

If we allow trans students to stay, will that change us somehow?

Are we ready to welcome and support trans students?

In 2017, retention practices remain usually informal and rarely codified. Most schools were still figuring out what their guidelines around current trans students should be. Seven schools reported no policy on this question, and six reported that they would support the trans student until graduation.

Most schools (20) are opting for a case-by-case determination of whether trans students should remain at their girls’ school, but they are preparing themselves by setting parameters which will guide that determination. Most administrators echoed, “We will support each student on their exploration and journey insofar as it does not conflict with our mission as a girls’ school.” However, many administrators raised the concern that asking one trans student to leave while allowing another to stay might ultimately provoke disastrous legal or public relations consequences.

Factors to consider were the student’s age, the initiation of medical transition, and self-identification as male (as opposed to transgender). Some administrators were more likely to ask younger trans students to leave, or to allow a trans student to stay until the end of a division, while a few administrators mentioned their reluctance to kick out a trans student during the college application process. Several administrators mentioned that if

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 5 students initiated cross-sex hormones, they would not be invited to return. Many schools said they would draw the line at students who publicly self-identify as male (as opposed to trans, transgender, genderqueer, or gender-questioning) being not a good match for a girls’ school, but few schools had actually had those students.

Length of time of trans gender identity was also cited as a factor by a middle/upper school head: “If I had a 7th or 8th grader transitioning to male, we’ll work with you to help you develop your identity. But in my head, if the student is still identifying as male a year later, I’d feel like, ‘maybe this isn’t the right place for you.’ But the student is likely to want to stay.”

Trans students becoming student leaders was a sticking point for many administrators, who expressed concern about (FTM) trans male students in leadership positions representing or being seen publicly as ‘the face of’ the school.

On the other hand, one Head said, “We need trans students to be willing to work within the constraints of being at a girls’ school – even to embrace it. But it won’t work if they’re treated as second class citizens.”

BATHROOMS, LOCKER ROOMS, BOARDING, AND OVERNIGHT TRIPS: For as much discussion and media attention as the topic of trans people and bathrooms gets, it seems to be a relatively easy fix for schools. Most looked for the opportunity to turn single-stall bathrooms into all-gender bathrooms and mark them “Restroom,” “All-gender,” Gender- inclusive” etc. For now, many schools would offer a private locker room changing space, knowing that not all trans students would opt for that.

Boarding school administrators were eager to learn of others’ experiences. Around boarding and overnight trips, schools really didn’t have this figured out yet, and of course some are more constrained than others due to their housing stock or customs around not providing single rooms. Administrators were mindful of the possibility that MTF students might not be publicly out as trans, which would certainly complicate rooming assignments. For FTM boarders, many administrators were concerned about reactions from the parents of potential roommates -- including more traditional families or international families -- who might not be familiar with trans people.

CURRICULUM: Many schools reported that the topic of the gender spectrum, gender identity, or transgender individuals is taught somewhere – for example, in health and wellness, history, social justice, or literature classes. Parents didn’t seem to object to intellectual study of the topic. However, when older students came out to or began to inform younger students about trans experience, parents would sound the alarm bells. As a result, several administrators were considering how and when the adults could take on the task of introducing this material to the younger kids.

PARENT RELATIONS: Many participants acknowledged both the heartbreak involved in witnessing unsupportive parents with trans kids and the dicey position that puts the school in. Having unsupportive parents puts trans kids at high-risk for depression, substance abuse, and suicidality. Schools want to encourage self-exploration and authenticity among students, but then they struggle to take on the role of bridging the gap between trans students and their

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 6 unsupportive parents. Several administrators had already experienced parents unleashing antagonism toward the school for supporting their trans child.

DRESS CODE: Most of the schools had reviewed their dress code with an eye to making it more gender-expansive, usually by including pants as an option. Many schools complained that their students rarely wore pants, though – sometimes because the particular pants in the uniform were “dorky,” and often because the dominant student culture still favored things like long, straight hair and skirts. Several schools had shifted to allow pants for the older students but not in the lower school. The White Dress still dominated graduation attire, though most schools would allow pants when requested.

ALUMNAE were an important concern for girls’ schools, in two ways: On the one hand, Heads of School were hearing concerns from alumnae about what the school was doing about transgender students, and were facing current parents who are alumnae who seemed particularly conservative about trans inclusion at the school. On the other hand, administrators, aware of alums who’d come out as trans after graduation, were trying to include and embrace them within the school community. Several participants raised questions about whether to stop using alumnae and instead refer to graduates as alums in order to be more inclusive.

BOARD RELATIONS were seen as critically important on the trans topic. Many administrators stated that they generally prefer to determine policy and practice within the School and then run it by their Board. However, in many cases the Head recognized that this particular diversity issue had the potential to be mission-critical, and therefore chose to involve the Board in something that might otherwise have been viewed as strictly operational. For some schools, the fact that the trans topic touched on admissions issues meant that the Board had to be consulted. At a few schools, the Board had to be pushed to get involved in the topic, sometimes resenting doing so.

Many administrators emphasized the critical importance of finessing Board relations here, particularly because the Board/Head interface was the locus of many of the leadership changes that have occurred around trans inclusion. As one participant said, “My colleagues tell me, and I’ve learned, that the support of your Board Chair is make-or-break on this one.” Heads of School devoted much attention to how and when to educate their Boards, as well as strategic planning on how and who to include in decision-making bodies like a Transgender Task Force.

STUDENT INVOLVEMENT: Most schools opted not to involve students in decision-making around trans policy and practice. Instead, students were involved in education and training (as leaders and participants) and invited to share input with decision-making administrators. At the one school where students were integrally involved in the process because that was in keeping with the school culture, it became very dicey and contentious to have students meeting with trustees to hammer out policy.

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 7 CONCLUSION: “IT’S COMPLICATED!”

Over and over, administrators pointed out the complexity of both the issues and the process around trans inclusivity at girls’ schools. Participants faced competing allegiances – to girls’ education; to supporting students’ identity journeys; to feminism; to diversity and inclusion; to both staying current and honoring tradition. With 29 out of 33 schools reporting trans students on their campuses, administrators recognized that it’s not a matter of whether girls’ schools need to tackle this topic, it’s a matter of when. The girls’ school response to this need over just the past few years has been impressive in its scope and depth, particularly given this complexity.

Talented and experienced leaders in girls’ education shared painful experiences:

! “This process has yielded the information that the faculty and the Board are on totally different pages, and I honestly don’t know how we’ll resolve that.” ! “This topic is not for the feint of heart.” ! “While our school was hammering this out, I didn’t sleep for six weeks. This [development of guidelines around trans students] was the hardest thing I’ve ever done in my professional life, but it’s also the thing I’m proudest of.”

The gender revolution, with its rapid acceptance by this generation of students, poses immediate and significant challenges for girls’ schools. And administrators have taken up that challenge by asking the hard questions, initiating a dedicated process of learning and self- reflection, and assessing where their particular school will land in the changing gender landscape.

It’s complicated, but it can be done. While there’s no one-size-fits-all approach, girls’ schools have much to learn from and share with each other, as not just many of our students, but also our institutions, embark on this new gender journey.

Julie Mencher, MSW is a psychotherapist, trainer, and consultant and a pioneer in LGBT education and advocacy. She developed and held the position of Transgender Specialist at Smith, a women's college, over fifteen years ago. As a nationally recognized speaker and consultant, Ms. Mencher serves as a strategic advisor to organizations on gender diversity and sexuality. With a specialty in working with single- sex institutions, Ms. Mencher has helped girls’ schools and women's colleges navigate the changing gender landscape while also staying true to their mission. A member of the Smith College School for Social Work faculty for over twenty years, she was also a Visiting Scholar at the Stone Center at Wellesley College. She trains graduate students and professionals in social work, psychology, and psychiatry. She is the author of numerous articles and book chapters on LGBT issues and is a frequent presenter at NCGS, NAIS, and TABS conferences. She lives in Northampton MA, where her clinical practice includes a specialty in working with trans youth and their families. She can be reached through www.juliemencher.com or at [email protected].

www.juliemencher.com • 413-530-4348 • [email protected] 8 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Financial Statements

For the Year Ended 31 December 2017 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Contents For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

Page

Financial Statements Directors' Report 1 Statement of Profit or Loss and Other Comprehensive Income 9 Statement of Financial Position 10 Statement of Changes in Equity 11 Statement of Cash Flows 12 Notes to the Financial Statements 13 Directors' Declaration 19 Independent Assurance Practitioner's Review Report 20 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

The directors present their report on The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited for the financial year ended 31 December 2017.

1. General information

Information on directors

The names of each person who has been a director during the year and to the date of this report are:

Vivienne Awad (resigned 26 May 2017) Qualifications BA, DipEd, MEDL Experience Vivienne is principal of Domremy College in Sydney NSW. She is a leader of learning with an authentic interest in girls’ education, having spent her career teaching in Catholic girls’ schools, both systemic and independent. Prior to her appointment as Principal at Domremy College, Vivienne was Deputy Principal at and Assistant Principal at Bethany College, Hurstville. Throughout her twenty eight years in education, Vivienne has held a number of middle management and executive positions that have allowed her the opportunity to lead staff and students in areas of contemporary pedagogy, pastoral care, co-curricular activities, mentoring and leadership. She began her career as a teacher of Mathematics and continues to explore ways to develop the confidence and mindset necessary for students to experience success and to enjoy the rigour involved in pursuing the higher levels of mathematics. Special responsibilities NSW Co-representative

Jackie Barron Qualifications BA, Dip Ed, MMgt Experience Jackie Barron is the principal of St Hilda’s Collegiate, a state integrated, day and boarding school in Otago, New Zealand. Leading her second school and in her eighth year as a principal, Jackie has enjoyed a variety of leadership roles in several schools, with a key focus being lifting student achievement through robust programmes that enhance the mental health, resiliency and wellbeing of girls. Jackie is involved with her regional Principals’ Association and values the collaborative and supportive professional relationships between the girls’ schools in the area. As a Ministerial appointment to the Sport New Zealand Board, Jackie is enjoying her second term in a governance role on a national board, that impacts on all sectors of society in New Zealand. She is passionate about the opportunities for gender equity in governance and the importance of women’s voices being heard around the board table, so young women can see, and believe in, the pathways available to them. Special responsibilities New Zealand Representative

1 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Information on directors (cont'd)

Mary Cannon Qualifications BEd, MSchldrshp, PhD Experience Dr Mary Cannon has worked in State education in Victoria for the past 35 years. She is the current principal at Canterbury Girls’ Secondary College in Melbourne, a position she has held for the past 8 years. Mary holds a Bachelor of Education, a Masters of School Leadership and a Ph.D. in History. She is an appointed member of the Merit Protection Board in Victoria and is the Acting Senior Chairperson as required. She is the author of a number of classroom textbooks, particularly in the area of History. Special responsibilities Victorian Co-representative

Roslyn Curtis Qualifications MEd, MLitStudies, BA(Hons), DipEd Experience Ros is principal of St Margaret’s Anglican Girls’ School, Brisbane. Her areas of interest include school leadership structures and their effectiveness, curriculum leadership and aspirant leaders, effective governance and change leadership and management. In 2011, Ros received the John Laing Award for her significant contribution to the professional development of Senior Leaders in Schools. Ros is the Queensland Representative and executive member of the board of the Alliance of Girls’ School Australasia, and member of the executive branch of the Queensland Branch of AHISA (Association of Heads of Independent Schools), and a member of the Advisory Board of the Business School at Bond University. Special responsibilities President and Queensland Representative

Jenny Ethell (resigned 4 August 2017) Qualifications BBus(Agric), Grad DipEd, DipRSS Experience Jenny Ethell (BBus, Grad Dip Ed, MACE) has been the Principal of Perth College since 2003 and has taught and held senior leadership positions at government, independent and Catholic schools in Queensland, Victoria, and . With a strong belief in lifelong learning, Jenny has spent time studying at Harvard University and Melbourne University, and with the Institute of Company Directors. She is the WA representative of the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australia and is the WA chair of the Association of Heads of Independent Schools of Australia. Jenny’s hope is for each student to graduate from Perth College with a strong sense of self, authenticity, confidence, determination, humility and kindness. Special responsibilities Former Treasurer and WA Representative

2 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Information on directors (cont'd)

Kate Hadwen (appointed 4 August 2017) Qualifications PhD, MEd, BT, GradCertEd Experience A respected educator, Kate has pursued a career in education inspired by her own love of learning and her passion to empower young people to step outside their comfort zone and to flourish in our increasingly complex world. Kate’s background includes teaching and leadership roles in Junior, Middle and Senior schools, research and lecturing in the tertiary sector, and National project management in school-based pastoral care programmes. Kate also has outstanding academic qualifications having completed a Bachelor of Teaching (1996), Graduate Certificate of Education (2006), Master of Education (2007) majoring in Educational Leadership and a Doctor of Philosophy (2015). Special responsibilities WA Represenative

Anne Johnstone (appointed 26 May 2017) Qualifications BA LLB (Hons) Grad Dip Ed Experience Prior to joining Ravenswood in 2016, Anne was Principal of , a leading independent day and boarding school for girls, in Adelaide. Anne is also a founding Board member of the Positive Education in Schools Association (PESA), and has been a leader in the implementation of positive education in schools, along with wellbeing and resilience in learning, and has presented at conferences nationally and internationally in this field. Throughout her career in education Anne has held the leadership positions of Deputy Headmistress, Head of Senior School, Head of Junior School and Gifted Education Coordinator. Anne began her teaching career as an English teacher, and has also taught history, applied psychology and philosophy. In 2003, Anne received The Teachers’ Guild of NSW Award for Excellence in the Early Years of Teaching. In 2004 Anne was awarded a Winston Churchill Fellowship, the focus of which was to explore how to foster resilience in learning, and conducted this study whilst based at Cambridge University in England. Anne holds degrees in Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Laws (with Honours) and a Graduate Diploma of Education. Before pursuing her passion for teaching, Anne practised as a lawyer specialising in commercial litigation. Anne has also worked as a consultant advising schools and law firms in the areas of positive psychology, resilience, leadership and communication skills, and has lectured at Macquarie University in Modern Corporate Governance and Labour Law. Special responsibilities NSW Co-representative

3 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Information on directors (cont'd)

Marise McConaghy (appointed 13 December 2017) Qualifications BA, Dip Teach, ASDA, MACE, FAIM Experience Marise McConaghy has a strong background in girls’ education and has written and spoken extensively on various topics related to the development of girls. She graduated from the University of Queensland having studied English and History and is currently undertaking post-graduate work through the Queensland University of Technology on the development of leadership amongst girls and women. Marise has undertaken professional development experiences at Harvard University’s Executive Education Women’s Leadership Forum and in Vienna with architects, educators and policy-makers at the Vienna University of Technology. Marise has a background in both primary and secondary education. She has worked in single sex boys’ and girls’ schools and co-educational environments across a number of school sectors. Marise has also provided board committee input at an early learning centre with multiple campuses, and was a board member of the Queensland College of Teachers and also a member of its Professional Standards Committee. Special responsibilities Victorian Co-representative

Francoise Reddan (resigned 5 December 2017) Qualifications BA(Hons), DipEd, BEdSt, MEdSt Experience Fran is the principal of Mentone Girls' Grammar School where she has served the pursuit of excellence in education for 10 years. Fran's extensive expertise in the education sector spans more than 25 years and includes a variety of leadership positions, serving on several boards, and contributing her expertise in innovation, global learning, creativity, gender and leadership. Fran is recognised not only as an outstanding educator achieving excellent results, but also for her astute skills and understanding of the ‘business of a school’ with its complexity in stakeholder management. Special responsibilities Former President and Victorian Co-representative

Briony Scott (appointed 1 January 2017)) Qualifications PhD Experience Dr Briony Scott commenced as Principal of Wenona in July 2011. Briony has a Masters and Doctorate in Education from the University of Sydney, specialising in girls’ education; the utilisation of technology in the classroom; and non-government school funding policy. Prior to commencing at Wenona, Briony was Principal of , and served as Head of Senior School and Director of Studies at Oxford Falls Grammar School. She has also worked as a systems analyst for Olivetti. Briony has been a regular columnist on educational and parenting issues for The North Shore Times and speaks frequently at community forums and conferences. Special responsibilities Treasurer and NSW Co-representative

4 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Information on directors (cont'd)

Julia Shea Qualifications B Sc, Dip Ed, M Ed Admin Experience Julia Shea commenced as Principal of St Peter’s Girls’ School in January 2014. Demonstrating well-developed leadership, educational, strategic and organisational skills, Julia has a solid track record of staff management and development, and a focus on building capacity in others, inclusiveness and instilling in her team a strong sense of collaboration and understanding of their value and contribution to the School and most importantly, student learning. Julia has a wealth of experience in school leadership and curriculum development, particularly staff development and factors associated with student success and the development of the whole person. Special responsibilities SA Representative

Judith Tudball Qualifications BCA, GradDipEd, MLMEd, LTCL, AMusA, MAICD Experience Judith is Principal of St Michael’s Collegiate School, Hobart, an Anglican day and boarding school for girls from ELC–Yr 12. She has a proud commitment to girls’ education and a strong background in independent single sex girls’ school in NSW and QLD. Judith’s career has evolved through numerous leadership roles including Director of Music, Head of Creative Arts, Head of High School, and Dean of Co- Curriculum. Judith believes creativity in education can enhance self- esteem and motivation, develop independence, and inspire curiosity in students. Judith is committed to assisting young women to contribute as confident and empathetic citizens in a global community. Special responsibilities Tasmanian Representative (resigned 31 December 2017)

Directors have been in office since the start of the financial year to the date of this report unless otherwise stated.

Company secretary

Loren Bridge (MBA, BBus) has held the role of Company Secretary since November 2013. Loren is a highly experienced marketing, communications and community relations specialist with over 20 years experience in senior management roles. For the past four years she has driven the Alliance's engagement with schools, business, community and industry organisations. She has established successful partnerships and initiatives such as Making a Difference, a leadership program for girls, and a STEM project that has seen over 500 girls from 52 schools participate in NASA's space school program in the USA. Loren is a Director of the Australian Gender Equality Council.

Principal activities

The principal activities of the Alliance during the financial year were aimed at widening the educational opportunities for girls and young women through collaborations with girls' schools and key partners.

No significant changes in the nature of the Alliance's activity occurred during the financial year.

5 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Short term objectives

The Alliance's short term objectives are to:

 Strengthen the voice of the Alliance in promoting the education of girls in girls' schools.

 Retain the current level of membership, and member loyalty, in Australia and New Zealand.

 Make research accessible and meaningful for members to support of the case for girls' schools and inform current pedagogy and practice.

 Strengthen partnerships to deepen the service offering and influence of the Alliance with members.

Long term objectives

The work and direction of the Alliance is shaped by four key goals. All initiatives undertaken contribute to achieving and satisfying these:

 Inspiring girls

Our work inspires girls and young women to feel a positive sense of agency, to be unafraid to stretch beyond their comfort zone and be motivated to lead and determine their own future.

 Challenging convention

Our work critically questions social archetypes and conventions, providing evidence and insight that enables girls and young women to challenge traditional stereotypes and expectations in the ambitious pursuit of their goals and a more inclusive society.

 Creating opportunities

Our work provides girls, young women and their educators with a range of experiences, skills, tools and knowledge that open their hearts and minds to new ideas and ways in which to make a difference.

 Harnessing voices

Our work brings together the voices of many, advocating the case for girls' schools and enabling the needs of girls and young women to be heard clearly in society as a platform for positive change.

Strategy for achieving the objectives

The strategies we will employ to achieve these objectives include:

 Engaging and equipping member schools and their staff at all levels to champion the case for girls' schools

 Creating a strong presence in traditional and social media

 Tailor member services to closely align with the diverse needs of membership

 Develop or extend services to meet needs of regional /smaller schools 6 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Strategy for achieving the objectives (cont'd)

 Build loyalty and add value for staff (middle management & classroom teachers)

 Increase member engagement in programs and services across all sectors and sizes of schools

 Curation of education and social research that supports the case for girls' schools

 Evidence based marketing and communications collateral that equips member schools to promote the benefits of girls' schools

 Publications that promote the benefits of girls' schools and build the profile of the organisation across various media formats

 Selectively seek and invest in research programs, via partnerships and grants that build the evidence base to inform the design of educational program, opportunities and experiences for girls, young women and their educators and positions AGSA as a thought leader

 Optimise the partnership portfolio to build the profile of the organisation and expand services to members

 Develop sponsorship programs that support and promote the Alliance

 Strengthen international connection and engagement in the USA and UK.

How principal activities assisted in achieving the objectives

2017 realised:

 Membership growth of 8%.

 Increased positive media coverage and social media engagement that strengthened the reputation and voice of the Alliance. Metrics for website, social media and member hub all show increases.

 Released two promotional videos supporting the case for girls' schools

 32 events for staff and students with over 2800 attendees including Speaker Tour of Australia and New Zealand with author and academic Prof Cordelia Fine.

 Published 43 research abstracts; 18 research summaries and 20 media reports providing members with the latest research and news related to girls' education. Collaborated on three significant research project: 1. with AskRight to undertake study on philanthropy in girls' schools; 2. with UQ and the Australian Gender Equality Council to conduct a pilot study which surveyed over 10,000 boys and girls as well as interviewing over 500 of these survey participants regarding their self-confidence, leadership and STEM career intentions which will inform the development of an educational program for high school students. The program is aimed at raising awareness of the issue of gender inequality and will develop resources which will be distributed to schools across Australia; 3. With Monash University the Alliance funded a study into STEM subject and career participation rates for girls / women.

7 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Report For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

1. General information (cont'd)

Performance measures

The Alliance measures its performance using a number of indicators including engagement of members through events and digital platforms; membership retention and recruitment; and satisfaction surveys.

Members' guarantee

The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited is a company limited by guarantee. In the event of, and for the purpose of winding up of the company, the amount capable of being called up from each members and any person or association who ceased to be a member in the year prior to the winding up, is limited to $ 20 for all members, subject to the provisions of the Alliance's constitution.

At 31 December 2017 the collective liability of members was $ 3,340 (2016: $ 3,100).

Meetings of directors

During the financial year, 6 meetings of directors were held. Attendances by each director during the year were as follows:

Directors' Meetings Number eligible to Number attend attended Vivienne Awad 3 3 Jackie Barron 6 5 Mary Cannon 6 4 Roslyn Curtis 6 6 Jenny Ethell 4 3 Kate Hadwen 3 2 Anne Johnstone 3 2 Marise McConaghy - - Francoise Reddan 6 5 Briony Scott 6 6 Julia Shea 6 5 Judith Tudball 6 4

Signed in accordance with a resolution of the Board of Directors:

Director: ...... Roslyn Curtis

Dated:

8 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Statement of Profit or Loss and Other Comprehensive Income For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

2017 2016 $ $ Member subscriptions 196,325 185,225 Conference income 142,894 244,239 Function income 55,437 81,654 Partnership income 56,250 75,000 Educational programs 76,590 53,289 Sponsorship - 17,590 Interest income 4,090 6,380 WAGS income 22,958 10,971 Speaking tour income 8,801 - Awards and prizes - 2,750 Other income 2,376 3,019 Conference expenses (97,486) (201,312) Function expenses (58,333) (55,111) Newsletter and magazine costs (16,000) (15,489) Employee benefits expense (201,771) (165,816) Depreciation and amortisation expense (5,321) (6,953) Partnerships (2,829) (23,510) Other expenses (101,015) (71,353)

Profit before income tax 82,966 140,573 Income tax expense - -

Profit for the year 82,966 140,573

Other comprehensive income for the year, net of tax - - Total comprehensive income for the year 82,966 140,573

The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements. 9 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Statement of Financial Position As At 31 December 2017

2017 2016 Note $ $ ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 4 840,198 781,970 Trade and other receivables 5 181,270 148,905 Other assets 6 55,246 2,108

TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 1,076,714 932,983 NON-CURRENT ASSETS Property, plant and equipment 7 12,795 15,388

TOTAL NON-CURRENT ASSETS 12,795 15,388 TOTAL ASSETS 1,089,509 948,371

LIABILITIES CURRENT LIABILITIES Trade and other payables 8 34,921 39,899 Other financial liabilities 9 380,251 317,101

TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 415,172 357,000 TOTAL LIABILITIES 415,172 357,000 NET ASSETS 674,337 591,371

EQUITY Retained earnings 674,337 591,371

TOTAL EQUITY 674,337 591,371

The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements. 10 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Statement of Changes in Equity For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

2017 Retained Earnings Total $ $ Balance at 1 January 2017 591,371 591,371 Profit for the year 82,966 82,966

Balance at 31 December 2017 674,337 674,337

2016 Retained Earnings Total $ $ Balance at 1 January 2016 450,798 450,798 Profit for the year 140,573 140,573

Balance at 31 December 2016 591,371 591,371

The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements. 11 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Statement of Cash Flows For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

2017 2016 Note $ $ CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Receipts from member subscriptions 226,380 394,994 Other operating receipts 416,344 411,118 Payments to suppliers and employees (585,858) (547,608) Interest received 4,090 6,380 Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities 12 60,956 264,884

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Purchase of property, plant and equipment (2,728) (16,718)

Net cash used by investing activities (2,728) (16,718)

Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents held 58,228 248,166 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 781,970 533,804 Cash and cash equivalents at end of financial year 4 840,198 781,970

The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements. 12 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

The financial report covers The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited as an individual entity. The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited (the Alliance) is a not-for-for profit company limited by guarantee, incorporated and domiciled in Australia.

The functional and presentation currency of The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited is Australian dollars.

Comparatives are consistent with prior years, unless otherwise stated.

1 Basis of Preparation

In the Directors' opinion, the Alliance is not a reporting entity since there are unlikely to exist users of the financial report who are not able to command the preparation of reports tailored so as to satisfy specifically all of their information needs. This special purpose financial report has been prepared to meet the reporting requirements of the Corporations Act 2001.

The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the recognition and measurement requirements of the Australian Accounting Standards and Accounting Interpretations, and the disclosure requirements of AASB 101 Presentation of Financial Statements, AASB 107 Statement of Cash Flows, AASB 108 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors and AASB 1054 Australian Additional Disclosures.

The financial statements have been prepared on an accruals basis and are based on historical costs modified, where applicable, by the measurement at fair value of selected non-current assets, financial assets and financial liabilities.

Significant accounting policies adopted in the preparation of these financial statements are presented below and are consistent with prior reporting periods unless otherwise stated.

2 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

(a) Revenue and other income

Revenue is recognised when the amount of the revenue can be measured reliably, it is probable that economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the Alliance and specific criteria relating to the type of revenue as noted below, has been satisfied.

Revenue is measured at the fair value of the consideration received or receivable and is presented net of returns, discounts and rebates.

Subscriptions

Revenue from the provision of membership subscriptions is recognised on a straight line basis over the financial year.

Rendering of services

Revenue in relation to rendering of services, which includes events and functions income, is recognised depending on the stage of completion of the services. Where income is received in advance of providing a service the amount is recognised within liabilities as income in advance to be released to income when the service is supplied.

Sale of goods

Revenue is recognised on transfer of goods to the customer as this is deemed to be the point in time when risks and rewards are transferred and there is no longer any ownership or effective control over the goods. 13 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

2 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (cont'd)

(a) Revenue and other income (cont'd)

Other income

Other income is recognised on an accruals basis when the Alliance is entitled to it.

(b) Income Tax

The Alliance is exempt from income tax under Division 50 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.

(c) Goods and Services Tax (GST)

Revenue, expenses and assets are recognised net of the amount of goods and services tax (GST), except where the amount of GST incurred is not recoverable from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).

Receivables and payable are stated inclusive of GST.

The net amount of GST recoverable from, or payable to, the ATO is included as part of receivables or payables in the statement of financial position.

Cash flows in the statement of cash flows are included on a gross basis and the GST component of cash flows arising from investing and financing activities which is recoverable from, or payable to, the taxation authority is classified as operating cash flows.

(d) Cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents comprises cash on hand, demand deposits and short-term investments which are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and which are subject to an insignificant risk of change in value.

(e) Employee benefits

Provision is made for the Alliance's liability for employee benefits arising from services rendered by employees to the end of the reporting period. Employee benefits that are expected to be wholly settled within one year have been measured at the amounts expected to be paid when the liability is settled.

Employee benefits expected to be settled more than one year after the end of the reporting period have been measured at the present value of the estimated future cash outflows to be made for those benefits. In determining the liability, consideration is given to employee wage increases and the probability that the employee may satisfy vesting requirements.

Obligations for contributions to defined contribution superannuation plans are recognised as an employee benefit expense in profit or loss in the periods in which services are provided by employees.

(f) Loans and receivables

Trade receivables, loans, and other receivables that have fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market are classified as ‘loans and receivables’. Loans and receivables are measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method, less any impairment. Interest income is recognised by applying the effective interest rate, except for short-term receivables when the recognition of interest would be immaterial.

14 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

2 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (cont'd)

(f) Loans and receivables (cont'd)

Impairment of financial assets

At the end of the reporting period the Alliance assesses whether there is any objective evidence that a financial asset or group of financial assets is impaired.

The carrying amount of the financial asset is reduced by the impairment loss directly for all financial assets with the exception of trade receivables, where the carrying amount is reduced through the use of an allowance account. When a trade receivable is considered uncollectable, it is written off against the allowance account. Subsequent recoveries of amounts previously written off are credited against the allowance account. Changes in the carrying amount of the allowance are recognised in profit and loss.

(g) Trade and other payables

These amounts represent liabilities for goods and services provided to the company prior to the end of the financial year and which are unpaid. Due to their short term nature they are measured at amortised cost and are not discounted.

(h) Adoption of new and revised accounting standards

The Alliance has adopted all standards which became effective for the first time at 31 December 2017, the adoption of these standards has not caused any material adjustments to the reported financial position, performance or cash flow of the Alliance.

(i) New Accounting Standards and Interpretations

The AASB has issued new and amended Accounting Standards and Interpretations that have mandatory application dates for future reporting periods. The Alliance has decided not to early adopt these Standards. The following table summarises those future requirements, and their impact on the Alliance where the standard is relevant: Effective date for Standard Name entity Requirements Impact AASB 15 Revenue from 31/12/18 AASB 15 introduces a five step process for The Directors do not contracts with revenue recognition with the core principle of believe that the new customers the new Standard being for entities to standard will have a recognise revenue to depict the transfer of material impact on goods or services to customers in amounts recorded revenues of that reflect the consideration (that is, the Alliance. payment) to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Accounting policy changes will arise in timing of revenue recognition, treatment of contracts costs and contracts which contain a financing element. AASB 15 will also result in enhanced disclosures about revenue, provide guidance for transactions that were not previously addressed comprehensively (for example, service revenue and contract modifications) and improve guidance for multiple-element arrangements.

15 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

3 Critical Accounting Estimates and Judgments

The Directors have not made any significant accounting estimates or judgements which are likely to affect the future results of the Alliance.

4 Cash and Cash Equivalents 2017 2016 $ $ Cash at bank and in hand 840,198 781,970

5 Trade and Other Receivables CURRENT Trade receivables 181,270 148,905

6 Other Assets CURRENT Prepayments 55,246 2,108

7 Property, plant and equipment Website development costs At cost 25,447 22,719 Accumulated depreciation (12,652) (7,331)

Total website development costs 12,795 15,388 Total property, plant and equipment 12,795 15,388

Movement in the carrying amounts for each class of property, plant and equipment between the beginning and the end of the financial year: Office Website Equipment development Total $ $ $ Year ended 31 December 2017 Balance at the beginning of year - 15,388 15,388 Additions - 2,728 2,728 Depreciation expense - (5,321) (5,321)

Balance at the end of the year - 12,795 12,795

Year ended 31 December 2016 Balance at the beginning of year 31 5,592 5,623 Additions - 16,718 16,718 Depreciation expense (31) (6,922) (6,953)

Balance at the end of the year - 15,388 15,388

16 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

8 Trade and Other Payables 2017 2016 $ $ CURRENT Trade payables - 9,686 GST payable 27,290 21,718 Sundry payables and accrued expenses 4,000 5,500 Other payables 3,631 2,995

34,921 39,899

9 Income in Advance Income received in advance 380,251 317,101

10 Members' Guarantee

The Alliance is incorporated under the Corporations Act 2001 and is an Alliance limited by guarantee. If the Alliance is wound up, the constitution states that each member is required to contribute a maximum of $ 20 each towards meeting any outstandings and obligations of the Alliance. At 31 December 2017 the number of members was 167 (2016: 155).

11 Contingencies

In the opinion of the Directors, the Alliance did not have any contingencies at 31 December 2016 (31 December 2016:None).

12 Cash Flow Information

Reconciliation of net income to net cash provided by operating activities: 2017 2016 $ $ Profit for the year 82,966 140,573 Non-cash flows in profit: - depreciation 5,321 6,953 Changes in assets and liabilities, net of the effects of purchase and disposal of subsidiaries: - (increase)/decrease in trade and other receivables (32,365) (131,396) - (increase)/decrease in other assets (53,138) 44,878 - increase/(decrease) in income in advance 63,150 191,041 - increase/(decrease) in trade and other payables (4,978) 12,835

Cashflow from operations 60,956 264,884

17 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Notes to the Financial Statements For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

13 Company Details

The registered office of and principal place of business of the company is: The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited Unit 102, 239 Golden Four Drive Bilinga QLD 4225

18 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Directors' Declaration

The Directors have determined that the Alliance is not a reporting entity and that these special purpose financial statements should be prepared in accordance with the accounting policies described in Note 2 of the financial statements.

The directors of the Alliance declare that:

1. The financial statements and notes, as set out on pages 9 to 18, are in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001 and:

(a) comply with Australian Accounting Standards as stated in Note 1; and

(b) give a true and fair view of the Alliance's financial position as at 31 December 2017 and of its performance for the year ended on that date in accordance with the accounting policies described in Note 2 of the financial statements.

2. In the Directors' opinion, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Alliance will be able to pay its debts as and when they become due and payable.

This declaration is made in accordance with a resolution of the Board of Directors.

Director ...... Roslyn Curtis

Dated:

19 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713

Independent Assurance Practitioner's Review Report to the members of The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited

Report on the Financial Statements

We have reviewed the accompanying financial statements of The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited, which comprise the statement of financial position as at 31 December 2017, and the statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income, statement of changes in equity and statement of cash flows for the year ended on that date, a summary of significant accounting policies, other selected explanatory notes, and the directors' declaration.

Directors' Responsibility for the Financial Statements

The directors of the Alliance are responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with the Australian Accounting Standards to the extent described in Note 1. This responsibility includes establishing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies; and making accounting estimates that are reasonable in the circumstances.

Assurance Practitioner’s Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express a conclusion on the accompanying financial statements based on our review. We conducted our review in accordance with Auditing Standard on Review Engagements ASRE 2400 Reviews of Financial Reports Performed by an Assurance Practitioner Who is Not the Auditor of the Entity, in order to state whether, on the basis of the procedures described, anything has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the financial statements, taken as a whole, are not prepared in all material respects, in accordance with the Australian Accounting Standards to the extent described in Note 1. ASRE 2400 requires us to comply with the requirements of the applicable code of professional conduct of a professional accounting body.

A review of a year financial report consists of making enquiries, primarily of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters, and applying analytical and other review procedures. A review is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards and consequently does not enable us to obtain assurance that we would become aware of all significant matters that might be identified in an audit. Accordingly, we do not express an audit opinion.

Independence

In conducting our review, we have complied with the independence requirements of the Australian professional accounting bodies.

Conclusion

Based on our review, which is not an audit, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that these financial statements do not present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited as at 31 December 2017, and of its financial performance and its cash flows for the year ended on that date, in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards to the extent described in Note 1.

SAAS Audit Pty Ltd

James Kenward Director

Suite 4, 118 Vulture Street South Brisbane QLD 4101

Dated:

20 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713 For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

Detailed Profit and Loss Account

2017 2016 $ $ Income Member subscriptions 196,325 185,225 Conference income 142,894 244,239 Function income 55,437 81,654 Partnership income 56,250 75,000 Space school income 76,590 53,289 Sponsorship - 17,590 Interest income 4,090 6,380 Other income 34,135 16,740

Total income 565,721 680,117 Less: Expenses Accounting fees 8,940 7,677 Independent assurance practitioner's remuneration 4,000 3,460 Bank charges 2,117 2,988 Conference expenses 97,486 201,312 Consulting and professional fees 28,325 11,036 Depreciation 5,321 6,953 Donations 435 1,250 E-commerce gateway charges 584 477 Educational programs 1,500 - Executive meeting expenses 13,696 10,603 Filing fees - 434 Function expenses 58,333 55,111 Insurance 3,532 3,151 Minor equipment and software 3,980 121 Newsletter and magazine expenses 16,000 15,489 Partnerships 2,829 23,510 Postage 1,621 560 Professional development 664 - Printing and stationery 1,481 1,273 Research and media services 12,413 15,436 Salaries 184,298 151,430 Strategic planning costs 8,694 - Sundry expenses 74 - Superannuation contributions 17,473 14,386 Telephone and internet 1,559 1,633 Travel and accommodation 1,490 5,714 WAGS brochure 3,906 3,226 Website hosting 404 136 Website maintenance 1,600 2,178

Total Expenses 482,755 539,544 Profit before income tax 82,966 140,573

21 The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited ABN 11 079 627 713 For the Year Ended 31 December 2017

Disclaimer

The additional financial data presented on page 21 is in accordance with the books and records of the Alliance which have been subjected to the review procedures applied in our independent assurance practitioner's review of the Alliance for the year ended 31 December 2017. It will be appreciated that our review did not cover all details of the additional financial data. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on such financial data and we give no warranty of accuracy or reliability in respect of the data provided. Neither the firm nor any member or employee of the firm undertakes responsibility in any way whatsoever to any person (other than The Alliance of Girls' Schools (Australasia) Limited) in respect of such data, including any errors of omissions therein however caused.

SAAS Audit Pty Ltd

James Kenward Director

Suite 4, 118 Vulture Street South Brisbane QLD 4101 Dated:

22 6 February 2018

The Directors The Alliance of Girls’ Schools (Australasia) Limited 102/239 Golden Four Drive BILINGA QLD 4225

Dear Directors

THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS’ SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED: 2017 REVIEW

We have completed our review of your financial statements which we also prepared. The financial statements have been forwarded to Loren together with a representation letter to arrange sign off. On sign off, please scan the signed pages back to me. I will then scan back a copy to you for lodgement with ASIC.

Impact of ACNC Registration

Once again, congratulations for achieving your ACNC registration, this removes any doubts in relation to income tax. We note that your registration indicates that ACNC expect you to lodge the December 2018 Annual Information Statements and Financial Report by 30th June 2019. A lodgement for 2017 is not required, it is for this reason we believe lodgement of 2017 with ASIC is appropriate.

We recommend the board members review ‘Governance for Good’ the ACNC’s website which clearly sets out their responsibilities. ASIC also has guidance for ACNC registered companies listing matters which should still be reported to them – these are minimal.

In terms of audit/review requirements there is no change as charities with revenue between $250K and $1m can opt for a review. References in the accounts will be to ACNC legislation and the requirement to include a director’s report falls away.

I would like to express our appreciation for the cooperation and assistance that we received from Loren during the course of our work this year.

Should you wish to discuss any of these matters, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Our invoice for the work undertaken is attached.

Yours sincerely

James Kenward Director Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia 102/239 Golden Four Drive Bilinga QLD 4225

31.01.18 Dear Loren Bridge

Re: Business Insurance Period: 31.01.2018 to 31.01.2019 ------We are pleased to submit your Renewal Invitation and ask that you please check the details carefully. If necessary, immediately advise us of any amendments, we also remind you of your Duty of Disclosure and request you inform us of any changes.

After analysing the current market place and comparing other Insurer's products, we have recommended the insurer shown on your invoice. The product recommended, based on information supplied by you, offers the protection and benefits to cover your particular needs and objectives, at a competitive premium.

We have also attached a list which shows some of the Insurances that are available in the market and we request that you spend a few minutes to complete this form and return it along with your remittance. This information will assist us in providing to you advice on the Insurances you feel are important to you. If you are not interested in any other covers or advice, could you please still complete and return the form so we are able to keep our records up to date in relation to your requirements.

Should you have any queries or wish to discuss further please do not hesitate to contact the writer.

Yours sincerely

Taela Bloemers Email Address: [email protected]

Reference: LETCRI ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia 102/239 Golden Four Drive Bilinga QLD 4225 Renewal of Cover TAX INVOICE I0235415

Our Reference : ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 Premium 2,175.52

Date : 30.01.2018 Stamp Duty 215.37 Class : Business Insurance Broker Fee 155.96

Premium GST 217.55 Insurer : Ansvar Insurance Ltd Fee GST 15.60

Policy No. : 044000587365 GST Total 233.15

Period : 31.01.2018 to 31.01.2019 Total Amount $ 2,780.00

IMPORTANT NOTES * When a Fire & ES Levy is shown, ES relates to State Emergency Services (Applicable NSW Only) We apologise for the delay in forwarding your renewal notice. However, your interests are held covered for a further 14 days pending receipt of your premium remittance.

INSURED: Alliance of Girls Schools (Australasia) Limited BUSINESS DESCRIPTION: Community service organisation

Your Account Manager is Taela Bloemers TERMS - NET 14 DAYS - Please forward your remittance to ensure cover. Please refer to your DUTY OF DISCLOSURE obligations and other important notices overleaf. Claims must be notified immediately as late notification may cause denial of liability in some instances. Unless we tell you otherwise in writing, we receive commission in addition to any broker fee mentioned above. Please ask us for any further information.

METHODS OF PAYMENT: Total Due $ 2,780.00 Post cheque payments together with this payment slip to: PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220 made payable to Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd 10 Monthly Instalments of $ 304.08 Biller Code : 66340 Please note initial instalment will include an application fee of $ 60.00 Reference : 002354150088 Total Amount Payable $ 3,100.76 Includes application fee & credit charges Telephone & Internet Banking - BPAY Contact your bank or financial institution to make this paymentyour cheque, savings, debit or transaction account. More info: www.bpay.com.au To proceed with your funding and to complete your application, please visit: https://hpf.online/1w1h2L4r5f www.abc2c.com.au\payment or Ph 07 5586 9955 to pay using your Visa or Mastercard Client Ref.: ACC MIA A8595 Reference: I0235415

Please note: An Administration Fee of .705%+GST will apply to all Application Number: 40251599 credit card payments over $4,000. Refer overleaf for important information about Hunter and AUB Group SOME IMPORTANT THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW It is essential that you carefully read and and which a reasonable person in the Cancellation of your Policy understand the following important notices. If you circumstances would include in answering the If a policy is cancelled before the expiry of the have any questions, please ask us. questions. Examples of matters that should be period of insurance, we reserve the right to refund disclosed are: the net return premium we received from the Make sure you comply with your Duty of - any claims you have made in recent years for the Insurer or have a cancellation fee charged to Disclosure particular type of insurance; offset the Insurers deduction of commission. The Insurance Contracts Act 1984 requires that - cancellation, avoidance of, or a refusal to renew Please ask us for any additional information you you, and everyone who is an insured under your your insurance by an insurer; require about our remuneration or cancellation policy, comply with the duty of disclosure. Make - any unusual feature of the insured risk that may policy. sure you explain the duty to any other insureds you increase the likelihood of a claim. may apply on behalf of. We do not do this unless - circumstances which may give rise to a claim. Financial Ombudsman Service Australia specifically agreed in writing. If you have any complaints about the service An insurer who is deciding whether they are provided to you, you should contact us and tell us The duty requires you to tell the insurer certain prepared to renew your policy, may give you a copy about your complaint. If the complaint cannot be matters which will help them decide whether to of anything you have previously told them and ask resolved to your satisfaction within 45 business insure you and, if so, on what terms. You have this you to tell them if anything has changed. If an days, you have the right to refer the matter to the duty until the insurer agrees to insure you and insurer does this, you must tell them about any Financial Ombudsman Service Australia('FOS').We before the insurer agrees to renew your policy. You change or advise that there is no change. If you do will provide you with further details about FOS also have the same duty before you extend, vary not respond then this will be taken to mean there upon lodging your dispute with us, or at any time or reinstate an insurance policy. The type of duty has been no changes. upon your request. that applies can vary according to the type of policy. Delay between final entry into the policy and Important Notice about your Austbrokers Broker If you are responding for other insureds original disclosure of information and Hunter Premium Funding Agreement If you are providing information for other insureds, You need to tell us if you have disclosure of you confirm you have their authority to do so and information in the application process and Austbrokers role and remuneration that the information provided is what they have something has happened that makes the Your Austbrokers Broker and AUB Group Limited told you in response to the duty of disclosure information disclosed inaccurate, or new matters ('AUB') (ABN 60 000 000 715) have a preferred obligations. arise that would require disclosure under the duty. supplier arrangement with Hunter Premium You must do this before the policy has been Funding Pty Ltd ('Hunter') for the arrangement Avoid making misrepresentations or not telling entered into (or renewed, varied, reinstated or of premium funding. They do not act for Hunter the insurer something extended as applicable). and do not advise on whether Hunter's products If you (or anyone who is an insured, or a proposed or services are right for you or are most insured, under the policy) make a Misstatement of Premium appropriate. You need to make your own decision misrepresentation, or if you do not tell the insurer We try to tell you the correct amounts of premium based on the information provided. something that you are required to tell them, they and statutory and other charges that apply to your may cancel your policy or reduce the amount they insurance. In the event that we misstate that If you use Hunter, your Austbrokers Broker will pay you in the event of a claim, or both. If the amount (either because we have made an receives: misrepresentation or failure is fraudulent, the unintentional error or because a third party has (a) a payment based on the interest earned on the insurer may refuse to pay a claim and treat the misstated the amount), we reserve the right to premium funding by Hunter each month; policy as if it never existed. correct the amount. Where permitted by law, you (b) a commission which is a percentage of the shall not hold us responsible for any loss that you amount of funding provided to you; If we act on behalf of the insurer, you need to refer may suffer as a result of any such misstatement. (c) a payment based on a percentage of all to the policy which will set out the duty that outstanding loans less any cancelled or applies. We will advise you when/if we act on Change of Risk or Circumstances terminated loans; and behalf of the insurer. You should carefully monitor and review that your (d) a payment based on a percentage on certain insurance contract is adequate to cover your assets general insurance business placed by the If we act on your behalf, to assist us in protecting or business activities and seek a variation if it is not. Austbrokers Network with certain divisions of your interests, it is important that you tell us every Many policies require us to notify the insurer in Allianz Insurance Ltd. matter that: writing of certain changes to the insured risk during - you know; or the period of insurance. The insurer can then AUB receives certain upfront payments from - a reasonable person in the circumstances could decide whether to cover the new risk. Examples are: Hunter for entering into (or renewing) a preferred be expected to know, may be relevant to the - For insurance covering property location supplier arrangement with Hunter. Your insurer's decision whether to insure you and, if changes, new business activities or any Austbrokers Broker is owned [partly/wholly] by so, on what terms. significant departure from your normal business AUB and benefits from any profit made by this operations. entity due to this arrangement. If in doubt it is better to tell us. We will then assist - For insurance covering your liability to third you in determining what needs to be disclosed to parties changes to the nature of your business, If your loan is cancelled, your Austbrokers Broker the insurer in order to meet your duty. and specifically in products liability, changes to and AUB keep any payments received pursuant to your product range or your involvement in the above arrangement with Hunter. If you need When you first apply for your policy, the insurer products not previously notified to insurers. more information or explanation of the above, may ask you specific questions relevant to their please ask us. decision whether to insure you. Interest of Other Parties Many policies exclude cover for an interest in the Cancellation of your Policy(ies) on request of Before an insurer agrees to renew your policy, you insured property held by someone other than the Hunter may again be asked specific questions by the insured, unless that interest is specifically noted in Your Loan Agreement with Hunter allows your insurer relevant to their decision whether to renew the policy. For example, if property is jointly Austbrokers Broker, on receipt of a notice from your policy. owned, or subject to finance, the interest of a third Hunter requesting cancellation of any policy party such as the joint owner or financier may be specified in the Loan Agreement with Hunter, to When you answer any questions asked by the excluded if it is not specifically noted on the policy. cancel the policy and provide the relevant refund insurer, you must give honest and complete If you want the interest of any third party to be to Hunter. Your Austbrokers Broker will notify you answers and tell the insurer, in answer to each covered, please let us know, so that we can ask the of any such cancellation. question, about every matter that is known to you insurer to note that party's interest on the policy.

Please debit my [ ] MASTERCARD [ ] VISACARD

Card Number |___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___|

Cardholders Name ______CCV ______

Signature ______Card Expiry Date ______/______

Reference ______Phone No ______(Found on the front of this invoice) Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd Phone: 07 5586 9955 Fax: 07 5586 9966 PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220

Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia COVERAGE SUMMARY Business Insurance

IMPORTANT NOTICE We provide our financial services under the terms and conditions noted in our Financial Services Guide issued to you. If you do not have one of these documents, please call us on phone 07 5586 9955 or visit our website. You must read this document before proceeding and by proceeding you represent and warrant you have received and read it. The following is a summary of cover only. For full terms and conditions including definitions, conditions, other limits and exclusions, please refer to your Policy Document or Product Disclosure Statement. We would like to remind you, that if this policy is cancellable and you cancel before the expiry date, we will refund the unused premium less our fee and commission. The Insurer or Agency may also impose a fee on cancellation. Any errors identified in the summary below must be reported to your Account Manager for amendment.

FIRE AND EXTRANEOUS PERILS: NOT INSURED CONSEQUENTIAL LOSS: NOT INSURED BURGLARY: NOT INSURED MONEY: NOT INSURED GLASS: NOT INSURED BROADFORM LIABILITY: INSURED MACHINERY BREAKDOWN: NOT INSURED ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT: NOT INSURED GENERAL PROPERTY: NOT INSURED TRANSIT: NOT INSURED TAX AUDIT: NOT INSURED

Reference: ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 31.01.18 Page No. 1 Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd Phone: 07 5586 9955 ABN 79 011 046 414 Fax: 07 5586 9966 PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220

Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia COVERAGE SUMMARY Business Insurance

BUSINESS INSURANCE

INSURED: Alliance of Girls Schools (Australasia) Limited (and no other entities)

BUSINESS DESCRIPTION: Community service organisation which may include organised networking events for members, provide marketing materials, advocate for girls schools, provide research analysis of existing research. Activities may also include outings, organised games, op shops, camps and excursions, fundraising such as walkathons and picnics events/festivals held at your place of occupancy.

Excluding any events/festivals held at premises other than your own where more than 500 attendees are expected unless specifically agreed by endorsement detailed within this document. (Some activities are excluded as per policy wording) INTERESTED PARTIES: Nil Advised

SITUATION: 102/239 Golden Four Drive Bilinga QLD 4225

BROADFORM LIABILITY:

************************************************************************ GENERAL PUBLIC & PRODUCTS LIABILITY ************************************************************************

INTEREST INSURED: All sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay Third Parties in respect of personal injury and/or damage to property as a result of an occurrence and happening in connection with the business of the Insured, or caused by any of the Products Sold, Manufactured, Supplied, or Distributed by the Insured.

Public Liability $ 10,000,000 Any One Occurrence Products Liability $ 10,000,000 Any One Period of Insurance

CONDITIONS/EXTENSIONS/ENDORSEMENTS: Property in the Physical and Legal Control $ Not Insured

Reference: ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 31.01.18 Page No. 2 Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd Phone: 07 5586 9955 ABN 79 011 046 414 Fax: 07 5586 9966 PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220

Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia COVERAGE SUMMARY Business Insurance

Advertising Liability $ Not Insured Molestation/Sexual Abuse $ Not Insured Medical Malpractice $ Not Insured

CLAIMS POR PERSONAL INJURY TO LABOUR HIRE AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS EXCESS ENDORSEMENT ------It is hereby agreed and declared that any claims for personal Injury to labour hire personnel, subcontractors or contractors who are performing services on behalf of the Insured will be subject to an excess of $5,000 each and every claim.

CLAIMS FOR PERSONAL INJURY TO VOLUNTEERS EXCESS ENDORSEMENT ------

It is hereby agreed and declared that any claims for personal Injury to volunteers will be subject to an excess of $1,250 each and every claim unless the Insured has an Voluntary Workers Personal Accident Policy with Ansvar Insurance Limited in which case the standard policy excess will apply. Conditions/Extensions/Endorsements as per policy

EXCLUSIONS: SECOND-HAND ELECTRICAL GOODS - PRODUCTS LIABILITY EXCLUSION ------We will not cover any claims directly or indirectly arising out of or in connection with your products if they are: Sold as second-hand electrical goods unless appropriately tested and tagged. In all other respects the policy remains unaltered.

SEXUAL ABUSE EXCLUSION ------This policy does not cover any claim arising from: Any actual or alleged sexual behaviour, (as defined below), committed, attempted, or allegedly committed or attempted, by an insured person. Sexual Behaviour means any attempted or committed verbal or non-verbal act, communication, contact or other conduct or similar conduct or sexual discrimination, intimidation, molestation, harassment, abuse or lewdness. Exclusions as per Policy

DEDUCTIBLE/EXCESS: $ 1,000 Any one claim $ 5,000 Claims for personal injury to labour hire and/or subcontractors each and every claim $ 1,250 Claims for personal injury to volunteers each and every claim Additional Excesses As Per Policy

Reference: ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 31.01.18 Page No. 3 Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd Phone: 07 5586 9955 ABN 79 011 046 414 Fax: 07 5586 9966 PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220

Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia COVERAGE SUMMARY Business Insurance

************************************************************************ PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY ************************************************************************

INTEREST INSURED: This policy covers claims for Civil Liability arising from the conduct of the Insureds Professional Business Practice. As Per Policy Wording.

LIMIT OF LIABILITY: $ 2,000,000 Any One Claim $ 2,000,000 In the Aggregate

DEDUCTIBLE/EXCESS: $ 1,000 Each and every claim

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 200

RETROACTIVE DATE: 05/01/2015 - Excluding known Claims and Circumstances

GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE: Anywhere in the world excluding the USA and Canada

Please Note: Professional Indemnity is a Non Cancellable Policy and No refund is applicable if cancelled prior to the due date.

CONDITIONS/EXTENSIONS/ENDORSEMENTS: Contractual Liability Not Required Conditions/Extensions/Endorsements as per policy

EXCLUSIONS: Exclusions as per Policy

************************************************************************ MANAGEMENT LIABILITY ************************************************************************

INTEREST INSURED: This policy covers claims for Civil Liability arising from the conduct of the Insureds Professional Business Practice. As Per Policy Wording.

LIMIT OF LIABILITY: $ 2,000,000 Entity Liablity $ 2,000,000 Directors & Officers Not Taken Entity Reimbursement Not Taken Employment Practices Not Taken Trustees Liability

Reference: ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 31.01.18 Page No. 4 Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd Phone: 07 5586 9955 ABN 79 011 046 414 Fax: 07 5586 9966 PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220

Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia COVERAGE SUMMARY Business Insurance

Not Taken Statutory Liability Not Taken Internet Liability Not Taken Entity Crisis Cover $ 2,000,000 Aggregate Policy Limit

Sublimits Not Taken Employee & Third Party Fidelity Not Taken Tax Audit

DEDUCTIBLE/EXCESS: $ 1,000 Each and every claim

CONDITIONS/EXTENIONS/ENDORSEMENTS: Conditions/Extensions/Endorsements as per policy

EXCLUSIONS: Exclusions as per Policy

WORDING: Ansvar Insurance Limited Community Services Organisations Policy Document COMSERVPOLV2.0 April 2016

------

CONDITIONS/EXTENSIONS/ENDORSEMENTS: Conditions/Extensions/Endorsements as per policy

EXCLUSIONS: Cyber / Electronic Data Exclusion Exclusions as per Policy

INSURER POLICY NUMBER PROPORTION

Ansvar Insurance Ltd 044000587365 100.0000% A.B.N. 21 007 216 506 Level 15, 127 Creek Street Brisbane AFS Licence No: 237826

Premium Details :

Premium 2,175.52 Stamp Duty 215.37

Reference: ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 31.01.18 Page No. 5 Austbrokers Coast to Coast Pty Ltd Phone: 07 5586 9955 ABN 79 011 046 414 Fax: 07 5586 9966 PO Box 3858 Burleigh Town QLD 4220

Alliance of Girls Schools Australasia COVERAGE SUMMARY Business Insurance

Broker Fee 155.96 GST 233.15 TOTAL 2,780.00

Reference: ACC MIA A8595 0408100/007 31.01.18 Page No. 6 THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS' SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED ABN 11 079 627 713

PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2018 2018 2018 2017 Jan-18 Jan-17 Year To Date Budget Actual

Income Member Subscriptions 202,963 191,461 202,963 203360 196324 Biennial Conference 0 0 0 149000 0 The Aspiring Leadership Conference 0 0 0 0 22793 Function Income - Vic events 0 0 0 0 12558 Function Income - NSW events 0 0 0 0 1095 Function Income - South Australia 0 0 0 0 410 Student Leadership Conference 124,474 117,959 124,474 120000 120101 Function Income - General 0 0 0 0 36162 Function Income - Qld events 0 0 0 0 5214 Function Income - Tas events 0 0 0 0 0 Function Income - WA events 0 0 0 0 0 Function Income - NZ events 0 0 0 0 0 Magazine Sales 0 0 0 0 228 Other Sales 264 (242) 264 0 2148 Space School 0 0 0 0 76590 Sponsorship 0 0 0 0 0 WAGS Income 1,459 8,860 1,459 0 22958 Partnership Income 31,250 0 31,250 0 56250 Speaking Tour Income 0 0 0 0 8800 Prog - Online Introd to Girls school 500 0 500 0 0 Total Income $360,910 $318,038 $360,910 $472,360 $561,631

Expenses Accountancy Fees 660 600 660 0 8940 Advertising 0 0 0 0 0 Amortisation of Website 436 513 436 0 5321 Auditors Fee 0 0 0 0 4000 Bank charges 247 83 247 0 2117 Consultancy 0 0 0 0 28325 Depreciation 0 0 0 0 0 Donations 0 0 0 0 435 E Commerce Gateway 317 182 317 0 583 EO Professional Development 0 0 0 0 664 Executive Meetings Travel 55 0 55 0 12294 Accommodation 0 0 0 0 356 Teleconferencing 0 0 0 0 0 Catering 0 0 0 0 0 Meeting Cost 0 0 0 0 1045 Filing Fee 0 0 0 0 0 Conference/Function Expenses Function Exp - Biennial Conference 0 0 0 0 1750 Function Exp - Aspiring Leaders 0 0 0 0 10974 Function Exp - MAD 0 0 0 0 23441 Function Exp - Speaking Tour 0 0 0 0 21128 Function Exp - IWD Breakfast Vic 0 0 0 0 748 Function Exp - Qld Event 0 0 0 0 4256 Function Exp - NSW Event 0 0 0 0 1161 Function Exp - Tas Event 0 0 0 0 0 Function Exp - Vic Event 6,302 0 6,302 0 7598 Function Exp - WA 0 0 0 0 0 Function Exp - SA 0 0 0 0 0 Function Exp - NZ 0 0 0 0 0 Student Leadership Conference 76,353 43,175 76,353 85000 84762 General Expenses 0 0 0 0 74 Global Forum 0 0 0 0 0 Programme - Online Introduction to Girls school 0 0 0 0 1500 Insurance 0 0 0 0 2400 Interest Paid 0 0 0 0 0 Lease of Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 Legal Cost 0 0 0 0 0 Minor Equipment & Software 158 0 158 0 3980 Newsletter & Magazine 0 0 0 0 16000 Media Services 0 5000 0 0 5000 Research Expenses 0 0 0 0 7414 Postage & Courier 0 0 0 0 1621 Printing & Stationery 0 0 0 0 1481 Partnership 0 0 0 0 2829 Software 0 0 0 0 0 Speaking Tour 0 0 0 0 0 Strategic Planning 0 0 0 0 8693 Superannuation 1,724 1,261 1,724 0 17473 Telephone and Internet 130 0 130 0 1559 Travel & Accommodation 255 0 255 0 1490 Wages and Salaries 18,145 13,270 18,145 0 184298 WAGS Brochure 0 0 0 0 3908 Website - eNewsletters 0 0 0 0 0 Web Hosting 33 0 33 0 404 Web Maintenance 0 0 0 0 1600 Workers Compensation 0 0 0 0 1132 Total Expenses 104,815 64,084 104,815 85,000 482,754

Operating Profit (Loss) 256,095 253,954 256,095 387,360 78,877

Other Income Interest - WBC Cash Reserve 322 354 322 6000 4011 Interest - Cheque Account 13 0 13 0 79 Awards & Prizes 0 0 0 0 0 Total Other Income 335 354 335 6,000 4,090

Net Profit / (Loss) $256,430 $254,308 $256,430 $393,360 $82,967

Page 1 THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS' SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED ABN 11 079 627 713

BALANCE SHEET FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2018 January 2018 January 2017

Assets

Current Assets

WBC Society Account 155791 135535 WBC Community Solutions Cash Reserve 713026 609046 Accounts Receivable 121460 103232 Prepayments 37326 12531

Total Current Assets 1027603 860344

Fixed Assets Website development 25747 22719 Accumulated Depreciation -13088 -7844

Total Fixed Assets 12659 14875

Total Assets 1040262 875219

Liabilities

Current Liabilities Accrued expenses 4615 6100 Accounts payables -314.6 0 GST Collected 35535 26632 GST Paid -12597 -9480 PAYG Withholding Payable 7917 6288 Membership Fee Paid in Advance 0 0 Student Leadership Conference Paid in Advane 0 0 Biennial Conference Paid in Advance 74340 0

Total Liabilities 109495 29540

Net Assets 930767 845679

Equity Retained Earnings 674337 591371 Current Year Earnings 256430 254308 Total Equity 930767 845679

Page 2 THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS'S SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED Taxation Depreciation Report - Detailed Period 01/1/18 to 31/1/18 Private Acq (disp) Original Opening Additions Profit (Loss) Depn Description Use % Date Cost W.D.V (Disposal) on Sale Method Depreciation Closing W.D.V

Website Development Website Development 14/10/15 6000 2432 40% P 81 2351 Website Development 22/1/16 6000 2685 40% P 90 2596 Website Development 22/1/16 2000 895 40% P 30 865 Website Development 21/3/16 1454 705 40% P 24 682 Website Development 22/3/16 7264 3439 40% P 115 3324 Breadcrump Digital 13/12/17 2729 2638 40% P 88 2550 Website Development 22/1/18 300 40% P 10 290

25447 12794 300 436 12658

Page 3 THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS' SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED ABN 11 079 627 713

PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2018 2018 2018 2017 Jan-18 Jan-17 Year To Date Budget Actual

Income Member Subscriptions 202,963 191,461 202,963 203360 196324 Biennial Conference 0 0 0 149000 0 The Aspiring Leadership Conference 0 0 0 0 22793 Function Income - Vic events 0 0 0 0 12558 Function Income - NSW events 0 0 0 0 1095 Function Income - South Australia 0 0 0 0 410 Student Leadership Conference 124,474 117,959 124,474 120000 120101 Function Income - General 0 0 0 0 36162 Function Income - Qld events 0 0 0 0 5214 Function Income - Tas events 0 0 0 0 0 Function Income - WA events 0 0 0 0 0 Function Income - NZ events 0 0 0 0 0 Magazine Sales 0 0 0 0 228 Other Sales 264 (242) 264 0 2148 Space School 0 0 0 0 76590 Sponsorship 0 0 0 0 0 WAGS Income 1,459 8,860 1,459 0 22958 Partnership Income 31,250 0 31,250 0 56250 Speaking Tour Income 0 0 0 0 8800 Prog - Online Introd to Girls school 500 0 500 0 0 Total Income $360,910 $318,038 $360,910 $472,360 $561,631

Expenses Accountancy Fees 660 600 660 0 8940 Advertising 0 0 0 0 0 Amortisation of Website 436 513 436 0 5321 Auditors Fee 0 0 0 0 4000 Bank charges 247 83 247 0 2117 Consultancy 0 0 0 0 28325 Depreciation 0 0 0 0 0 Donations 0 0 0 0 435 E Commerce Gateway 317 182 317 0 583 EO Professional Development 0 0 0 0 664 Executive Meetings Travel 55 0 55 0 12294 Accommodation 0 0 0 0 356 Teleconferencing 0 0 0 0 0 Catering 0 0 0 0 0 Meeting Cost 0 0 0 0 1045 Filing Fee 0 0 0 0 0 Conference/Function Expenses Function Exp - Biennial Conference 0 0 0 0 1750 Function Exp - Aspiring Leaders 0 0 0 0 10974 Function Exp - MAD 0 0 0 0 23441 Function Exp - Speaking Tour 0 0 0 0 21128 Function Exp - IWD Breakfast Vic 0 0 0 0 748 Function Exp - Qld Event 0 0 0 0 4256 Function Exp - NSW Event 0 0 0 0 1161 Function Exp - Tas Event 0 0 0 0 0 Function Exp - Vic Event 6,302 0 6,302 0 7598 Function Exp - WA 0 0 0 0 0 Function Exp - SA 0 0 0 0 0 Function Exp - NZ 0 0 0 0 0 Student Leadership Conference 76,353 43,175 76,353 85000 84762 General Expenses 0 0 0 0 74 Global Forum 0 0 0 0 0 Programme - Online Introduction to Girls school 0 0 0 0 1500 Insurance 0 0 0 0 2400 Interest Paid 0 0 0 0 0 Lease of Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 Legal Cost 0 0 0 0 0 Minor Equipment & Software 158 0 158 0 3980 Newsletter & Magazine 0 0 0 0 16000 Media Services 0 5000 0 0 5000 Research Expenses 0 0 0 0 7414 Postage & Courier 0 0 0 0 1621 Printing & Stationery 0 0 0 0 1481 Partnership 0 0 0 0 2829 Software 0 0 0 0 0 Speaking Tour 0 0 0 0 0 Strategic Planning 0 0 0 0 8693 Superannuation 1,724 1,261 1,724 0 17473 Telephone and Internet 130 0 130 0 1559 Travel & Accommodation 255 0 255 0 1490 Wages and Salaries 18,145 13,270 18,145 0 184298 WAGS Brochure 0 0 0 0 3908 Website - eNewsletters 0 0 0 0 0 Web Hosting 33 0 33 0 404 Web Maintenance 0 0 0 0 1600 Workers Compensation 0 0 0 0 1132 Total Expenses 104,815 64,084 104,815 85,000 482,754

Operating Profit (Loss) 256,095 253,954 256,095 387,360 78,877

Other Income Interest - WBC Cash Reserve 322 354 322 6000 4011 Interest - Cheque Account 13 0 13 0 79 Awards & Prizes 0 0 0 0 0 Total Other Income 335 354 335 6,000 4,090

Net Profit / (Loss) $256,430 $254,308 $256,430 $393,360 $82,967

Page 1 THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS' SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED ABN 11 079 627 713

BALANCE SHEET FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2018 January 2018 January 2017

Assets

Current Assets

WBC Society Account 155791 135535 WBC Community Solutions Cash Reserve 713026 609046 Accounts Receivable 121460 103232 Prepayments 37326 12531

Total Current Assets 1027603 860344

Fixed Assets Website development 25747 22719 Accumulated Depreciation -13088 -7844

Total Fixed Assets 12659 14875

Total Assets 1040262 875219

Liabilities

Current Liabilities Accrued expenses 4615 6100 Accounts payables -314.6 0 GST Collected 35535 26632 GST Paid -12597 -9480 PAYG Withholding Payable 7917 6288 Membership Fee Paid in Advance 0 0 Student Leadership Conference Paid in Advane 0 0 Biennial Conference Paid in Advance 74340 0

Total Liabilities 109495 29540

Net Assets 930767 845679

Equity Retained Earnings 674337 591371 Current Year Earnings 256430 254308 Total Equity 930767 845679

Page 2 THE ALLIANCE OF GIRLS'S SCHOOLS (AUSTRALASIA) LIMITED Taxation Depreciation Report - Detailed Period 01/1/18 to 31/1/18 Private Acq (disp) Original Opening Additions Profit (Loss) Depn Description Use % Date Cost W.D.V (Disposal) on Sale Method Depreciation Closing W.D.V

Website Development Website Development 14/10/15 6000 2432 40% P 81 2351 Website Development 22/1/16 6000 2685 40% P 90 2596 Website Development 22/1/16 2000 895 40% P 30 865 Website Development 21/3/16 1454 705 40% P 24 682 Website Development 22/3/16 7264 3439 40% P 115 3324 Breadcrump Digital 13/12/17 2729 2638 40% P 88 2550 Website Development 22/1/18 300 40% P 10 290

25447 12794 300 436 12658

Page 3 Feedback for Actura for HASSE Junior Space School December 2017

Huntsville Space Camp

Item Positive Negative Potential Improvements Other Comments

Accommodation  Fun design with  Glass transparent doors on shower  Shower doors coated so that  Students avoiding showering space style cubicles they are not transparent due to modesty “Habitat” bunk  GM’s and students using same  Very short toilet doors need  Students uncomfortable in dorms bathrooms to be lowered so knees are using bathrooms and toilets,  Teachers hotel  Limited time allocated for hygiene not visible while sitting on leading to constipation and accommodation and personal toilet time late at toilet discomfort satisfactory night causing constipation,  Late afternoon rest break  Actura corrected shared  Surroundings were stomach cramps and unhygienic and shower time needs to be bathrooms by instructing GM’s inspiring practices timetabled so students can not to use same bathroom as  Long lines for showers and toilet recuperate/refresh and students after request from late at night extending students shower before evening meal accompanying teachers. already too long days, leading to and evening activities Although this was a solution to many students not showering. one problem it did lead to  Air conditioning was too cold. longer bathroom lines and less  Warm blankets not provided until available access to bathrooms students asked (students too for students as more students afraid to ask for blankets due to were sharing the same not knowing GM’s well and rude bathroom. Space School staff).  Space Camp staff overseeing  Accompanying teachers were students at night were rude, given no permission to access to abrupt and not helpful so student dorm rooms, told not to students were afraid to ask for come in assistance Actura’s Comment and Response

Huntsville facilities are designed to balance safety with privacy.

20180215 1

 The bathroom doors are not transparent, but we acknowledge that they are not 100% opaque. There is an additional shower curtain in the cubicle for privacy. This was communicated to parents during the Preparation Day. To establish accurate expectations about the showers for use in the Habitats, packing lists will include a large/beach towel for students to drape over the shower door if desired. Note that USSRC is a state-run facility, thousands of students partake every year.  Actura will recommend to USSRC to display signage allocating bathroom usage time between staff and students.  Toilet doors are at an appropriate height and are designed as such to achieve balance between safety and privacy.  The program itinerary will be amended to allow for a longer period of shower time at the end of the day.  December 2017 had an unusually cold winter, and while there were some rooms in which students were quite warm, some rooms did not have the best heating. We addressed this with USSRC during the expedition and students were given extra blankets in all rooms. Student blankets are already readily available on the stairwell of every level in the Habitat. We will also investigate if an agreed temperature can be set for arrival in each room.  Only staff who are staying in the Habitat are allowed access the Habitat. Teachers who are on the expedition have access to Actura staff and the Habitat Manager on the ground level of the dormitory 24/7 at any time.  We are not aware of any rude USSRC staff, however will formally address with the Camp Director at USSRC.

Food  Limited to no selection for  Regular rest breaks allocated students and staff with special with fruit, healthy energy dietary requirements food options and water  Food very high in fat, salt and sugar  Multiple unhealthy options continually presented  Very similar food presented at each sitting  Food running out before all students had eaten, students left to eat hot chips and ice cream on several occasions  Only 3 meals provided no morning, afternoon tea or supper (despite students being kept up until quite late at night).

20180215 2

 No access to hot drinks in a very cold environment.  No soup options  Lack of healthy options led to some students either not eating or eating very little at meals.  Many students also dehydrated due to lack of access to water and adequate rest breaks. Actura’s Comment and Response

 The expectations surrounding food will be made clearer to students prior to departure. Students will be encouraged to select healthier options that are available from the USSRC cafeteria.  Fruit, snacks and water stations are available in the cafeteria at all times, and they walk past the cafeteria regularly between activities. We will encourage students to carry their own drink bottles with them throughout the day. Additional short rest breaks for students and staff will be requested throughout each day.  USSRC was made aware of a few hot dishes running out on one occasion, and has officially acknowledged and apologised. This is never acceptable and not normal practice. Students were fed a meal that night. Note that the salad bar and hot sides were in fact available at all times.  Hot drink stations have been limited to adult access only, for safe practice and to limit student intake of caffeine.  Soup is available for staff and students as part of a rotating meal plan. It is not available every day.

STEM  Junior School  Very little focus on STEM  STEM activities need to be students may content introduced with relevant benefit from  STEM that was covered was background information and activities, poorly covered at a level far related to student previous however, would below the students’ school STEM knowledge still require experience (lower order  Utilise the sense of place to discussion, thinking and application) drive deep thinking activities accompanying  Content and background were through pedagogical stories, glossed over or in some cases approaches such as Problem explanation of ignored or misinformed. Based Learning rather than concepts,  Mathematics was ignored and replicating what the relation to STEM in the only instance it was

20180215 3

concepts and raised through the whole instructor models (low-order skills explored… program in rocket building application) Pythagoras triangles presented were incorrect  Very limited opportunity for any problem solving in particular real-world problem solving  The majority of Space School Crew Trainers had very limited STEM knowledge Actura’s Comment and Response

 The Space Camp program run at USSRC does not typically involve teachers, however CASE are discussing ways to integrate teachers into the program, and find alternate valuable activities, such as access to the Educator Resource Centre.  We aim to encourage accompanying teachers, Group Managers and Crew Trainers to promote a higher level of engagement for students in their learning activities, focused on practical astronaut training.  We look to further utilise Crew Trainers who have been highly praised and recommended by staff and students, in order to ensure that a higher level of knowledge is interwoven into daily activities. CASE are looking to develop CASE accreditation for preferred Crew Trainers.  CASE has identified three specific areas for further improvement in delivery, to integrate higher amounts of Problem Based Learning and to communicate the connections between the physical astronaut training and STEAM learning: o 1. Rocket construction o 2. Simulators: MAT, 1/6 Gravity Chair, MMU o 3. Mars Olympus Mons, Rock climbing

Activities  Mission  Potential opportunities for  Activities included have simulations STEM extension and potential to create an were excellent enrichment were wasted excellent learning  Astronaut almost each minute of our stay opportunity but the content training  Rocket building activity was and delivery needs to be including 1/6th poorly facilitated, excessively reviewed by STEM gravity, MMU long with limited opportunities educators. for engineering and creativity

20180215 4

etc were for students and the rockets  If Space School Crew Trainers valuable were never fired. were knowledgeable and  Activities including but not enthusiastic about STEM and limited to habitat design, heat Astrophysics it would shield, and astronomy were significantly enhance the very low order in thinking and experience application and poorly run.  Actura GM’s need to be more proactive and knowledgeable in enhancing the educational opportunities

Actura’s Comment and Response

 We will discuss the rocket assembly and launch activity with USSRC, so that students will be provided with more explicit scaffolding. That is, students will be provided with an introduction about rocketry and will be given a brief/guidelines to work towards in teams, when assembling the rocket. This will leave room for students to problem solve and experiment with their rocket designs and assembly methods.  As above, CASE are looking to develop CASE accreditation for preferred Crew Trainers.

Time allocation  Days too long with little to no  Days need to be shortened downtime for both staff and with less “padding” and time students wasting activities  Students needed time allocated  Rostered breaks for staff; to call or message home both Actura GM’s and particularly younger students teaching staff who were homesick

Actura’s Comment and Response

 The program itinerary will be reviewed to include additional down time and more time before bed to contact home. Note: the dormitory does not have Wi-Fi to ensure that students limit screen time and sleep well.

20180215 5

 Actura have identified that WA participants need to arrive in the US a day earlier than other states. Actura are also assessing alternative flight paths to reduce travel time.  Where possible WA participants will start in Houston, continuing to Huntsville in their second week.

Actura Staff  Listened to  Actura Staff acted on very  GM’s need to provide clear feedback from minimal feedback from leadership and professional teaching staff accompanying teachers role modelling for their  GM’s friendly  GM’s did not pass on info to group accompanying teachers re daily  GM’s should be chosen with timetable and activities educational and student  GM’s given no flexibility to cope management prior with individual groups needs experience (duty of care  GM’s asked for advice on appropriate for school age multiple occasions but did not students). act on it  Calibre, training, attitude,  GM’s more interested in being standard of education and students friend personal ethics of each GM needs to reflect the standard of education the students from high fee paying schools receive  GM’s need to display a positive attitude and respect for accompanying teachers and include them as part of the educational team for the group

Actura’s Comment and Response

 All Group Managers undergo a multiple stage interview process, followed by extensive program training; 10-12 hours of eLearning training and 19 hours of face-to-face training time, focused on program delivery and safety and emergency response.

20180215 6

 During the training process we ensure that Group Managers are inspired to act as leaders and role models for their groups, and are motivated to inspire the students and instil a sense of passion. Additionally, all Group Managers are encouraged to support students to further develop their social and interpersonal skillset.  Group Managers’ qualifications include Working with Children Check, AFP Clearance, Advanced First Aid with CPR and Anaphylaxis training; and come from a variety of academic backgrounds, including teaching, medical, science educators and professional educational tour guiding.  Post-tour, the performance of all Group Managers is assessed against a set of performance criteria, including but not limited to exercising Duty of Care, following all safety and Standard Operating Procedures, delivery of program content in accordance with program training, demonstration of leadership capabilities, resolution of escalations and consideration of staff and teacher feedback.  Group Managers are in 24/7 communication with Operations and can provide feedback with the collective supervisory group at any time.  If accompanying teachers have any further feedback whilst away, they are encouraged to express any concerns directly with Actura staff, as discussed during the pre-tour teacher brief.  Accompanying teachers received the printed schedule for their expedition group upon arrival to USSRC, in packs provided by USSRC.  In Houston, teachers have access to our scheduling software to access the schedule for the week. Logins were provided pre-tour.  Group Managers are required to further assist teachers by communicating necessary details and updates with accompanying teachers. This is enforced and is a part of the post-tour performance review.  It will be suggested to accompanying teachers that they download WhatsApp on their phones, as a means of communicating amongst each other during expeditions.  CASE and Actura are working closely with USSRC to review the response times to any escalations that occur.  It is the company’s practice to re-engage with Group Managers who have participated on previous expeditions and have had exceptional performance assessments. By doing so, the organisation aims to consistently improve the quality of the delivery.

Space Camp  Friendly but rigidly inflexible  Space Camp Crew trainers Staff  Huge variation between crew that facilitate HASSE camps trainer competencies, many should be highly competent, were incompetent instructors professional and flexible to and facilitators meet the personal and  Many crew trainers had little to educational needs of no STEM knowledge and were individuals and their group very poor presenters and  HASSE could utilise the facilitators processional expertise of accompanying STEM teachers to enrich the program

20180215 7

Actura’s Comment and Response

 USSRC had new policies in place for student protection based on the allocation of a single Crew Trainer per group. Our groups have two additional chaperones and CASE are now working with USSRC to align SOP’s to better utilise Group Managers and accompanying teachers.  As per previous comments, CASE are looking to integrate Group Managers and teachers into the delivery to ensure optimal STEM learning.

Nursing/Health  Nursing staff  Students who were exhausted  Exhausted students should available and were not allowed to return to be able to rest in their own accessible their own bunk to rest bunk and not with sick  Sick bay facilities  No clear division of children in the sick bay, if were available responsibilities for teachers and supervised by a staff member to tired, GM’s on who manages  Actura need to tighten their overwhelmed students’ medication medication policy and and to isolate  Whole group made to go to sick procedures and have one sick children bay to wait while students in staff member per group their group took medications responsible. This should be  Students were embarrassed re: the GM as the accompanying personal medications and felt teacher is not an employee they were inconveniencing of Actura and Actura have their group by having to track collected health information everyone past the sick bay from parents  Not all students had health and  Heath information reports medication details recorded should include daily dosages leading to inconsistencies in  All students should have full information available medical details available in a  Numerous students fell ill due portfolio for each group in a to lack of rest & sleep, poor central location for ease of nutrition, dehydration and checking hygiene lack of personal space  Accompanying teachers for toilet and long arduous days should be provided with print outs prior to commencement of the tour

20180215 8

and not be required to print this out from a portal Actura’s Comment and Response

 USSRC have strict SOP’s in place to ensure student safety at all times. This includes no student is to be alone in the dormitories at any time. Any student who is tired or unwell must rest in the supervised sick bay.  At USSRC all prescription and non-prescription medication carried by students (other than Asthma puffers and Epipens) must be taken to the nurse located in the sick bay. Only USSRC sick bay staff are authorised to administer these medications. All authorised medication carried by the Group Manager is to be supplied to the student after discussion and agreement within the supervisory group (which includes the Group Manager and teacher). This is clearly communicated during the teacher briefing and Group Manager training.  All members of the supervisory group receive student medical information (including daily doses of prescription medication) as authorised by the parents. Please note, our parent agreements authorise Actura to share medical information with the school authorities and accompanying teachers for best care of the students.  It is not acceptable for the whole group to be present or waiting whilst a select few students receive their medication.  As above mentioned, CASE is working continuously with USSRC to align SOP’s including student sick bay visits to better utilise Group Managers and accompanying teachers. In addition to the verbal and printed reminder to the parents already in place regarding the labelling of medication, Actura will fine tune processes to ensure this is actioned before students hand over their medication to USSRC.

Other  Teaching staff  Huge amounts of single use Students in the Junior Space mini-camp was plastic and polystyrene thrown program need to finish activities by beneficial in out every mealtime 8pm allowing adequate time to call creating a  No environmental or parents, shower and prepare for network of sustainability messages bed. accompanying included teachers.  Essential elements of the program could be covered in two days for the students.  Student exhaustion was ignored and no time was given to acclimatise or deal with jet lag. Many students and staff were falling asleep in sessions and camp staff still refused to

20180215 9

change the programme and allow students to go back to their rooms – the suggested bed-time for students that the staff were recommending was 8 – 8:30pm. Students were often not getting back to dormitories for at least an hour or two in some cases after this time. Teaching staff told to take students to sick bay if they needed to sleep. Some students did not want to ‘miss out’ leading to increased stress, anxiety and inability to sleep. Actura’s Comment and Response

 The use of re-usable plastic plates and cutlery is normal practice at USSRC, as it is safer than crockery, however these are washed and re-used after every meal. This is consistent with USSRC’s prominent signage on the wall of the cafeteria, titled ‘Recycling Station’. There is minimal occasional use of single- use polystyrene bowls.  Actura have identified that WA participants need to arrive a day before students from other states, to recover from their extended travel.

Houston – DoubleTree by Hilton (Greenway Plaza) Item Positive Negative Potential Improvements Other Comments

Accommodation Hotel facilities and  Boys and girls were roomed and  Timeslot provided bedrooms were clean interspersed on the same floor despite and comfortable. assurances that this would not be the case.

20180215 10

 Members of the public interspersed between girls’ rooms.  The above points caused concern due to the students having to utilise short windows of opportunity just before bed to call home, therefore, they were in pyjamas in the corridors attempting to obtain WIFI access which was limited to not available in rooms.  Teaching staff had to address the general public for drunken and disorderly behaviour outside the girls’ rooms and call hotel security on one occasion, meaning the students felt unsafe in their bedrooms.  Groups were roomed across multiple floors which made monitoring challenging.

Actura’s Comment and Response

 Student hotel rooms are allocated per group taking into consideration adult supervisory requirements.  An accompanying teacher and/or Group Manager is allocated a room on the same level(s) as students from their respective group.  Student groups are allocated rooms on the same floor, unless the number of students exceeds available rooms on each floor. As per above, an accompanying teacher or Group Manager will be located on the same level. Actura staff members are allocated rooms throughout the hotel, for additional supervision and support.  Room checks are conducted each night to ensure students’ wellbeing and attendance in their allocated room throughout each night. Hotel security monitors and advises Actura staff of any unauthorised or unusual movements. All rooms are equipped with internal phone lines so that students can request assistance at any time.  From a practical point of view, Actura does not have exclusive use of the hotel. As a result rooms may be allocated to the general public on the same floor as the students.

20180215 11

Food  After  Lack of nutritious options in general.  A wider range of healthy repeatedly Almost non-existent provisions for food options, including raising vegetarians. protein for concerns, the  Food provided was high in fat, sugar vegetarians/vegans. Actura staff and salt, leading to some girls not  Healthy breakfast options attempted to eating. need to be provided such as liaise with  Several groups missed out on food one oatmeal and cut fruit. hotel staff, evening due to the late scheduled  Ensure the hotel are aware providing finish of the day’s activities. Take away of any late finishes scheduled mediocre food had to be sourced for them, on the programme. solutions. however, this did not arrive until after 9pm. Actura’s Comment and Response

 A range of nutritious food options were available each day for students for any meals served at the hotel. Additionally, groups ate at external food providers and were presented with a wide range of buffet-style options, including many healthy options.  The vegetarian menu provided students with a healthy range, including beans, tofu, vegetables and pasta.  Breakfast options included porridge, eggs and bacon, fruit, toast and a range of cereals. Fruit was also abundantly available for students to take with them each day.  Actura provided cereal bars and other snack food items for supplementary snacks in Houston.  Actura will continue to encourage students to exercise greater will power when visiting food courts, cafeterias and buffets to make healthy choices.  Actura acknowledges that on occasion there were delays in the refilling of some food items. In one particular case the group’s dinner was delayed by 30 minutes. For this particular instance, the Operation team worked with the hotel kitchen to not only provide the scheduled dinner, but also arranged alternative options from external food suppliers to avoid any further delay. This was not due to a late arrival and no group missed out on food. Coordination with the kitchen and group meal times will be improved with closer monitoring by Actura personnel and staggered meal times.

Activities  Examples of poor organisation,  GM’s need time to prepare preparation and wasted education for daily activities and opportunities listed below the table. lessons they are delivering  On one occasion an Actura employee and not “wing it” as they (Group Assistant) had to present an consistently referred to. introduction to the Cell Lab

20180215 12

experience. She felt completely out of  Staff should be qualified in her depth having no biology the specialist area of being experience. She had no choice but to presented. rote learn the content of slides provided by Actura and hope none of the students would ask questions. Actura’s Comment and Response

 The brief for Cell Lab is being revised to meet CASE program standards. Note that the briefings delivered to students prior to the various STEM activities are designed to provide a light, contextual overview and elicit interest and curiousity, so that students can generate and prepare any questions they have for staff at the facility (e.g. at Cell Lab). The preparation for mentioned briefs is covered in the training.  Expeditions visit exceptional program providers in Houston. Staff educators at each program venue are tasked with delivering their content for maximum student engagement and learning.

Actura Staff  Male GM staff were conducting  Ensure that only female staff evening room checks for female are involved in evening room students (who were in underwear checks. and/or pyjamas).Despite multiple requests at a formal meeting, via messaging and in person, this practise continued.

Actura’s Comment and Response

 During their training, Group Managers are requested to conduct room checks, and if visiting a room of the opposite gender to not pass the doorway into the room. As soon as the presence of a male Group Manager was reported as an issue, this was attended to by Actura staff and it did not happen again. Moving forward, more female Group Managers will be recruited for all future Alliance expeditions.

Nursing/health  After the first  Despite being assured that a nurse provisions night, a 24 would be available overnight, this hour nursing failed to be the case upon arrival. This service was resulted in a student being taken to the hospital when they could have

20180215 13

made available been monitored by the nurse in the in the hotel. hotel. Actura’s Comment and Response

 The availability of a nurse on-site was extended from 16 hours to 24 hours/day during the first week of the expedition, before Junior students arrived. Hospital escalations are decided by supervisory group in consultation with Actura management under the recommended number of nurses. Note that the medical centre and hospital facilities are only 10 minutes from the hotel.  In future, a nurse will be made available 24/7 for student care.

Other  Upon listening  Students were promised next day  Research laundry providers to our laundry facilities would be available in carefully in future and have complaint Houston (at a cost to them). Many provisions on standby if about this students and staff participated as they required. Consider asking issue and our had run out of clean clothes by this parents/students to pack suggestion point in the trip. The clean washing enough socks and underwear that new socks failed to arrive the next day and in for the whole trip via the and some cases the next again day. Some packing list instead of underwear students had no choice but to go assuring them that laundry was required sockless in cold temperatures and could be done. for affected wear dirty or no underwear. students, this was purchased by Actura. Actura’s Comment and Response

 Actura will be working with alternative laundry service providers moving forward.  Replacement items of clothing were offered in isolated cases where laundry could not be provided according to the original plan.  The above issue has not occurred before and in this instance resulted from a substantial number of items that needed to be dry cleaned by students. As the service on offer was a wash-and-dry service, delays resulted. To avoid this moving forward, Actura will remind students on laundry day that items requiring dry cleaning cannot be included. A remark will be added to the packing list.

20180215 14

Transportation  The logistical  Some students had been placed next  Ensure provisions are in arrangements to male members of the public on the place for all eating were well flight despite the travel agent requirements, even if this organised, overseeing this. Adjustments to the means taking extra food on both at the seating plan were made. to the planes, or asking airports and  Despite Actura being promised by the parents to pack this. on site (partly travel agent that nut free food would thanks to the be made available on the flight for Actura US those with nut related anaphylaxis, Operations only gluten free meals were offered to team). affected students. These were  Coaches were supposedly free of nuts as a purposeful luxurious and ingredient, but the cabin crew could clean. not guarantee that there were free of traces of nuts. As no other food provisions had been brought on board for these children (including the 14/15 hour flight) they had to choose to eat only some fruit or take the risk of eating the meals. Actura’s Comment and Response

 Actura staff meticulously plan the seating arrangement of every flight well in advance, to ensure that students are never seated alone next to a member of the public. If for some reason this seating plan is not adhered to on the day, Actura staff will do their upmost to work with the airline to move students in an appropriate seating arrangement. Please note that airlines can change the aircraft, and sometimes the pre-allocated seating is compromised.  Parents are advised to bring a pre-packed sealed meal for all air travel, as nut-free meals are not guaranteed by any airline. Actura work closely with the travel agent to request special meals by the applicable airline meal codes. As back up in future Actura will provide a limited number of pre-packed food items for anaphylactic students on behalf of parents who fail to meet this requirement. Additionally all Group Managers travel with emergency cash to provide all students with a means to purchase suitable meals.

Additional Comments re Activities and Organisation  Numerous examples of poor organisation

20180215 15

o Students waited for 45 minutes outside Johnson Space centre as tickets were left behind at Hotel and Actura staff did not know what to do so waited aimlessly for direction. Actura confirmed that on one occasion unfortunately tickets were left at the hotel. Replacement tickets were printed at the venue and Group Managers entertained students whilst waiting. o Numerous Actura staff at Houston venue who were very limited in their knowledge of activities and unhelpful to accompanying teachers. Actura staff does their utmost to assist accompanying teachers with any requests made throughout the program. o Teachers and students provided “just in time” information, e.g. five mins or less before activities commenced Teachers have access to the scheduling software. Logins were provided prior to the expedition. Students are briefed about the upcoming days’ activities during the Community Time on the night prior or during the morning session. Actura will do its best to further improve communication with teachers. o Daily morning teacher briefings promised but only delivered on two mornings with no prior warning. Actura will ensure that teacher briefings and additional safety briefings are included in the Master Schedule, available at the start of the program. Teachers will continue to have access to the scheduling software. o Teachers not presented with any opportunity to review the daily schedule in advance or contribute to the educational aspect of the programme. Teachers have access to the scheduling software. Logins were provided prior to the expedition. At the start of the expedition teachers were provided with a booklet identifying key areas in which they could contribute throughout the program. Teachers are invited to two eLearning modules prior to the expedition, focused on program content and linkage to ACARA key learning areas to prepare them for the expedition.

 Many presenters engaged by Actura for external activities had limited or no knowledge of the tour or activity they were conducting, eg. tour guides reading information from an iPhone and having never themselves visited the venue before with limited to no knowledge of the content they were presenting. (This happened at multiple venues) Actura acknowledge that the Rice University tour content and delivery needs to be improved.  Tour guides continually presenting inaccurate, biased and misleading STEM information, eg. “If we put one million wind turbines on the planet then the wind would cease to blow.” “Oh, it doesn’t matter if the sides on the triangle are wrong, I wasn’t good at maths” “Fracking conducted by petroleum companies stops earthquakes” Actura and CASE will address the standard of guides at every venue.  Rules for students’ behaviour set out but not adhered too. Actura has a comprehensive Code of Conduct with rules enforced as per defined escalation flow. Adherence to Code of Conduct falls under the responsibility of all members of the supervisory group (including the Group Manager and accompanying teacher).  GM’s outlining procedures to teachers in regards to students’ supervision and safety and not adhering to these themselves.

20180215 16

o e.g. walking through the gate at NBA event and leaving students at the gate as GM wanted to get down to court side ASAP and left students unsupervised amongst crowds of public entering and was not even aware students had not followed them for approx. five minutes. o GM’s leaving their group in the stands to go to the toilet and food venues despite rules being laid out by them to other staff and students that adult supervisor and their allocated students should remain together at all times. Actura’s SOP for the movement of students changes at big events due to heightened safety requirements. At big events all staff of the supervisory group must adhere to the event grouping mechanism, during which specific students are assigned to each adult. This allows the sub groups to move freely and safely in case of any emergency through the venue. Actura management are on-site during these events as additional support to all groups. An operational staff member is assigned to each venue section to monitor any movements within their sections and the entry/exits of the venue.

General Comments

 Actura has conducted the HASSE Space School as a commercially profitable exercise but we do not feel that the students’ emotional, physical and educational wellbeing has been adequately considered and catered for in this setting.  The glossy marketing and pre-tour materials and promises of STEM enrichment were not reflected in the poor facilitation and organisation of the event we experienced  Accompanying teaching staff intervened on numerous occasions as the students’ health, safety and wellbeing was at risk and in some cases, was bordering on neglect.  Huntsville Space Camp was an independent provider and would not change their operating practices despite requests from both Actura staff at the request of accompanying teachers. Because of this, we would not recommend other schools to participate in the programme. The camp was run almost as a fun, babysitting, theme-based event, keeping students busy for exceptionally long hours rather than effectively utilising the special setting, facilities and resources. The Space School truly believed they had an exceptional educational programme, (which was not the case) conducted in a rigid, inflexible format, in order to give their majority of poorly trained staff little room for thinking about the programme they were facilitated. A few Crew Trainers were excellent but the vast majority operated as babysitters. Despite numerous requests from accompanying teaching staff to shorten the contact hours and allow for students rest this did not change. For this reason, we believe that even with our feedback given to Actura, this part of the tour would continue unchanged.

Conclusion:  We could not in good conscience recommend the Junior HASSE Space School programme in its current form to future students and other schools as there were multiple circumstances where the health and wellbeing of students were put at considerable risk.

20180215 17

Many of the findings of the WA teachers are inconsistent with the national feedback collected from other Alliance groups in December and from groups over the past four Alliance expeditions. The feedback on a national basis indicates that the students, teachers and parents overwhelmingly endorse the program. This is evidenced in the feedback surveys by high levels of satisfaction, meeting and exceeding their expectations of the program and high levels of recommendation to others. Our partner schools and previous accompanying teachers of the Alliance recognise Actura’s high level of operational ability, with safety and wellbeing of students Actura’s highest priority, and the program content complementing the STEM teaching and learning carried out in schools.

At the end of every expedition Actura conducts their own comprehensive internal post tour review, prioritising areas of improvement. As displayed throughout the partnership with the Alliance, Actura continues to work with partner schools and previous accompanying teachers to enhance the program content and overall experience in upcoming expeditions.

20180215 18

Feedback for Actura for HASSE Senior Space School December 2017

Feedback Provided by:

Lesley Kaye- Presbyterian Ladies’ College Katrina Prendergast – Iona Presentation College

Houston – DoubleTree by Hilton (Greenway Plaza) Item Positive Negative Potential Improvements Other Comments

Accommodation Hotel facilities and Staff sharing of rooms was not ideal for Staff should be allocated their own bedrooms were clean downtime. room as standard. and comfortable. Sharing with a person I had never met was awkward (Katrina). Actura’s Comment and Response

 Actura’s agreement with the Alliance is that the standard arrangement for teachers is twinshare accommodation. Actura will work with the Alliance to ensure that teachers are aware of this upon application, and on appointment to the program teachers can elect to have a single room at their own additional expense.  Teachers were introduced to each other during the pre-tour teacher briefing and met a second time at the Preparation Day.

Food Salad was available at Some food listed on menu on matrix Choice of restaurants could be more Plasticware was replaced all venues. was not at the meal. Especially aligned to the Sweet Tomatoes eventually with cutlery desserts. restaurant visited, which had a and crockery after many Choices of some variety of healthy options available. complaints. restaurants for There was not enough healthy options excursions were good available, particularly for breakfast, Improve the food options available with vegertarian and where the foods were either fried or for vegetarian and other dietary non gluten options packet cereal with high-sugar content. requirements. available. Eating of plastic plates with plastic More healthy options made cutlery and polystyrene cups was not available, particularly for breakfast.

20180215 1

acceptable both environmentally, nor For example, sugar free muesli for comfort of staff and students. and/or porridge and sugar free yoghurt. On occasion – meals had run out and staff at hotel claimed there was no more.

Actura’s Comment and Response

 Desserts should be served as per details shown in the schedule. Re-usable crockery and cutlery will be used for hotel meals. Actura will monitor this for future expeditions.  A range of nutritious food options were available each day for students for any meals served at the hotel. Additionally, groups ate at external food providers and were presented with a wide range of buffet-style options, including many healthy options. o Breakfast options included porridge, eggs and bacon, fruit, toast and a range of cereals. Fruit was also abundantly available for students to take with them each day. o Actura provided cereal bars and other snack food items for supplementary snacks in Houston. o Actura will continue to encourage students to exercise greater will power when visiting food courts, cafeterias and buffets to make healthy choices.  Actura acknowledges that on occasion there were delays in the refilling of some food items. Coordination with the kitchen and group meal times will be improved with closer monitoring by Actura personnel and staggered meal times.

Activities NASA activities were 3D printing activity was a long day in a Use the teacher knowelge prior to excellent very uninspiring and claustrophobic the trip to ascertain student ability room. Students became disengaged. and prior knowledge to base Staff at NASA had sessions on. Many students had immense knowledge RICE university was a waste of time. experience in 3D sketch and design. and were so pleased Students are staff were uninterested. to help. Tour was conducted by a non-student, Would have loved to have seen who had limited knowledge of the other sights in Houston – Galveston Guest speakers were campus and used a mobile phone to Oil rig etc. generally very good. assist with the tour. Provide additional cultural experiences, particularly in the

20180215 2

Trip to rocket second week after NASA when the company was very programme was not as engaging. engaging. Or cut the tour time down to just the NASA component. Actura’s Comment and Response

 In consultation with the previous accompanying teachers the 3D printing activity will be reviewed.  Actura acknowledge that the Rice University tour content and delivery needs to be improved.  CASE are exploring additional cultural experience options in Houston.

Actura Staff Although staff were lovely, it seems Increase teaching staff in tours in that there were too many GA and GM replace of GA. Have staff then help staff as often they were seen on their explain concepts and work with phones and outside of classes not students. taking part in the acrtivity. Actura’s Comment and Response

 During the teacher preparation/training period, Actura will ensure that school staff are made aware of the requirements for Group Managers to check important updates on their work phones. Group Assistants are tasked to upload photos to Facebook for parents up to three times per day. Group Assistants also assist the Group Manager with all logistics and venue arrangements, to allow Group Managers to remain focused on the students. Escalations and movement updates are input and regularly monitored and dealt with via the communication apps on their phones.  The role of Group Managers and Group Assistants is clearly defined for school staff in pre-tour eLearning and teacher briefings. Accompanying teachers are encouraged to contribute their support and/or expertise when appropriate.

Nursing/health Nurse was availbale Students and staff suffered from Provide staff and students with time provisions each time I visited the fatigue due to the long hours with off – maybe two half days. Giving centre. limited breaks / time off. them time to recharge, thus improving wellbeing.

In need of a psychologist for students with mental health issues.

20180215 3

Someone to chat to when they just need some one-on-one time.

Actura’s Comment and Response

 In Actura’s internal improvement notes it was identified that time off for teachers and Group Managers needs to be entered in the Master Schedule and therefore known by all from the outset of the program.  In addition to the 24/7 certified nursing service provided at the hotel, Actura is connected with a network of independent mental health specialists that can be contacted upon request. In the case of students travelling with a diagnosed mental health disorder, parents are asked to provide individual mental health management plan, including the child’s own psychologist’s contact details and backup contact details in Australia. Group Managers and teachers are supplied with this information in their travel folder.  Actura expedition team include some staff with mental health first aid training.  Actura seeks to achieve a good balance within the program between down-time (non-learning time) for students and potential behavioural issues resulting from excessive free time.

Laundry Students were promised next day Research laundry providers carefully laundry facilities would be available on in future and have provisions on two occasions over the two weeks. standby if required. The first wash day was two days in so Consider asking parents/students to too early and the date for the second pack enough socks and underwear wash day was moved to the second last for the whole trip via the packing list day – too late. instead of assuring them that laundry could be done. Actura’s Comment and Response

 Actura will be working with alternative laundry service providers moving forward.  Replacement items of clothing were offered in isolated cases where laundry could not be provided according to the original plan.  The above issue has not occurred before and in this instance resulted from a substantial number of items that needed to be dry cleaned by students. As the service on offer was a wash-and-dry service, delays resulted. To avoid this moving forward, Actura will remind students on laundry day that items requiring dry cleaning cannot be included. A remark will be added to the packing list.

20180215 4

Transportation Very good both ways GMs had to occasionally move in flights. students mid flight to be away from general public males. Coaches were luxurious and clean. Actura’s Comment and Response

 Actura staff meticulously plan the seating arrangement of every flight well in advance, to ensure that students are never seated alone next to a member of the public. If for some reason this seating plan is not adhered to on the day, Actura staff will do their upmost to work with the airline to move students in an appropriate seating arrangement. Please note that airlines can change the aircraft, and sometimes the pre- allocated seating is compromised.

20180215 5

Expedition Structure JSS Alliance 4 Expeditions, 4 States, 117 Students

Expedition J68 Expedition J69 Expedition J70 Expedition J71 AGSA 1 AGSA 2 AGSA 3 AGSA 4 AGSA 5 AGSA 6 AGSA 7 AGSA 8 ACT(8) QLD(15) VIC (16) VIC (16) VIC 9,WA 7 WA (16) WA(15) WA(15)

GM Keira Michelle Elisha Jesse Bree David Jessica Angharad Watkins Johnston Hofstein Allen Hemsley Bravos Scholle Thomas TE: Murray Gillian Sally Gemma Megan Caporn Rebecca Lana Cora Mckay Hibbert Glennon Johnson (MLC, WA) Duyckers Noble Algie (CGGS (Loreto, (SUM, (MGSC, VIC) Claire Haughey (PC, WA) (PLC, WA) (St Hilda, WA) ACT) QLD) QLD) (Loretto, VIC) GA: Michael Ye Heather Yu Jenna Nygaard (GM/GA) Stacey Woods Actura Staff and Expedition Management

GMs: 6 female, 2 male Teachers: 8 female, 1 male GAs: 3 female, 1 male Expedition Structure HSS Alliance 3 Expeditions, 5 States, 107 Students

Expedition G49 Expedition G50 Expedition G53 AGSA 9 AGSA 10 AGSA 11 AGSA 12 AGSA 13 AGSA 14 ACT 12,QLD 8 VIC (20) NSW (20) NSW (20) WA (15) WA (12)

GM: Samuel Joanne Caitlin Alexander Chloe Shelley Hardwick Tate Sneddon Edwards Bravos Turnbull TE: Juliette Major Belinda Schreurs Byron Usmar Lynda Ellem Lesley Kaye Katrina (St Claire’s) (St Margaret’s) (BRIGI) (LOK) (PLC) Prendergast Andrea Hickey Jonathon Mascorella (Iona) (Mary Mac) (LOK) GA: Tiana Thorburn (GM/GA) Sarah Chang Andy Chang Actura Staff and Expedition Management

GMs: 4 female, 2 male Teachers: 6 female, 2 male GAs: 2 female, 1 male JUNIOR SPACE SCHOOL COMBINED EXPEDITION J68 J69 J70 J71 December 2017

C o m p i l e d by Natalie Roberts, Program Specialist, A c t u r a A u s t r a l i a 1 5 February 2018

Version 1.0 20180215 Methodology

• Each teacher and student participating in Space School Alliance Combined Expedition was asked to complete a written questionnaire on the final full day of their expedition. • Questionnaires included a combination of limited (closed) response questions and open response questions. • 7 (67%) teacher and 111 (95%) student responses were received and analysed. • Parents of participating students were invited by email to complete an online survey during January. • 61 (52%) parent responses were received and analysed. • Initial data analysis revealed teacher data was skewed by the responses of teachers from WA. • Further analysis of the data has been completed to extract responses from all Western Australian participants (students and teachers). • WA results are displayed in this report independently to facilitate comparison with all other respondents. Executive Summary

• Results for students are relatively consistent between WA and the rest of Australia. The major variation is found in their experience at USSRC, which WA students rated lower than other students in terms of both the Space and Science units as well as meal enjoyment. Conversely, WA students rated Space and Science units and meals at Houston higher than other students. • Results for teachers vary markedly between WA and the rest of Australia. WA teachers generally rated all activities and experiences lower than all other teachers. • Parents’ results were quite consistent across Australia with slight differences in the reasons parent enroll their daughters in Space School between WA and the rest of Australia, and in their experience with the customer portal and logistics arrangements was slightly better. Junior Space School Expedition Itinerary Week 1 – USSRC, Huntsville Alabama Week 2 – Houston Texas

Mission Simulation Johnson Space Center • Mission Training • Tram Tour • Alpha and Beta Missions • Space Center Houston exhibits • NASA Presentations/speakers STEM Activities STEM Activities • Rocket design, build, launch • Shark Dissection • Heat shield design, build • Weiss Energy Hall • Lunar base design, build • CSI Forensics • Cell Lab Astronaut Training Equipment HASSE Personal Development US Space History Leadership Development • Guest Speaker • Astronaut Dinner Teamwork Activities Cultural Experiences Expedition Overview

St Hildas Anglican Presbyterian Ladies College Iona Presentation College Perth College Methodist Ladies College Strathcona Baptist Firbank Girls Grammar St Aloysius College 117 students Shelford Girls Grammar Mentone Girls Secondary 9 teachers Mentone Girls Grammar Fintona Girls School 21 schools Catholic Ladies College St Margaret's Anglican Girl's School 9 repeating schools 4 expeditions Mary Mackillop College Canberra Girls Grammar St Clare's 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% Space and Science Units

How much did you like the following How much did you like the following SPACE & SCIENCE ACTIVITIES SPACE & SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

5 100% 9 11 100% 14 13 15 27 24 24 26 35 27 80% 31 30 80% 47 21 19 25 26 22 60% 60% 12 15 12 33 40% 21 7 7 40% 17 19 22 18 14 5 13 11 14 20% 5 7 3 6 20% 4 4 3 5 5 1 2 3 2 3 2 13 1 0% 0%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Students N=47 All other Students N=64

With jetlag being the major difference between WA and other students, it appears to have played a minor role in WA students’ experience at USSRC. WA students rated USSRC lower, but Cell Lab and CSI higher, indicating once they arrived in Houston they may have had a chance to recover. Space and Science Units

Favourite Activity Favourite Activity 2% 22% 25% 32% 4%

5% 54% 11% 15% 16% 14%

USSRC Space Camp Space Center Houston USSRC Space Camp Space Center Houston Cell Lab CSI: Body of Evidence Cell Lab CSI: Body of Evidence Shark Dissection Space Race movie Shark Dissection Space Race movie Weiss Energy Hall Weiss Energy Hall

WA Students N=44 All other Students N=53 Cultural Experience Unit

How much did you like the following CULTURAL How much did you like the following CULTURAL ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES

100% 100% 13 80% 23 80% 36 48 60% 41 60% 30 56

40% 19 40% 15 20% 9 20% 14 4 4 6 1 1 3 2 0% 0% 4 4 Rice University NBA Shopping Rice University NBA Shopping

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Students N=47 All other Students N=64

WA students rated NBA and shopping similarly to other students, but rated Rice University higher. “I really enjoyed the Rice university tour. Seeing the Berlin Wall panel was amazing.” Erin Carlson, Perth College “I liked Rice University because it was really pretty and showed us some good history, especially of JFK.” Sienna Ashe, Iona Presentation College Cultural Experience Unit

Favourite Activity Favourite Activity

26% 28% 37%

72%

37%

NBA Game Shopping Rice University NBA Basketball Game Shopping Rice University WA Students N=43 All other Students N=54

More WA students favoured shopping over the NBA compared to other students Personal Development Unit

How much did you like the following How much did you like the following PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

2 4 5 100% 5 4 10 3 100% 5 13 8 80% 17 8 18 80% 21 23 22 24 26 34 20 60% 20 60% 25 15 40% 9 20 14 13 40% 32 26 15 19 16 9 21 20% 6 6 20% 6 7 11 3 4 23 2 21 34 4 4 5 6 0% 1 1 1 0%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Students N=47 All other Students N=64

Results were consistent across Australian students, but WA students rated 7 Habits for Highly Effective Teens higher than others Personal Development Unit

Favourite Activity Favourite Activity

5% 2% 12% 26% 13% 24% 10% 8% 7%

48% 45%

HASSE Opening 7 Habits Morning Quiz HASSE Opening 7 Habits Morning Quiz Daily Dance Dance Competition Graduation Daily Dance Dance Competition Graduation WA Students N=39 All others Students N=43 Leadership Development Unit

How much did you like the following How much did you like the following LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

100% 100% 9 8 12 80% 80% 6 52 60% 39 60% 11 15 40% 40% 14 3 20% 20% 6 5 2 11 1 5 1 1 0% 0% Mark Polanski Olga Bannova Astronaut Dinner Mark Polanski Olga Bannova Astronaut Dinner

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Students N=47 All other Students N=63 About the Speakers

Dr Olga Bannova, Prof Research Associate Professor, Cullen College of Engineering, University of Houston; Member of AIAA Space Architecture Technical Committee (SATC) – Education Subcommittee

Dr Leroy Chiao American engineer, former NASA astronaut, former Commander of the ISS, entrepreneur, motivational speaker, and engineering consultant, former advisor to the White House. Leadership Development Unit

Favourite Activity Favourite Activity

2% 2% 8% 13%

90% 85%

Astronaut Dinner Olga Bannova Mark Polanski Astronaut Dinner Olga Bannova Mark Polanski

WA Students N=39 All other Students N=47 Expedition Experience

Please rate your experience with the way the EXPEDITION Please rate your experience with the way the EXPEDITION was ORGANISED was ORGANISED

100% 4 100% 7 16 22 19 80% 21 17 80% 32 32 26 60% 37 60% 51 20 30 40% 17 40% 34 16 21 29 6 20% 5 12 7 5 20% 13 11 1 2 4 2 2 3 1 6 2 1 9 0% 1 0% 11 1 1

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Students N=46 All other Students N=64

Results were consistent for all students, with transport in Houston rated slightly higher by WA students Expedition Experience

How do you rate the EXPEDITION MEALS? How do you rate the EXPEDITION MEALS?

100% 4 100% 5 5 12 15 16 16 20 80% 13 19 80% 29 17 13 23 25 19 18 17 60% 60% 35 20 19 34 40% 14 21 40% 13 12 14 24 22 16 8 10 9 20% 7 5 5 20% 16 4 2 9 9 10 4 5 5 3 2 3 8 8 0% 0% 1 1 1 Breakfast Lunch in Dinner in Breakfast Lunch in Dinner in Breakfast Lunch in Dinner in Breakfast Lunch in Dinner in in Huntsville Huntsville in Houston Houston in Huntsville Huntsville in Houston Houston Huntsville Houston Huntsville Houston

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Students N=46 All other Students N=64

WA students rated Huntsville meals lower than other students, but Houston meals higher. This may indicate a decreased tolerance in Huntsville as a result of tiredness/jetlag/illness, which was then overcome in Houston. Expedition Experience

What was your main reason for What was your main reason for attending Space School? attending Space School? 4% 1% 2% 11%

96% 86% My parents wanted me to My parents wanted me to I wanted to attend I wanted to attend My friends signed up for the expedition My friends signed up for the expedition Other Other

WA Students N=47 All other Students N=64 Expedition Experience

DID YOUR SPACE SCHOOL EXPERIENCE MEET YOUR DID YOUR SPACE SCHOOL EXPERIENCE MEET YOUR ORIGINAL EXPECTATIONS? ORIGINAL EXPECTATIONS? 2% 5%

32% 37%

58% 66%

Above my expectations Met my expectations Below my expectations Above my expectations Met my expectations Below my expectations WA Students N=47 All other Students N=64

Results were consistent across Australia. One student from WA and 3 other students said Space School did not meet expectations due to: food and transport, boring activities in Huntsville, unfair allocation of stickers. Of these, 3 would recommend to friends (1 didn’t answer). Expedition Experience

OVERALL, HOW WAS YOUR EXPERIENCE AT SPACE OVERALL, HOW WAS YOUR EXPERIENCE AT SPACE SCHOOL? SCHOOL?

2% 3% 19% 19%

79% 78%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Students N=47 All other Students N=64

Results were consistent across Australia. One student from WA and 2 other students said their experience was average. Reasons included too much personal development, not being placed with friends, bedding and showers in Huntsville. Expedition Experience

WOULD YOU RECOMMEND SPACE SCHOOL TO YOUR WOULD YOU RECOMMEND SPACE SCHOOL TO YOUR FRIENDS? FRIENDS?

0% 2%

100% 98%

Yes No Yes No WA Students N=46 All other Students N=62

One student said she would not recommend Space School because “They wouldn't enjoy it”. Interest in other Programs

Would you be interested in attending Would you be interested in attending any of the following programs? any of the following programs?

100% 100%

80% 80% 73.9% 75.0% 60% 60% 56.5% 55.0% 45.7% 45.0% 40% 40%

20% 20% 8.7% 6.7% 0% 0% Robotics Senior Space Art & Design Other (please Robotics Senior Space Art & Design Other (please School (USA) School School specify) School (USA) School School specify) (Houston, (Europe) (Houston, (Europe) Texas, USA) Texas, USA)

WA Students N=46 All other Students N=60 Highlights

• My favourite activity was the cell lab because I found it the most engaging and educational for my learning style. Sian Bamford, Methodist Ladies College, WA • Coming to Space School has helped me to widen my options for my future. Jessica McLaren, Canberra Girls Grammar, ACT • The Group Managers were amazing and the crew trainers were fantastic. I got to know everyone in my group and the ACT group really well and they are all wonderful people, and they made this trip enjoyable with their humour, dancing, singing etc. Lily Seckler, Fairholme College, QLD • At Space School I have learned to stay strong and enjoy every moment even when it is really hard because it all works out in the end and you'll end up making friends and having fun. Indigo James, Presbyterian Ladies College, WA Lowlights

• The bedtimes in Huntsville were too late and could be made earlier. Olivia McLaren, St Hildas, WA • Definitely some more healthier food options in Huntsville for meals rather than constant fried chicken. I got stuck with the little bed in our hotel room, the mattress isn't quite thick enough so I am sleeping on hard beans, it's not quite 4.5 star material. Elise Beattie, Perth College, WA • The beds and showers at Huntsville could be improved and the days could be shorter. Estella Black, Fintona Girls School, VIC • To improve I'd suggest healthier food at both locations and more time to rest from jet lag. Alessandra Negline, Loreto Mandeville Hall, VIC • Space School could definitely be improved by making it less hectic for everyone, including the GMs. It's very rushed, and I think the experience would be greatly enhanced if we were given better scheduling and rest times in Huntsville. Shannon Mao, Loreto Mandeville Hall, VIC Testimonials

• “…honestly the experiences I gained over the space camp trip was incredible! I had a ball and it definitely wasn't what I was expecting, as I didn't really see myself as one to enjoy a camp like that but I defiantly did enjoy it and I'm glad I got to go. I met and had the best time with an amazing bunch of girls and boys and some that I still keep in contact with. The girls from the younger grades from MBC that came I got to become close with and Hannah and I are even became closer friends. Therefore I think its safe to say I made some friends which made the trip even better. The whole set up from the food to the accommodation was great although their were times where little things in our rooms weren't perfect but I still wouldn't change it because it made it something to remember and have a laugh about. I can't name just one thing I learnt but over those two weeks I defiantly gained a lot more interest and information on space, America and myself throughout the camp. I would defiantly recommend this camp to everyone and anyone because I think there would not be one person that could go on this camp and not enjoy themselves. The crew trainers and supervisors were fun and did their duty of care very well. I wish I could give some negatives and not so many positives but I honestly don't feel as though it could be improved. I'm so grateful I got this opportunity and although I may not want to leave school and become an astrounaut, it allowed me to see that I can do or be what ever I choose.”

• “I had an a amazing time at Space Camp on the holidays and made so many new friends. I would highly recommend this experience to friends as I found that it was an interesting and fun way to learn more about space whilst also exploring the STEM skills. My favourite part of the Space Camp was in Huntsville at the NASA Space Camp facility where we got to participate in "missions". This entailed the completion of two of either a LEO, Lunar or Mars mission. I participated in both the lunar and Leo missions and got to be the roles of Commander and CapCom. My favourite position out of the two was CapCom as I got the chance to speak to the Orion capsule during landing and take off. Overall, the experience was astounding and space has become a whole new door to me in terms of future career paths and just a greater understanding and general interest in the subject matter of space. This opportunity has caused me to rethink my subject and career choices for the future and lean more towards subjects that are in the areas around the STEM program.” Hannah de Bruin, Year 10, Moreton Bay College

Space and Science Units

How satisfied were you with the How satisfied were you with the SPACE & SCIENCE ACTIVITIES SPACE & SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

100% 100% 1 1 1 80% 1 1 1 1 80% 2 2 2 3 4 60% 1 2 2 2 60% 2 1 40% 40% 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 20% 20% 1 1 1 1 1 0% 0%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=5

“Unable to attend mini camp due to student issues.” Lana Noble, Presbyterian Ladies College “Teacher mini camp was excellent and a highlight of the trip, which was a reflection of the group and the group leader.” Claire Haughey, Loretto Mandeville Hall Space and Science Units

FAVOURITE ACTIVITY FAVOURITE ACTIVITY

20% 33% 40%

50%

17% 40%

USSRC Space Camp Space Center Houston USSRC Space Camp Space Center Houston Cell Lab CSI: Body of Evidence Cell Lab CSI: Body of Evidence Shark Dissection Space Race movie Shark Dissection Space Race movie Teacher Mini Space Camp Teacher Mini Space Camp WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=5

“Shark Dissection. The presenters were well organised - the information provided was accurate and the activity was interesting.” Lana Noble, Presbyterian Ladies College “USSRC - variety awesome simulations.” Gillian Hibbert, Loretto College Coorporoo “The missions at USSRC were the highlight of the trip and authentically connected the skills of the program.” Murray McKay, Canberra Girls Grammar School Cultural Experience Unit

How satisfied were you with the How satisfied were you with the CULTURAL ACTIVITIES CULTURAL ACTIVITIES

100% 100% 1 2 80% 1 80%

60% 60% 4 2 2 2 40% 40% 3 1 20% 20% 1 1 0% 0% Rice University NBA Shopping Rice University NBA Shopping Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

Teachers N=2 Teachers N=5 Cultural Experience Unit

Favourite Activity Favourite Activity

25% 25% 25%

75% 50% Rice University NBA Basketball Game Shopping Rice University NBA Basketball Game Shopping

WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=4

“All three - fun!” Cora Algie, St Hilda’s Anglican School “NBA game this is a cultural experience that the students cannot get at home. It is a truly American experience.” Lana Noble, Presbyterian Ladies College “Rice University - stories and guided tour” Gillian Hibbert, Loretto College Coorporoo Personal Development Unit

How satisfied were you with the How satisfied were you with the PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

100% 100% 1 1 1 1 80% 1 80% 3 1 2 2 60% 2 2 60% 2 2 40% 40% 1 1 1 20% 20% 1 1 2 1 1 0% 0%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=5

WA teachers did not rate Morning Quiz, Dance Competition or Graduation. “What was the HASSE Opening and Morning Quiz? Didn't do Dance comp.” Cora Algie, St Hilda’s Anglican School “As the girls/students were not doing any other exercise the HASSE dance was important for fitness and wellbeing. Did secret Santa instead of dance comp.” Lana Noble, Presbyterian Ladies College Personal Development Unit

FAVOURITE ACTIVITY FAVOURITE ACTIVITY

100% 100%

HASSE Opening 7 Habits Morning Quiz HASSE Opening 7 Habits Morning Quiz Daily Dance Dance Competition Graduation Daily Dance Dance Competition Graduation WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=3

“The daily dance - was fun to pump up the students and get moving. Don't remember HASSE Opening; Didn't do dance comp.” Gemma Johnson, Mentone Girls Secondary “Dance in the morning was a good way to start. Students loved the dance competition. 7 Habits and Quiz could be integrated more.” Sally Glennon, Somerville House Leadership Development Unit

How satisfied were you with the How satisfied were you with the LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

100% 100%

80% 1 80% 2

60% 2 60% 4 1 40% 40% 1 20% 20% 1

0% 0% Olga Bannova Astronaut Dinner Olga Bannova Astronaut Dinner

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=4

“Quality and expertise of guest speakers was high. Also great to have a female role model from an interesting background and job experience inspire the girls.” Claire Haughey, Loretto Mandeville Hall Leadership Development Unit

Favourite Activity Favourite Activity

100% 100%

Astronaut Dinner Olga Bannova Mark Polanski Astronaut Dinner Olga Bannova Mark Polanski

WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=2 Expedition Meals

How do you rate the EXPEDITION MEALS? How do you rate the EXPEDITION MEALS?

100% 100%

80% 1 1 1 80% 3 3 3 3 4 4 60% 2 2 2 60% 40% 40% 1 1 1 2 2 2 20% 20% 1 1 1 0% 0% Dinner in Lunch in Breakfast Dinner in Lunch in Breakfast Dinner in Lunch in Breakfast Dinner in Lunch in Breakfast Houston Houston in Huntsville Huntsville in Houston Houston in Huntsville Huntsville in Houston Huntsville Houston Huntsville

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=5

“The meals were not nutritionally balanced. Lack of vegetables and options low in sugar and salt and saturated fats.” Lana Noble, Presbyterian Ladies College “Houston B, L, D all excellent.” Gillian Hibbert, Loretto College Coorporoo “I liked having a good variety and supply of salad along the way” Murray McKay, Canberra Girls Grammar School Overall Experience Overall, how was your experience at Space School? Overall, how was your experience at Space School?

100% 100% 1 1 2 2 80% 80%

2 4 2 60% 60% 2 2 2 2 2

40% 40% 3 3 2 2 20% 20% 1

0% 0% How well did How well did How well did How well does Rate your How well did How well did How well did How well does Rate your we deliver we deliver we program overall we deliver we deliver we program overall personal STEM engage/inspire complement experience at personal STEM engage/inspire complement experience at development students STEM Space School development students STEM Space School components curriculum components curriculum Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=5 “Students will have been extended and inspired in areas of STEM as a result of their exposure to quality and unique opportunities provided by venues, particularly NASA.” Claire Haughey, Loretto Mandeville Hall Expedition Experience

Did your Space School experience Did your Space School experience meet your original expectations? meet your original expectations?

40%

60%

100%

Above my expectations Met my expectations Above my expectations Met my expectations Below my expectations Below my expectations

WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=4 Expedition Experience

WOULD YOU RECOMMEND SPACE SCHOOL TO FELLOW WOULD YOU RECOMMEND SPACE SCHOOL TO FELLOW TEACHERS? TEACHERS?

100% 100%

Yes No Yes No WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=5 Interest in other Programs

Which of the following programs would Which of the following programs would your students be interested in attending? your students be interested in attending?

100% 100% 100.0%

80% 80% 66.7% 66.7% 60% 60%

40% 40%

20% 20% 0.0% 0.0% 0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0% Robotics Senior Space Art and Design Other (please Robotics Senior Space Art and Design Other (please School (USA) School School specify): School (USA) School School specify): (Houston, (Europe) (Houston, (Europe) Texas, USA) Texas, USA)

WA Teachers N=2 All other Teachers N=3 Highlights

• “Staff were swift to act when students were sick which was great.” Gemma Johnson, Mentone Girls Secondary, VIC • “The missions at USSRC were the highlight of the trip and authentically connected the skills of the program.” Murray McKay, Canberra Girl's Grammar School, ACT Lowlights

• “Huntsville's STEM activities were good for year 7-8 but didn't extend the 9s. The Houston activities were inspiring but not as much STEM to extend their interest in science or space.” Sally Glennon, Somerville House, QLD • “Online Briefing and Welcome Pack - more details on flights and events could help.” Sally Glennon, Somerville House, QLD • “Organisation of flights and transfers was poor as we didn't find out our flights until a few days before. Also written in USA times which is strange for coming back to Aus.” Gemma Johnson, Mentone Girls Secondary, VIC

Reasons for Enrolment and Satisfaction What was the main reason for enrolling What was the main reason for enrolling your your child in Space School? child in Space School?

Recommended by school 3% Recommended by school 6%

Enriching life's perspective 66% Enriching life's perspective 59%

Networking & Interpersonal Skills 38% Networking & Interpersonal Skills 25%

Global exposure 45% Global exposure 34%

Leadership & Personal… 59% Leadership & Personal… 59%

Foster interest in STEM 72% Foster interest in STEM 84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N= 32

WA parents appear to enroll their daughters in Space School for different reasons to other parents around Australia. There is a slightly greater emphasis on global exposure and networking and interpersonal skills compared to fostering STEM interests. Expedition Delivery

Did your Space School experience meet Did your Space School experience meet your your original expectations? original expectations? 0% 0%

41% 48%

52% 59%

Above my expectations Met my expectations Above my expectations Met my expectations Below my expectations Below my expectations WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N=32 Expedition Delivery

Please rate the following events Please rate the following events

100% 100% 7 8 11 11 9 10 10 80% 13 80% 8 60% 60% 18 13 20 19 40% 15 11 10 40% 19 20% 3 20% 4 2 5 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0% 0% Information Preparation Departure Day Arrival Day Information Preparation Departure Day Arrival Day evening Day evening Day

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N=32 Expedition Impact

Please rate the impact for your child Please rate the impact for your child

100% 100% 9 7 80% 14 12 80% 16 19 23 60% 60% 28 40% 15 16 40% 20 13 16 20% 10 20% 9 2 2 3 4 1 0% 0%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N=32 Service Delivery

Please rate your experience using the Please rate your experience using the Actura customer portal Actura customer portal

0% 3% 3% 0% 4% 11%

41% 39%

53% 46%

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N=32 Service Delivery

Please rate our social media and Please rate our social media and communications while your child was on communications while your child was on expedition expedition

100% 100% 13 9 10 80% 12 15 80% 12

60% 60% 10 8 9 13 9 10 40% 40% 6 6 3 7 20% 1 20% 6 5 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 0% 0% Facebook SmugMug (photo 7 Habits Emails Facebook SmugMug (photo 7 Habits Emails gallery) gallery) Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N=32 Service Delivery

How would you rate our overall service? How would you rate our overall service?

100% 100% 16 13 80% 80% 18 17 60% 60% 40% 13 17 40% 8 7 20% 2 1 20% 2 1 1 1 1 0% 0% Customer Service & Logistic Arrangements Customer Service & Logistic Arrangements Communication Communication

Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

WA Parents N=28 All Other Parents N=27 Recommendations and Suggestions

Would you recommend Space School Would you recommend Space School to your family and friends? to your family and friends? 3% 0%

97% 100% Yes No Yes No WA Parents N=29 All Other Parents N=2

One WA parent would not recommend Space School but provided no reason. Key Learnings Key Learnings implemented

June-July 2017 Student and Teacher Key Learnings  Improve Seven Habits activities to be STEM or space themed and include the use of video to make the session more interactive and engaging  Include a range of topics for the Morning Quiz presentation  Update the packing list distributed on Preparation Day to include guidelines on shorts (NA for Dec Expedition but incorporated for June 2018) June-July 2017 Parent Key Learnings  Change Smugmug galleries to show Day 1 to 12 and have GMs include the day headers in nightly upload  Improve Customer Portal to separate rooming requests from travel requests  Schools to formally confirm a student’s suitability to participate in the program based on medical, behavioural and learning difficulties  Enhance the program with support from previous Accompanying Teachers to identify direct links to national syllabus  On Preparation Day share with parents information on the total Expedition size and that USSRC dormitory accommodation can include students from other schools Key Learnings Implemented

Dec 2016 Student and Teacher Key Learnings Allow more downtime for students to socialise with each other and reflect on the program content Establish a set menu plan and work with US Operations team to offer a wider variety of food catering to all dietary special requirements Provide context for the inclusion of non-space oriented activities such as Oil Drilling Rig and Shark Dissection Dec 2016 Parent Key Learnings Mission Control in Sydney during transit in and out of USA to manage social media communication Improve Customer Portal to separate rooming requests from travel requests Preparation Day events to be restructured to allow a longer break out session for students to socialise, get to know each other and their GM Key Learnings from Dec 2017

• Include a greater variety of invigorating activity in the morning activity. • Western Australian participants to arrive a day before the program commences to ensure rest prior to commencing the formal program. • Request updated medical information form from parents, school authority and accompanying teacher six weeks prior to Expedition. • Reaffirm with caterers the meal plan for students with special dietary requirements. • Fruit and other healthy snacks to be made available at every meal and for students to take as snacks throughout the day. • Improve the Rice University guided tour to include facilities showcasing the history and importance of the university’s relationship with space. • Ensure the expectations of accompanying teachers are aligned with the learning outcomes of the program. • GMs to assist Crew Trainers at USSRC to focus on the STEM content and relevance of each activity and to communicate this to students, EG rocket building, rock climbing and multi-axis trainer. • More self-directed team activity at Weiss Energy Hall and Health Museum, EG NASA Expert at JSC. • Re-evaluate CSI activity to achieve better critical thinking and problem solving skills, as this activity consistently rates average amongst students and teachers • Space Race movie to be shown in individual group room (not as a combined large event)

Mentone Girls Secondary College – Student presentation on Dec 2017 Space School

Intro At the conclusion of the school year, 6 girls from our school and many other students from all across Australia came together in Houston, Texas in the USA for 2 weeks of Space School. This incredible event was organised by the Alliance of Girls Schools Australia, Actura, the Houston Association for Space and Science Education and of course, NASA.

It comprised of two different camps: the Junior Space School and the Senior Space School. And here, we have girls who have been on these camps, to share with you our extraordinary experiences.

Junior Trip The first week of the trip was held in Alabama through an American space camp programme at the space and rocket centre in Huntsville. We started the day with a wake up call that included the time, weather and a strong southern accent. We were cold, jet lagged and in my case ready for bed. Still it was amazing, we got to use the simulators for walking on the moon, zero gravity, increased gravity, missions and tumble spins. Mostly real things used by astronauts in their training programme. It was a wonderful and eye opening week.

Before we knew it we were on a plane to Houston for our second and final week of the trip. Tonsilis and 12am hospital trips didn’t stop us from having amazing time. The activities, guest speakers, and what felt like heavenly hotel rooms kept us eagerly awaiting every next day. We also got to learn about other sciences such as forensics, biology and cell research. One of the nights included Listening to an amazing and inspiring talk from former commander of the international space station, Lee Roy Chao. We even got to touch a real piece of the moon at the Johnson space centre where we spent 2 of our days learning about space travel. Past, present and future. After another 35 ish hours of travel time we were back at home.

Senior Trip Unlike the junior trip, the senior trip spent their whole time in Houston. We started our trip off by spending the week at NASA. While at NASA we attended their Space University where we got to do many different activities ranging from building rockets and mars rovers, where we competed in challenges, to scuba diving to train for space walking and many more interesting activities. We got to meet some amazing people that work at NASA including astronauts and one of the people who could be headed to mars within our lifetime. We got to go on amazing tours where we saw NASA’s facilities, rockets and training centers. In the second week we went to a makerspace to 3D print rovers and worked on presentations that would be presented to our group. We were able to speak with many other people from NASA and even had dinner with an astronaut. We also performed a simulation where we did activities in a space shuttle and mission control. Throughout this trip there were also times where we experienced the American culture by going shopping and even a NBA game! Casey and my group were from all around Australia and we formed some amazing friendships.

Reasons for going/what you got out of it As you would expect from travelling, and we did a LOT of travelling, it is a really exciting and insightful experience. And learning about the American space industry in its home country made it incredibly valuable. One local I met had done an internship at NASA in high school, and worked at SpaceX, Tesla and Apple! The most exciting thing though, was knowing that everything we were learning was relevant to us, we were learning about our futures. To all the students here, your whole life, there has been someone living in space. And now we are entering a new era of space exploration, they call us the Mars Generation. For those that haven’t heard, Australia is actually getting its own official Space Agency soon. But it’s not all just about space. This trip is for anyone who is interested in STEM, or for those who just want to broaden their horizons.

Conclusion There will be another trip running at the end of this year, so if you are interested in this amazing opportunity keep your eye on the school newsletter for details. Thankyou.

Executive Officer’s Report Update on Strategic Plan — 2018 Operational priorities: 1. Online Introduction to Girls’ Schools: Course content, videos and assessment complete. Course to be piloted in Executive Committee schools prior to launch at BEC in May. 2. Deliver high quality SLC: • Fully subscribed with 165 students from across Australia, NZ, USA, Philippines and Zimbabwe • 18 staff from Alliance schools attended lunch and goal setting sessions, 21 attended celebration dinner • Keynote speakers included Stephanie Rice — Olympic swimmer, Cam Greenwood (Founder Monsta Surf), Dr Catherine Ball (She Flies), Liz Volpe (League of Extraordinary Women), Sarah Gully (UN Foundation’s Girl Up) • 53 parents attended presentation by Dr Peta Stapleton, Clinical Psychologist, on Love Languages and Parenting Young Leaders • Sponsorship from UN Foundation’s Girl Up ($13,000 plus scholarship to Girl Up Conference in Washington). • Student feedback was consistent with previous years and highlights the key benefit of the program as the opportunity to make real connections over 4-days with like-minded girls from across Aus, NZ and overseas. The downside most mentioned is that 4 days is too short and the program doesn’t allow enough free time.

SLC attendance by sector and region: 2018 IND STATE CATH INT OTHER TOTAL SCHOOLS 74 14 71 8 167 % 44.31 8.38 42.51 4.79 100.00 AT SLC 53 3 20 1 77 % of SLC 68.83 3.90 25.97 0.00 1.30 100.00 % SECTOR 71.62 21.43 28.17 0.00 45.51

REGION NSW/ACT VIC NZ QLD WA SA TAS OS OTHER TOTAL SCHOOL 43 41 24 26 10 12 5 6 167 S % 25.75 24.55 14.37 15.57 5.99 7.19 2.99 3.59 100.00 AT SLC 15 18 7 19 7 6 2 2 1 77

% of SLC 19.48 23.38 9.09 24.68 9.09 7.79 2.60 2.60 1.30 100.00 % 34.88 43.90 29.17 73.08 70.00 50.00 40.00 33.33 REGION

Feedback: I would just like to say a bug thank you for the hospitality shown to our girls at the Leadership conference. They had a wonderful time and the feedback given to the staff this week was very positive. They clearly gained much from the event. I very much hope that our Headgirl & Deputies are in a position to attend in the future. Lorraine (Hill) Principal Chisipite School Zbw

Once again, our students have been tremendously fortunate to attend the Student Leadership Conference and we are extraordinarily grateful for your kindness. Kate and Kristina had the most remarkable experience and learned so much. They have already shared some of what they learned with their classmates and are enthusiastically thinking about how to translate what these lessons to their lives at Greenwich Academy. I want to let you know just how much we appreciate this opportunity. I know that such an event represents months of preparations and planning. THANK YOU!!! Connie Blunden, Greenwich Academy

3. Deliver high quality BEC: • Program finalised with 11 feature presentations including US author and journalist Peggy Orenstein; 14 breakout sessions; panel session with Maree Crabbe. • Sponsorship increased to 12 with one platinum sponsor; two gold; two silver and seven bronze

4. Establish recognition awards: • No progress

Significant issues: New members 2018: Mercy College Coburg Vic; St Mary Star of the Sea NSW; Girls’ Preparatory SAF, Otago Girls High School NZ. Current membership is 171 schools: ACT 3; NSW 41; NZ 25; QLD 26; SA 12; TAS 5; VIC 42; WA 10; Overseas; 7

ACNA Application The alliance application for charity status has been approved.

2017 Annual Report STRATEGIC GOAL 1: To promote the education of girls in girls’ schools through creating public awareness for the philosophy and practice of girls’ schools. Increase use of the website and social media • Membership subscription to the website is 776 • Media Hub has 11 education editors/reporters • Our presence on Twitter continues to grow steadily — 22% increase in followers in 2017, almost 10,000 visits to the Alliance twitter profile and 246 mentions. • LinkedIn Career Hub membership is 264. Jobs are being regularly posted and the hub is promoted to members, jobs are also tweeted as an additional benefit to members.

Media Coverage • 2017 was successful for the Alliance in terms of media coverage. As news organisations lowered their staffing levels the incidence of story syndication has increased and facilitated wider placement of Alliance’s key messages. This is both positive in terms of raising awareness of the benefits of girls’ schools as well as countering anti single-sex school coverage. • 233 articles / interviews • Reach of 45,500,000

Disseminate publications more broadly • Distributed 14750 brochures in 2017 (15700 in 2016) • 12 customised inforgraphic videos produced in 2017 (24 in 2016) • ‘Let’s hear it from the girls’ video with interviews from students at SLC 2017 viewed 4,300 times on YouTube. eNews • Enews was redesigned with a cleaner less clastrophobic feel, with single features for news, research and events aimed at pulling more readers through to the website. • There was a 20.33% increase in subscribers to eNews in 2017 • Average click rate 11.3% compares well with industry average of 2.1% • Average open rate of 40.9% also compares well with industry average of 22.2% In Alliance • May edition themed Staff wellbeing and professional development, was 40 pp and featured 14 articles from member schools including state, Catholic and Independent, and Australian, New Zealand and South African. There were 6 articles sources from writers outside of the Alliance. • October edition themed Work futures, was 52 pp and featured 29 articles from members, 2 from partners and 2 from university academics.

Support vibrant Branch events In 2017 the Alliance held 34 branch events with over 2800 guests (see appendix for full list) Leveraged partnerships to provide positive outcomes

• AskRIGHT: 2 places on Advancement tour to USA in 2018. Fundraising and engagement survey • Actura: 2017 - 316 students from 40 schools including WA, 2018 extend to NZ and SA • World Challenge: Sri Lanka Famil in April, provided guest speaker at 3 branch events • Bond: Hosted Empowering Leaders Masterclass (May) and SLC (January).

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: To provide leadership in girls’ education through cutting edge research and leadership development Student Leadership Conference for students entering their final year of secondary school. The four-day residential course, designed specifically for girls, aims to equip attendees to become effective and motivational leaders during their final year of school. Scholarships are offered to Indigenous and financially disadvantages students.

Making A Difference: Girls for Change Leadership Summit, offered in Dunedin NZ included residential option, (36 attendees), Sydney (18), Brisbane (35) and Melbourne (37). This unique 2-day holiday program for girls in Year 9-11 provides the opportunity to connect with successful young entrepreneurs and social change makers; develop leadership and entrepreneurial skills; explore effective advocacy; and develop the communication skills needed to effect change.

NASA Space School this initiative aims to encourage more girls to pursue STEM subjects and careers. Since 2016 over 500 girls from 52 schools have participated in the Alliance’s two-week space school program in the USA run conjunction with Actura Australia. Scholarships are offered to financially disadvantages students on the basis of merit.

Student Alliance Networking Group comprising 200 girls from 20 schools in NSW who meet to collaborate on projects that create awareness and build knowledge of issues that impact on women and girls.

Empowering Leaders Masterclass, a two-day program, facilitated by Circle, for middle managers was attended by 45 Alliance school staff with all branches except Tasmania represented.

Annual Speaker Tour in 2017 Prof Cordelia Fine, academic psychologist and writer, addressed the cultural assumptions, scientific research, and gendered biases that have popularised false understandings of biology, evolution, and their impacts on human behaviour and development and provided suggestions to educators on how to address unconscious gender bias and cultural assumptions in classrooms. Prof Cordelia Fine presented in seven cities: Melbourne (80) Adelaide (40) Hobart (86) Perth (67) Auckland (66) Sydney (45) and Brisbane (72).

Publish, support and disseminate research on girls’ education Research

In 2017, 43 research abstracts were added to the Research Library, including research by Professor Cordelia Fine and other leading academics on recent developments in neuroscience, and a selection of current academic studies on the impact of pornography and social media on young people.

“Single-sex education for girls: What the research shows” ¾ accessible to members, the media and the general public on the Alliance website ¾ was updated with important research on single-sex education by several leading researchers, including Professor Christian Dustmann of University College London and Professor Alison Booth of the Australian National University.

Research assistance was provided to Martin Perold of St Stithians College () who asked for help locating information on helicopter parenting; Kathy Bishop () who requested information on the role of parents in choosing their daughter’s friends and friendship groups; and Kim Kiepe (St Hilda’s Anglican School) who requested information on the number of girls’ and single-sex schools in Australia.

Research Grant

Professor Helen Forgasz and Adjunct Professor Gilah Leder of Monash University completed their investigation of girls/women and STEM in late 2017. Their report, which contains several positive findings for the Alliance ¾ including in relation to the STEM participation rates of girls in single-sex schools compared with girls in co-ed

schools in subjects including chemistry, intermediate and advanced mathematics, and physics ¾ will be released in early 2018.

National Gender Inequality Educational Program for High Schools

The Alliance, AGEC and the University of Queensland Business School are collaborating on a project which has already surveyed over 10,000 boys and girls as well as interviewing over 500 of these survey participants regarding their views of gender inequality. These findings will inform the development of an educational program for high school students based around self-confidence, leadership and STEM Career intentions program.

eBriefs

Principals received eighteen eBriefs in 2017 on topics ranging from the AskRight report on fundraising and alumni relations in girls’ schools to Christian Dustmann’s research on why single-sex schools are so successful, especially for girls.

Media Report Alert

The Media Report Alert, emailed to principals each Monday during term time, continued to be popular in 2017 with several requests for the alert to be distributed more widely (e.g. to other senior staff or by request for all staff of member schools). The focus has remained on girls’ schools and single-sex education, along with current issues in education and pedagogy, health and wellbeing (including for LGBTQI students), STEM, and gender equity and stereotyping issues.

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: To ensure excellence in governance, continuing sustainable growth and professionalism in serving members Membership The stakeholder surveys conducted in May showed a very high NPS (67) and overall a high level of satisfaction with services provided by the Alliances. Several members mentioned higher level of service and higher profile of Alliance.

2017 saw a 10.6% increase in membership (16 new members).

Loren Bridge, Executive Officer February 2018

APPENDICES

2017 Media Coverage

Leaders of tomorrow – article on the 2017 SLC - POSITIVE

Gold Coast Bulletin, 7 Jan 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

Female leaders of the future – Interviews with students at SLC 2017, profiling the conference - POSITIVE

7 News Gold Coast, 6 Jan 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

170 teens attend leadership conference – interviews with students at SLC 2017, profiling the conference - POSITIVE

9 News Gold Coast, 6 Jan 2017, Loren Bridge interviewed

Screen Queensland CEO Tracey Vieria resets the stage for film success – brief mention of Tracey speaking at the SLC conference - NEUTRAL

Business News Australia, 10 Jan 2017

Australian students visit NASA mission control as part of STEM program – interviews with two students who took part in the Alliance Space School trip - POSITIVE

Sydney Morning Herald, 22 Jan 2017

Why you should send your daughter to an all-girls school – opinion piece by Loren Bridge – POSITIVE

Sydney Morning Herald, 1 Feb 2017

Syndicated in Auckland Now and the EASSE website

An open letter to Westpac CEO Brian Hartzer. Alliance response to an interview with Mr Hartzer which suggested he thought single-sex schools were partly to blame for the lack of women in senior leadership roles - POSITIVE

Women’s Agenda, 4 May 2017, letter attributed to Loren Bridge.

Excerpt from open letter to Brian Hartzer included in editors opening letter in the magazine – POSITIVE

The Deal Magazine, June 2017 issue – Loren Bridge quoted

NSW school girls spend the holidays as 'astronauts in training' – article on NSW Space Camp

Sydney Morning Herald, 26 Jun 2017

Co-ed kids improvers in reading - ACER NAPLAN research noting that students from single-sex schools do better than co-ed but don’t improve as fast as their co-ed counterparts - NEUTRAL

West Australian, 9 Sept 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

Girls win right to wear shorts and trousers to all Victorian state schools - POSITIVE

The Age, 13 Sept 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

More girls study science, technology, engineering and mathematics in single-sex learning environments - POSITIVE

The Daily Telegraph, 2 October 2017, Loren Bridge opinion piece

Single-sex schools could disappear from Australia within 20 years – study – article referring to the ACER NAPLAN research - NEUTRAL

The Guardian, 3 October 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

Single-sex schools will 'disappear by 2035' – article referring to the ACER NAPLAN research – NEUTRAL/NEGATIVE

The Sydney Morning Herald, 3 October 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

Syndicated in 121 outlets

Aim to give girls ‘the grit’ – article on MAD New Zealand - POSITIVE

Otago Daily Times, 3 October 2017, Jackie Barron quoted

Jackie Barron interviewed about Alliance Making a Difference Leadership Summit in Dunedin and girls’ schooling - POSITIVE

Radio NZ, 4 October 2017

Students from St Hilda’s and Waitaki Girls High School interviewed about the Alliance Making a Difference Leadership Summit in Dunedin - POSITIVE

Channel 39, 4 October 2017

There's no on going benefit to a single-sex education for boys or girls – NEGATIVE

Kidspot, 4 October 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

Single-sex girls disappearing – co-ed versus single-sex schooling debate - NEUTRAL

Channel 7 Weekend Sunrise, 8 October 2017, Fran Reddan interviewed

Single-sex classes make a difference to girls: new research – article referring to new Dustmann research - POSITIVE

Sydney Morning Herald, 22 October 2017, Ravenswood parent interviewed

Syndicated in 46 other outlets

My son has thrived at a boys’ school, my daughters are fine at co-ed - balanced opinion piece on the co-ed vs single sex debate, mentioning the Alliance and Loren Bridge - NEUTRAL

Sydney Morning Herald, 23 October 2017

Syndicated in 5 other outlets, including The Age, WA Today, Canberra Times

Students do better in single-sex schools – study – POSITIVE

The Educator Online, 23 October 2017, Loren Bridge quoted

Single sex versus co-ed schooling, what is better for our children? – POSITIVE

Radio 2GB, 23 October 2017, interview with Loren Bridge

Melbourne schoolgirls head to NASA for space camp – POSITIVE

Herald Sun, 10 December 2017, Fintona students featured

Syndicated in 9 other outlets

Perth schoolgirls reach for the stars – space camp story – POSITIVE

The West Australian, 12 December 2017, Perth College students featured

Syndicated in one other outlet

The HSC school rankings most readers want to know - Article noting the online popularity of league tables, but balancing that with Alliance comment - NEUTRAL

The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 December 2017, Ros Curtis quoted

Syndicated in 3 other outlets

So you say you hate league tables… - Article noting the online popularity of league tables, but balancing that with Alliance comment - NETURAL

Newcastle Herald, 15 December 2017, Ros Curtis quoted

Syndicated in 20 other outlets

Are HSC league tables doing more harm than good? - POSITIVE

The Educator Online, 15 December 2017, Rose Curtis quoted

2017 Summary of Twitter Analytics

Month Impressions New Mentions Visits Tweets

JAN 19,800 19 25 835 34

FEB 24,500 16 13 774 43

MAR 22,000 13 15 926 49

APR 15,000 19 14 587 38

MAY 19,300 - (follow-bots skewed 33 773 58 the numbers)

JUN 19,300 23 26 886 43

JULY 21,000 5 19 728 49

AUG 25,300 18 21 1024 41

SEPT 17,800 10 22 745 24

OCT 34,600 13 44 1403 37

NOV 18,300 14 7 839 43

DEC 12,200 11 7 415 14

2017 Summary of eNEWS analytics

Issue Subscribers Opens % Clicks %

(Industry ave 21.9%) (industry ave 2.1%)

FEB 1254 41 11.8

MAR 1236 42.2 10.8

APR 1278 41.2 11.2

MAY 1294 44.6 14.3

JUN 1295 37.6 9.9

JUL 1357 36.4 11.4

AUG 1560 36.7 11.8

SEPT 1520 43.4 8.3

OCT 1521 38.8 12.8

NOV 1509 38.7 6

2017 Summary of Branch Events

TERM 1 Event PAX Schools Speaker Partners Venue Victoria: 6 IWD B’fast 198 19 Maya Narayan, public Queen’s Hall March lawyer and MGC alumna Parliament House Victoria: Twilight seminar 44 13 Madonna King, author CIRCLE (B Foster Shelford GGS 21 March and journalist presented) Bond (R Kronenberg) NSW: 7 Twilight seminar 35 7 Liz Volpe, Co-founder of CIRCLE (B Foster Mount St Benedict, March the League of presented) Pennant Hills Extraordinary Women

NSW: 7 SANG 200 20 Liz Volpe, Co-founder of Mount St Benedict, March the League of Pennant Hills Extraordinary Women Qld: 8 IWD Lunch 60 8 Tracey Vieira, CEO Bond (Catherine Brisbane Club March Screen Qld and 2016 Qld O’Sullivan, thanks guest Telstra Business Woman speaker) of the Year SA: 9 IWD Breakfast 165 11 Julia Gillard Adelaide March WA: 31 Year 12 leaders 60 10 Student run leadership Perth College March networking workshop TERM 2 Victoria: 3 Twilight seminar 93 13 Dr Judith Locke, Bond (R Kronenberg

May psychologist and author presented) NSW: 9 SANG 200 20 Margie Seale: Non- Wenona May Executive Director of Telstra Corporation, Bank of Queensland, Ramsay Health Care and Scentre Group, and Non- Executive Chairman of Penguin Random House Australia and New Zealand.

Qld: 16 Twilight seminar 58 12 Catherine Clarke, CEO iVicon (T Richmond) AHS May Qld Bond (R Kronenberg) CIRCLE (B Foster presented) 26-27 Empowering 43 27 Two-day program Circle (P Cummins, Bond University May Leaders presented by CIRCLE facilitated) Bond (C O’Sullivan, guest speaker at dinner) Bond (Professor Nick James & Associate Professor Amanda Coulthard, presented session) WA Networking Dinner 85 7 Dr Davis McCabe All partners Perth College acknowledged 31 May Gender Identity and diversity WA Year 9-10 student 88 8 Irina Cattalini Iona Presentation breakfast 20 June NSW MAD 18 8 (inc 2 Two-day workshop Wenona new) facilitated by yLead 3-4 July TERM 3 NSW: SANG 200 20 Catherine McAuley 25 July VIC: Speaker Tour 80 17 Cordelia Fine Actura (Stephen Hodges) Mentone GGS – presented 25 July Bond (R Kronenberg) All partners acknowledged SA: Speaker Tour 40 7 Cordelia Fine Bond (R Kronenberg) – St Peter’s Girls’ presented 26 July All partners acknowledged TAS: Speaker Tour 86 3 Cordelia Fine All partners St Michael’s acknowledged Collegiate 27 July VIC: MAD 43 10 (inc 1 Two-day workshop Strathcona BGGS non- facilitated by yLead 29-30 July member) WA: Speaker Tour 67 7 (inc 1 Cordelia Fine All partners Perth College non- acknowledged 1 Aug member) NZ: Speaker Tour 66 2 Cordelia Fine All partners St Cuthbert’s College acknowledged 3 Aug NSW: SANG 200 20 Santa Sabina 8 Aug NSW: Speaking Tour 45 14 (inc 2 Cordelia Fine Actura (Stacey Wood) – Santa Sabina non presented 8 Aug members) All partners acknowledged QLD Speaking Tour 72 9 Cordelia Fine Actura (Rochelle) – St Margaret’s AGS presented 9 Aug Bond University – R Kronenberg All partners

acknowledged VIC Science Breakfast 170 11 Dr Obranovich Mentone GGS for Year 11-12 17 Aug NZ MAD 34 13 (incl. 5 Three-day workshop St Hilda’s Collegiate non facilitated by yLead: School 2-4 Oct members) residential and non res Speakers: Veronica Stevenson, Founder & CEO - Humble Bee, Founder & Director - Spindle Fibre Films

Kendall Flutey, Co- Founder & CEO of Banqer

Jess Ducey, Chief People Wrangler - PledgeMe TERM 4 Qld: 7-8 MAD 33 11 Two-day workshop St Margaret’s AGS Oct facilitated by yLead NSW: 17 SANG: Showcase 200 20 Erin Molan, Sports Ascham Oct presenter SA: 19 Networking Event 45 11 No speaker St Peter’s Oct NSW: 24 Networking Event 24 9 Susan Moylan Coombs World Challenge (Aaron TWC Oct Pittaway – presentation) Embracing difference as a catalyst for change Victoria: 9 Networking Event 31 9 Helen Sultana, Girls Geek World Challenge (Aaron OLSH Bentleigh Nov Pittaway – presentation) Encouraging girls and women to build more of Robyn Kronenberg the internet (Bond) Laura Howison (Actura) WA: 7 Networking Event 87 6 Meetal Gandhi (Actura) Santa Maria Nov Tas: 23 Networking Event 36 5 Robyn Kronenberg Mt Carmel Nov (Bond) QLD: 11 Lunch 48 11 Aaron Pittaway, World Christine Edwards and Brisbane Club Dec Challenge Jeff Buchanan (AskRight) Rethink Orphanages Aaron Pittaway (World Challenge)

FORGASZ/LEDER STEM REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

Part 1: Data on STEM subject enrolments in Victoria 2001-2015 Data was obtained by Professor Helen Forgasz and Adjunct Professor Gilah Leder of Monash University from the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) for enrolments in all STEM subjects for students eligible to sit the VCE (Victorian Certificate of Education) from 2001 to 2015 for single-sex and co-ed schools and, importantly, by gender within these schools (p. 9). As a result, statistics for Victorian enrolments in eight STEM subjects can be compared between single-sex girls, co-ed girls, single-sex boys and co-ed boys.

Chemistry (Fig. 3, p. 10) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were significantly more likely to study chemistry than girls in co-ed schools (27.6% vs 15.4%). • In fact, girls at single-sex girls were equally as likely as boys at single-sex schools (27.0%) and more likely than boys from co-ed schools (20.1%) to study chemistry.

Mathematical Methods (intermediate mathematics) (Fig. 6, p. 12) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were significantly more likely to study intermediate mathematics (Mathematical Methods) than girls in co-ed schools (36.3% vs 21.6%). • In fact, girls at single-sex girls were equally as likely as boys at co-ed schools to study intermediate mathematics (36.3% vs 36.2%), though less likely than boys from single-sex schools (48.3%).

Specialist Mathematics (advanced mathematics) (Fig. 7, p. 13) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were more likely to study advanced mathematics (Specialist Mathematics) than girls in co-ed schools (8.9% vs 4.8%). • The enrolment of single-sex girls in Specialist Mathematics declined from 14.0% in 2001 to 6.9% in 2012, but has since been rising steadily and, at the 2015 level of 8.9% is closing in on co-ed boys at 11.3%. • The enrolment of girls at co-ed schools in advanced mathematics was at its highest in 2003 (8.0%) but declined steadily over the next ten years to 4.0% in 2012. Since then there has been a small annual increase and was 4.8% in 2015, just over half the rate for girls at single-sex schools (8.9%). • Boys at single-sex schools are the most likely to study Specialist Mathematics, although their enrolment dropped from 21.6% in 2001 to 15.2% in 2015.

Physics (Fig. 4, p. 11) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were more likely to study physics than girls in co- ed schools (7.5% vs 5.1%). • It is concerning, however, that this is a decline since 2001 when 11.8% of girls in single-sex schools and 6.5% of girls in co-ed schools studied physics. • In addition, boys are far more likely to study physics with 2015 figures showing that 24.7% of boys in co-ed schools and 22.4% of boys in single-sex schools studied physics.

Other subjects Enrolments in other STEM subjects were similar for girls in single-sex and co-ed schools in 2015: • Biology: single-sex girls 29.1% and co-ed girls 29.0% (Fig. 2, p. 9). • Further Mathematics (elementary mathematics*): single-sex girls 53.4% and co-ed girls 58.8% (Fig 5, p. 11). • IT Applications: single-sex girls 1.6% and co-ed girls 1.5% (Fig. 8, p. 13). • Software Development: single-sex girls 0.1% and co-ed girls 0.3% (Fig. 9, p. 14).

* Forgasz and Leder used the terms elementary, intermediate and advanced to describe the three levels of mathematics offered in Victoria.

Notes: (1): The higher proportion of co-ed girls taking elementary mathematics (Further Mathematics) may possibly be explained by the higher proportion of single-sex girls taking intermediate and advanced mathematics subjects. (This was not discussed in the Forgasz/Leder report – this is my suggestion of a possible explanation.)

(2) The dramatic fall in the number of both girls and boys taking IT Applications and Software Development very concerning. In 2001, between 20% and 36% of girls and boys in both school types took IT Applications. In 2015, less than 10% boys and 2% of girls took this subject. In 2001, about 12% of boys in single-sex and co-ed schools took Software Development compared with less than 2% of girls in both school types. In 2015, about 5% of boys and less than 1% of girls were enrolled in Software Development. This is an alarming development, particularly for girls, right at the time when IT and computing professionals are highly in demand.

Part 2: Survey of girls’ school graduates regarding STEM To tease out the complex interplay of factors impacting on the differences in STEM subject enrolments for girls attending single-sex and co-ed schools, as well as the larger differences between girls’ and boys’ schools, Forgasz and Leder conducted an online survey of graduates of single-sex and co-ed schools (p. 15). Results include:

A higher proportion of females from single-sex schools than co-ed schools had completed studies in STEM-related health fields (28.3% vs. 19.0%). Smaller differences in favour of girls’ school graduates were also seen in physical or biological sciences; agricultural or environmental sciences; and IT/computing (Table 6, p. 24). A higher proportion of females from co-ed schools than single-sex schools had completed engineering studies (14.3% vs. 3.9%). Smaller differences in favour of female co-ed school graduates were also seen in mathematics; and the teaching of STEM subjects at secondary or tertiary level (Table 6, p. 24).

However, it should be noted that 50.8% of survey respondents did not use these categories to describe their occupation but used their own words. Forgasz and Leder stated that they were unable to categorise these responses due to the “diversity and complexity of the responses provided” (p. 24).

Forgasz and Leder write that (p. 15): “This may be related to the finding that parents of females who had attended single-sex schools appeared more influential in their daughters’ career choices than parents of females who had attended co-educational schools.”

For females graduates of single-sex schools, the most influential factors on their initial career choice were parents (43.4%), being good at STEM subjects (37.6%) and good employment prospects (31.8%). For females who attended co-ed schools, the most influential factors were being good at STEM subjects (44.5%), parents (39.0%) and good employment prospects (34.8%) (Table 7, p. 25).

Also (p. 15): “From the survey data, it was also found that the traditional gender stereotyped role expectation that females serve as the main carer for children was evident not only among older participants, but also, disappointingly, among younger participants. This gendered expectation, as well as harassment and bullying in male- dominated fields (e.g., engineering), were provided by many survey respondents as explanations for career changes away from STEM.”

And (p. 15): “A noteworthy finding was that the female respondents were far more likely to say that they would recommend a single-sex school to promote a girl’s interest in STEM than for a boy. This finding is consistent with the widespread belief that single-sex schools are more likely than co-educational schools to promote girls’ interest in STEM.”

Nearly half (43%) of all female respondents said that they would recommend a single-sex school to provide for a girl’s interest in STEM-related studies, compared with only 8% who would recommend a co-educational school as promoting STEM-related studies for girls. The remaining 49% said they would recommend either school type to promote STEM-related studies for a girl, depending on the child (Table 12, p. 34).

Among females who attended single-sex schools, 48% nominated single-sex schools as better than co-ed schools (5%) to promote a girls’ interest in STEM. Of those who had attended co-ed schools, 24% recommended a co-ed school to promote a girls’ interest in STEM and 18% recommended a single-sex school (Table 13, p. 34).

Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways: Final report FOR: Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia

Monash University, October 2017

Helen Forgasz and Gilah Leder Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Table of contents Page No. Table of contents 1 Tables and figures 3 Tables 3 Figures 4 Introduction 5 Caveats 5 Contents of this report 6 Contextualising the study 8 Single-sex schooling in Australia 8 Enrolments in STEM subjects in the final year of the Victorian Certificate of 9 Education (VCE), 2015 Biology 9 Chemistry 10 Physics 10 Further mathematics 11 Mathematical methods (CAS) 12 Specialist mathematics 12 IT applications 13 Software development 14 Summary of findings from VCE STEM enrolments 2015 15 Methods 16 The instrument 16 The sample 16 Data cleaning 16 Sample used in analyses 16 Results 17 Background information (all respondents) by age, type of school attended, 17 decade school completed (relates to Aims 1 & 4) Subjects studied at year 12 (all respondents) 18 Background information for all females in the sample (by attendance at single- 19 sex (SS) or co-educational school (co-ed) (relates to Aims 1 & 2) STEM subjects studied in final year of schooling: All females (relates to Aim 1) 21 STEM subjects studied in final year of schooling: All females by school type 22 attended (relates to Aims 1 & 2) Occupations fields: all females by school-type attended (relates to Aims 1 & 2) 24 Factors influencing choice of initial career (NB. both SS and co-ed 25 data) Single-sex only – more details 25 More information about the female respondents who attended SS schools 26 (relates to Aims 1, 2, & 3) STEM subjects studied at year 12 (SS only) 26 Educational and occupational data (SS females only) 27 Factors influencing initial career paths, by age (SS females only) 28 Factors supporting or hindering career paths and goals (SS females only; 28 qualitative data) (related to Aim 3) Factors influencing change of career (relates to Aims 2 & 4) 30 Participants (males and females) who had attended co-ed schools 30

Page 1 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Career change among female participants who had attended SS schools 31 (relates to Aims 2 & 3) School choice to promote STEM interest for boys and girls (relates to Aims 4 33 & 5) Females’ (all) recommendations 34 Additional analyses for females who had attended SS schools 36 Final summary 38 Implications of the findings 42 References 43 Appendices 44 Appendix A Examples of Facebook advertisements used to recruit participants 44 Appendix B Online survey - copy 45 Appendix C Publications and presentations based on data gathered in the study 46

Page 2 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Tables and Figures

TABLES Page No. Table 1 Background information: Full sample by gender 17 Table 2 The STEM subjects studied in the final year of schooling, by gender, for 18 the full sample Table 3 Background information for the female sample by school type attended 20 Table 4 STEM subjects studied in final year of schooling: All females, by age, and 21 decade of school completion Table 5 Subjects completed in the final year of schooling: All females by school 23 type attended (single-sex (SS) or co-educational (co-ed)) Table 6 Current occupational field: All females by school type attended (SS or co- 24 ed) Table 7 Factors influencing the choice of initial career: All females by school type 25 attended Table 8 Mathematics subjects and Biology studied in the final year of schooling by 26 respondents’ age and decade of school completion (SS school females only) Table 9 Physics, IT/Computing, Chemistry, and no listed STEM subjects studied in 27 the final year of schooling, by respondents’ age and decade of school completion (SS school females only) Table 10 Single-sex school females who completed post-school studies after the 27 final year of schooling, and are in current employment by age and decade of school completion Table 11 Percentage of female participants who attended single-sex schools who 32 changed careers, by age Table 12 School setting thought to promote STEM related studies for boys and for 34 girls (all females) Table 13 Recommendations of school setting by respondents’ own schooling 34 Table 14 Recommendations of school type for promoting a girl’s interest in STEM- 37 related studies, by respondent age (all females) Table 15 Recommendations of school type for promoting a boy’s interest in STEM- 37 related studies, by respondent age (all females)

Page 3 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

FIGURES Page No. Figure 1 Percentages of single-sex (boys/girls) and co-educational schools in 8 Australia in 2016, by state/territory Figure 2 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 9 co-educational schools enrolled in biology, 2001-2015. Figure 3 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 10 co-educational schools enrolled in chemistry, 2001-2015. Figure 4 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 11 co-educational schools enrolled in physics, 2001-2015. Figure 5 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 11 co-educational schools enrolled in further mathematics, 2001-2015. Figure 6 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 12 co-educational schools enrolled in mathematical methods (CAS), 2001- 2015. Figure 7 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 13 co-educational schools enrolled in specialist mathematics, 2001-2015. Figure 8 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 13 co-educational schools enrolled in IT applications, 2001-2015. Figure 9 Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and 14 co-educational schools enrolled in software development, 2001-2015. Figure 10 Subjects studied in the final year schooling for the full sample by gender 18 Figure 11 VCE enrolments in STEM subjects in 2015 by gender 19 Figure 12 Percentages of all females studying Advanced mathematics, Intermediate 21 mathematics, and Elementary mathematics in their final year of school by decade of school completion Figure 13 Percentages of all females studying Physics, Chemistry, IT/Computing, and 22 Biology in their final year of school by decade of school completion Figure 14 Factors supporting career paths and goals for females from single-sex 28 schools Figure 15 Factors hindering career paths and goals for females from single-sex 29 schools

Page 4 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Introduction In Australia, the debate on the relative merits of single-sex and co-educational schooling for girls and for boys persists. Passionate protagonists are found on both sides. Whether the context is academic achievement, leadership opportunities, or confidence development, one of the most pervasive views put forward is that single-sex schooling is better for girls, while co-education is better for boys, particularly with respect to pursuing STEM-related studies. In this report, we present findings of a recent investigation for which the initial aims were:

1. to compare STEM participation rates at school level and beyond for females who attended single-sex and co-educational schools, in different time periods (e.g., by decade), by school type attended (government and non-government), and by country (Australia and New Zealand); 2. to identify and compare the life/career trajectories of these females; 3. to identify systemic and/or personal factors facilitating or inhibiting STEM participation of these females; and 4. to compare the above with responses from a male sample

We added a fifth aim:

5. to explore perceptions of single-sex or co-educational schooling to promote STEM for girls and boys.

Data for the study were gathered using an online survey. To recruit participants, Facebook advertising was used and invitations to participate were distributed to alumnae of member schools of the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia.

Caveats 1. Sample exclusions a. New Zealand participants

Early into the study, we found that response rates from New Zealand were very low. While many New Zealanders looked at the online survey, very few completed the survey. Since costs associated with Facebook advertising are based on the number of clicks on the advertisement, it was quickly realised that the limited budget precluded the continuation of targeting New Zealand participants. Thus, the focus turned to Australian participants only with subsequent changes to the layout and design of the Facebook advertisements1, and comparisons by country could not be undertaken.

b. Non-binary (gender)

As has now become routine, gender options included “non-binary”. The respondents who identified as “non-binary” were excluded from analyses as numbers were small (2).

2. Small male sample.

The response rate of male participants from Facebook advertising was low. Since boys’ schools are not members of the Alliance, recruitment was limited to Facebook advertising, thus further

1 Examples of the various Facebook advertisements used are included in Appendix A.

Page 5 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

restricting the final male sample. We spent additional monies (outside the budget of the study) to try to boost the male response rate; this required further changes to the layout and design of the Facebook advertisement. We were partially successful. Since, however, within our timeline we received fewer than 10 responses from males who had attended single-sex schools, the analyses we report are restricted to comparisons between the full samples of females and males.

3. Additional data.

In order to validate that our sample of respondents was from those focussing on STEM studies and careers, we requested data from the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) to disaggregate Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) Year 12 enrolment data in STEM subject areas by school type attended (single-sex or co-education) as well as by gender. VCAA did not allow further disaggregation by school sector, as there is only one single-sex boys’ school in the government sector in Victoria and the data would not be anonymous. The VCAA data, however, have proven invaluable in establishing the validity of the sample.

4. Small sample of female respondents from single-sex government schools

The number of female respondents attending single-sex government schools was small compared to the number from non-government (Independent and Catholic) schools. A consequence of this limitation is that we do not report findings by school sector for the female respondents attending single-sex schools.

5. Qualitative data limitations.

Due to budget limitations, we were unable always to analyse the full set of qualitative responses from female participants from single-sex schools. Since the number of female respondents from co-educational schools was 164, it was decided to consider the responses of a random sample of 164 females from single-sex schools. A random number generator was used to generate the 164 ID numbers from the full sample of 964 single-sex females. In some parts of this report, we do report on the qualitative responses from all single-sex females; for other analyses only the responses from the randomly selected 164 single-sex female responses are reported.

6. Variations in sample totals

Since not all respondents answered all questions, small variations in sample totals will be found throughout the report.

Contents of this report In light of the caveats discussed above, in this report we provide findings based on the aims of the study as follows:

 Contextualising the study o Data on single-sex schooling in Australia in 2015 o Victorian VCE enrolments in STEM subjects (2001 to 2015)  Methods adopted to gather data in the online survey  Details about the full sample who completed our survey o Background information (age, type of school attended, decade school completed) o STEM subjects studied at year 12 (by females, males, and 2015 VCE cohort)  Information about all the females in our sample

Page 6 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

o Attendance at single-sex (SS) or co-educational (co-ed) school (age, decade school completed, progression to higher education, qualifications completed) o STEM subjects studied at year 12 (by age, decade school completed)  Information about the respondents who attended a SS school o STEM subjects studied at year 12 (by age, decade school completed) o Progression to higher education, whether or not in employment at the time of survey completion o Factors influencing initial career path by decade of school completion o Barriers and supports for career pathways and goals  School choice for promotion of STEM (Female sample: SS and co-ed) o Quantitative data and qualitative explanations  Qualitative data o Snapshots derived from the female sample: reduced random SS sample (N=164) and co-ed full sample (N=164) o Factors influencing change of career o Career barriers and support

Additional information is included in the appendices including:

 Samples of the Facebook advertisements to recruit participants (Appendix A)  A copy of the online survey used in the study (Appendix B)  Material related to the various articles and conference papers we have prepared in which we have drawn on data from the study (Appendix C)

Page 7 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Contextualising the study Single-sex schooling in Australia As noted in the Good Schools Guide (2016), single-sex schooling in Australia is predominantly found in the fee-paying sectors of education; within the government sector, single-sex schools generally have selective entry based on academic achievement. While there are some academic scholarships offered in fee-paying schools, those attending them are generally from higher socio-economic backgrounds than students attending government schools (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2006. Research has shown that school and family backgrounds, including socio-economic status, are major contributing factors to student achievement (e.g. Cobbold, 2015; Hattie, 2009).

In Australia, there are more single-sex schools for girls than for boys. The pattern is more marked in some states than in others (see Figure 1), and in the ACT the opposite is found. One consequence of having more single-sex schools for girls than for boys is that girls are outnumbered by boys in co- educational schools.

Fig. 1. Percentages of single-sex (boys/girls) and co-educational schools in Australia in 2016, by state/territory. [Data derived from The Good Schools Guide (https://www.goodschools.com.au/)]

Currently there are 190 girls’ schools in Australia including 34 government girls’ schools. Of the remaining 156, approximately half are independent and half are Catholic. Most are located in NSW (40%) and Vic (27%), followed by Qld (16%), SA (7%), WA (5%), Tas (2.6%), and the ACT (1.6%). There are no single-sex schools for girls (or boys) in the Northern Territory (Derived from Alliance of Girls' Schools Australasia database of girls’ schools, 2017). The 2016 data on girls’ schools were similar.

As in many other countries (e.g., OECD, 20172), there are on-going concerns in Australia about

2 “The career paths of boys and girls already start to diverge by the age of 15. OECD-wide, 15-year- are, on average, more than twice as likely as girls to expect to work as engineers, scientists or architects. And while less than 0.5% of girls wish to be ICT professionals, almost 5% of boys do” (OECD, 2017, p.105).

Page 8 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways declining enrolments in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines at the tertiary and school levels (e.g., Roberts, 2014), and the under-representation of females in many of these fields and in many STEM-related occupations (e.g., Finkel, 2016; Professionals Australia, n. d.). Claims are frequently made that girls attending single-sex schools are more likely than girls in co- educational schools to study science and mathematics subjects.

Enrolments in STEM subjects in the final year of the Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE), 2015 In response to a request to the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA), VCE enrolment data for the years 2001-2015 for all STEM subjects (biology, chemistry, physics, further mathematics, mathematical methods (CAS), specialist mathematics, IT applications, and software development) were provided by gender within school type (single-sex and co-educational); permission was denied for a further break-down of the data by school sector (government, Catholic, and independent). Also provided were data on the numbers of students within each school type by gender who were eligible to complete VCE in each year.

In consultation with VCAA, it was determined that the most effective enrolment comparisons would result from comparing the percentages of students eligible to complete VCE who were enrolled in each subject. For each year, 2001 to 2015, the percentages of students eligible to complete VCE enrolled in each subject were calculated for boys and for girls in single-sex and in co-educational schools. These percentages are shown in Figures 2-8 below for each STEM subject.

The enrolment pattern findings for each subject are reported in turn. Biology

Fig. 2. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in biology, 2001-2015.

Page 9 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

The data in Figure 2 reveal that:

 A similar proportion of girls in single-sex and in co-educational schools study biology  A higher proportion of boys in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study biology  Over time, the proportions of boys in both schools types who study biology have increased steadily; for girls in both school types there was a decline until 2009 and then the numbers have been increasing again.

Chemistry

Fig. 3. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in chemistry, 2001-2015.

The data in Figure 3 reveal that:

 A higher proportion of girls in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study chemistry; the same pattern is evident among the boys.  Over time, the proportions of girls in single-sex and in co-educational schools studying chemistry has remained steady; for boys in both school types the proportions studying chemistry have steadily increased.

Physics The data in Figure 4 reveal that:

 Much higher proportions of boys than girls in both school types study physics  Over time, the proportions of boys in co-educational schools studying physics has remained steady, while the proportions of boys in single-sex schools studying physics has steadily decreased.

Page 10 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

 While slightly higher proportions of girls in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study physics, there has been a decrease in proportions of girls in both school types, with the decrease greater in single-sex schools.

Fig. 4. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in physics, 2001-2015. Further mathematics

Fig. 5. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in further mathematics, 2001-2015.

Page 11 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

The data in Figure 5 reveal:

 Similar patterns of enrolments in further mathematics for boys and for girls in both school types  Over time, the proportions of boys and girls in both school types enrolled in further mathematics have increased at very similar rates

Mathematical methods (CAS)

Fig. 6. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in mathematical methods (CAS), 2001-2015.

The data in Figure 6 reveal that:

 A higher proportion of girls in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study mathematical methods; the same pattern is evident among the boys.  Over time there has been a steady decrease in the proportions of boys and of girls in both school types studying mathematical methods (CAS); interestingly the decreases have been greater for girls in both schools types (s-s: 8.8%; co-ed: 6.2%) than for boys (s-s: 7.1%; co-ed: 3.9%), and greater in single-sex schools for both girls and boys than for boys and girls in co- educational schools.

Specialist mathematics The data in Figure 7 reveal that:

 A higher proportion of girls in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study specialist mathematics; the same pattern is evident among the boys.  The difference in proportions of boys and girls in single-sex schools studying specialist mathematics is smaller than the difference in co-educational schools.  Over time, there was a steady decrease in the proportions of boys and girls in both school types studying specialist mathematics until 2012, after which increases for girls in both

Page 12 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

school types and inconsistencies among boys in both school types are evident. The overall decrease between 2001 and 2015 was greater for girls in both school types (approx. 36%) compared to boys in both school types (approx. 27%)

Fig. 7. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in specialist mathematics, 2001-2015. IT applications

Fig. 8. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in IT applications, 2001-2015.

Page 13 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

The data in Figure 8 reveal that:

 Higher percentages of boys than girls in both school types study IT applications  The proportion of girls in both single-sex and co-educational schools studying IT applications has been very similar over time.  Over time, higher proportions of boys in co-educational than in single-sex schools have enrolled in IT applications  Over time, there have been very large and steady decreases in the enrolments in IT applications for all students in both school types.

Software development

Fig. 9. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in software development, 2001-2015.

The data in Figure 9 reveal that:

 Substantially higher proportions of boys than girls in both school types have enrolled software development  In both school types, the proportions of girls in both school types enrolled in software development are strikingly similar; the same pattern is observed for boys.  Over time, there have been very large and steady decreases in the software development enrolments of boys from both school types; from a very low starting point, the same pattern is evident for girls.

Page 14 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Summary of findings from VCE STEM enrolments 2015  Higher proportions of boys in single-sex and in co-educational schools than girls in single-sex and in co-educational schools are enrolled in physics, specialist mathematics, IT applications, and software development. o While, for physics and specialist mathematics, there is a higher proportion of girls from single-sex than co-educational schools enrolled, the same is true among boys in the two school types.  Higher proportions of girls and boys in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools are enrolled in biology, chemistry, and mathematical methods CAS.  The proportions of students enrolled in further mathematics is virtually identical among boys and girls in single-sex and co-educational schools.

While it would appear that girls in single-sex schools are enrolled in many of the STEM VCE subjects in higher proportions than girls from co-educational schools, the same pattern is generally evident for boys. It would appear to be too simplistic to conclude that it is the gendered setting of the school alone that contributes to this.

Socioeconomic-status plays an important role in academic outcomes, as well as in decisions about subject choice. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006), fee-paying non-government schools are, on average, at higher SES levels than government schools. There is much research evidence that school and family backgrounds are major contributing factors to student achievement (e.g., Hattie, 2009). Cobbold (2015) maintained that in Australia, and many other countries, “school SES has a much larger impact on student achievement than individual family SES” (pp. 4-5). According to Australian Catholic University (2011), the average Index of Community Socio- Educational Advantage [ICSEA] score for government schools in Australia was 988.16, lower than for non-government schools which was 1027.93. In combination, prior achievement, expectations of those in the social milieu, school factors including teachers, and confidence levels all contribute to subject choice decisions (e.g., Eccles, 1994, Hattie, 2009).

To tease out the complex interplay of factors impacting on the differences in STEM subject enrolments for girls attending single-sex and co-educational schools, as well as the larger differences between boys’ and girls’ STEM enrolments, we conducted an online survey of graduates of single- sex and co-educational schools. The survey results (discussed in detail later in this report) revealed that a higher proportion of females from single-sex than co-educational schools had completed studies in STEM-related health fields, while a higher proportion of females from co-educational schools than single-sex schools had completed engineering studies. This may be related to the finding that parents of females who had attended single-sex schools appeared more influential in their daughters’ career choices than parents of females who had attended co-educational schools.

From the survey data, it was also found that the traditional gender stereotyped role expectation that females serve as the main carer for children was evident not only among older participants, but also, disappointingly, among younger participants. This gendered expectation, as well as harassment and bullying in male-dominated fields (e.g., engineering), were provided by many survey respondents as explanations for career changes away from STEM.

A noteworthy finding was that the female respondents were far more likely to say that they would recommend a single-sex school to promote a girl’s interest in STEM than for a boy. This finding is consistent with the widespread belief that single-sex schools are more likely than co-educational schools to promote girls’ interests in STEM.

Page 15 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Methods The instrument An online survey questionnaire was developed. Closed (scorable) items were included with participants often asked to explain the responses given. Other items were open-ended, allowing participants to provide extended responses to the questions.

Biographical (e.g., gender, age, decade of school completion etc.) and demographic data (school type attended, location of school etc.) were sought in the first section. Items were also included to explore which STEM (or other) subjects were completed in the final year of schooling and reasons for doing so, STEM career trajectories and factors supporting or inhibiting participation in STEM occupations.

It should be noted that the school-level STEM subjects included: physics, chemistry, biology, IT, and three levels of mathematics subjects – subjects common to state-level offerings in Australia over time. The STEM occupations were those identified by the Chief Scientist of Australia (Finkel, 2016).

Participants were also asked to recommend which school type (co-education or single-sex) they would recommend for boys and for girls interested in STEM; they were invited to explain their recommendations.

A copy of the online survey instrument is found in Appendix B.

The sample As only one online survey was used in the study, we were unable to distinguish between responses received by way of Facebook advertising and those resulting from the requests sent to alumnae of Alliance schools. As noted earlier, not all respondents provided answers to each question. Thus, there are small variations in total sample sizes for each question discussed in the report. Data cleaning When the survey was closed, the full set of responses was downloaded. Data cleaning procedures were then undertaken. Not all surveys were fully completed. However, it was pleasing to find that around 80% of those who started the survey answered the bulk of the items.

It was decided to eliminate all survey responses from New Zealanders and non-binary respondents (see caveats above), as well as all surveys in which respondents had only provided biographical/demographic data, that is, no items central to the study had been answered.

The full Australian sample comprised 1218 respondents, of whom 83 (6.8%) were male and 1135 (93.2%) were female. Eight of these respondents were excluded from analyses by school type as they selected “other” as the school type (5 females, 1 male) or did not respond to the item (2 females) about the school type attended in the final year of schooling. Sample used in analyses The final female sample of 1128 involved in subsequent analyses by school type attended (single-sex or co-educational) comprised 964 (85.5%) who had completed their final year of schooling at single- sex schools (the SS sample) and 164 (14.5%) at co-educational schools (the Co-ed sample). Of the 82 males, 24 had completed schooling in single-sex schools (too few for any robust analyses) and 58 in co-educational schools (sufficient for comparisons with females from co-educational schools).

Page 16 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Results Background information (all respondents) by age, type of school attended, decade school completed (relates to Aims 1 & 4) Selected background information for the full sample, and by gender, is summarised in Table 13.

Table 1.

Background information: Full sample by gender

Males Females All N % N % N % Age 18-20 13 15.7 94 8.3 107 8.8 21-30 18 21.7 264 23.3 282 23.2 31-40 9 10.8 233 20.5 242 19.9 41-50 12 14.5 226 19.9 238 19.5 51-60 12 14.5 170 15.0 182 14.9 61-70 16 19.3 99 8.7 115 9.4 Over 70 3 3.6 49 4.3 52 4.3 School attended Government 40 48.2 124 10.9 164 13.5 Catholic 12 14.5 90 7.9 102 8.4 Independent 30 36.1 893 78.7 923 75.8 Other 1 1.2 28 2.5 29 2.4

Metropolitan 64 77.1 1060 93.4 1124 92.3 Non-metropolitan 18 21.7 62 5.5 80 6.6

Co-educational 58 69.9 165 14.5 223 18.3 Single-sex boys 24 28.9 24 2.0 Single-sex girls 964 84.9 965 79.2 Other 1 1.2 5 .4 6 .4 Decade school completed 1940-19494 1 .1 1 .1 1950-1959 1 1.2 26 2.3 27 2.2 1960-1969 8 9.6 60 5.3 68 5.6 1970-1979 10 12.0 138 12.2 148 12.2 1980-1989 14 16.9 188 16.6 202 16.6 1990-1999 6 7.2 216 19.0 222 18.2 2000-2009 12 14.5 228 20.1 240 19.7 2010-2016 20 24.1 194 17.1 214 17.6

3 It should be noted that not all respondents provided all background information requested on the survey.

4 As there was only one respondent who completed schooling in the 1940s, she has been excluded from many subsequent analyses by decade of school completion.

Page 17 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

The data in Table 1 reveal the following:

 There was a wide age range of respondents – both male and female. This was consistent with the range of variation in the decade in which school was completed;  Among female respondents, a much higher percentage completed their final year of schooling at independent schools (78.7%) than the proportion of female students currently enrolled in independent schools in Australia; ABS data indicate that 14.4% of all Australian students attended independent schools in 2015 (see http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4221.0). A similar, although less extreme, pattern was also noted for males. The extent of the skewing of the female sample is best explained by the likely successful sampling of alumnae from single-sex girls’ schools, predominantly found in the independent sector.  The vast majority of respondents had attended schools in the metropolitan capitals.

Subjects studied at year 12 (all respondents) The STEM subjects studied at year 12 for the full sample, and by gender, are shown in Table 2

Table 2.

The STEM subjects studied in the final year of schooling, by gender, for the full sample

Males Females Total N % N % N % Physics 43 51.8 370 32.6 413 33.9 Chemistry 48 57.8 529 46.6 577 47.4 Biology 16 19.3 514 45.3 530 43.5 Advanced level Mathematics 39 47.0 378 33.3 417 34.2 Intermediate level Mathematics 42 50.6 475 41.9 517 42.4 Elementary level Mathematics 9 10.8 126 11.1 135 11.1 IT/Computing 10 12.0 63 5.6 73 6.0 None of the above (i.e., non-STEM) 4 4.8 89 7.8 93 7.6

Figures 10 and 11 contain, respectively, the STEM subjects studied by the full sample in the final year of schooling and the VCE enrolments in comparable STEM subjects in 2015, by gender.

Figure 10. Subjects studied in the final year schooling for the full sample by gender

Page 18 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Figure 11: VCE enrolments in STEM subjects in 2015 by gender

The data illustrated in Figures 10 and 11 reveal that the percentages of males and females enrolled in the various STEM subjects are different for the full sample and for VCE in 2015. Nonetheless, some similarities in the graphs are evident. It can be seen that:

 The percentages of females in the study who studied each of the STEM subjects was higher than the percentages of the female 2015 VCE cohort who did so.  The direction of the gender differences in enrolments for the study sample are very similar to those in the 2015 VCE cohort.  In the study sample, higher proportions of males than females reported studying physics, chemistry, advanced level mathematics, intermediate level mathematics, elementary level mathematics and IT in their final year of schooling. Similarly, in VCE in 2015, higher proportions of males than females studied physics, chemistry, specialist mathematics, mathematical methods, further mathematics, and the two IT subjects.  Among the study sample and in the 2015 VCE, the gender difference was in the opposite direction for biology in that there were higher proportions of females than males who studied biology.

The data in Figures 10 and 11 together indicate that the recruitment strategies adopted for the study resulted in a respondent sample skewed towards STEM interest and/or STEM career involvement. Although the male study sample was small, it was particularly noteworthy that the same pattern of gender differences was evident in the enrolments reported by those participating in this study as was found for the 2015 VCE cohort.

Background information for all females in the sample (by attendance at SS or Co-ed school) (relates to Aims 1 & 2) Background Information for the full female sample (by school type attended) is recorded in Table 3: age, decade school completed, progression to higher education, qualifications completed (more than one could be specified). It can be seen in Table 3 that:

1. There were no major differences in the age profile of the two groups (SS or Co-ed) 2. There was little difference between the profiles of the two groups with respect to the decade of school completion

Page 19 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

3. With respect to higher education and post-school qualifications, there was again no appreciable difference between the two groups.

Table 3.

Background information for the female sample by school-type attended Co-ed Single-Sex Total N % N % N % Age 18-20 14 8.5 79 8.2 93 8.2 21-30 28 17.1 236 24.5 264 23.4 31-40 39 23.8 192 19.9 231 20.5 41-50 39 23.8 186 19.3 225 19.9 51-60 20 12.2 148 15.4 168 14.9 61-70 19 11.6 79 8.2 98 8.7 Over 70 5 3.0 44 4.6 49 4.3 Total 164 100.0 964 100.0 1128 100.0 Decade school completed 1940-1949 0 0.0 1 0.1 1 0.1 1950-1959 3 2.0 23 2.6 26 2.5 1960-1969 10 6.7 49 5.5 59 5.6 1970-1979 20 13.4 117 13.0 137 13.1 1980-1989 27 18.1 160 17.8 187 17.9 1900-1999 32 21.5 183 20.4 215 20.6 2000-2009 34 22.8 193 21.5 227 21.7 2010-2016 23 15.4 171 19.1 194 18.5 Total 149 100.0 897 100.0 1046 100.0 Post school studies Yes 149 92.0 874 91.3 1023 91.4 Post-school qualifications5 Certificate 36 22.0 204 21.2 240 21.3 Diploma 26 15.9 152 15.8 178 15.9 Advanced Diploma 6 3.7 60 6.2 66 5.9 Bachelors Degree 126 76.8 720 74.7 846 75.0 Graduate Diploma 34 20.7 172 17.8 206 18.3 Graduate Certificate 9 5.5 70 7.3 79 7.0 Masters degree 29 17.7 166 17.2 195 17.3 Doctoral degree 12 7.3 62 6.4 74 6.6

In summary, the samples of female participants who completed their final year of schooling in single-sex and co-educational schools are very similar. Both groups were well qualified with about 75% of each group having completed at least a bachelors degree, 17% a Masters degree, and around 7% a doctoral degree. National data for 2011 indicate that 41.7% of women had a bachelors degree and 10.5% had postgraduate (Masters/PhD) (ABS, 2012). Clearly, given that our female sample’s

5 Using an open-ended comment box, we attempted to obtain clarification on the disciplinary areas in which people reported having certificates, diplomas, bachelor degrees etc. Unfortunately, responses were so varied, this proved to be an unmanageable task to handle.

Page 20 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways educational qualifications were achieved over a wide time period, they were highly qualified compared to the general Australian female population. STEM subjects studied in final year of schooling: All females (relates to Aim 1) For all females, the STEM subjects studied in their final year at school, by respondents’ age group and by decade of school completion, are shown in Table 4.

Table 4.

STEM subjects studied in final year of schooling: All females, by age and decade of school completion

Advanced Intermediate Elementary IT/ Physics Chemistry Biology maths maths maths Computing N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Age 18-20 30 32.3 44 47.3 10 10.8 24 25.8 8 8.6 46 49.5 34 36.6 21-30 87 33 131 49.6 35 13.3 73 27.7 15 5.7 140 53 97 36.7 31-40 91 39.4 117 50.6 23 10 97 42 19 8.2 126 54.5 110 47.6 41-50 81 36 93 41.3 27 12 78 34.7 19 8.4 104 46.2 107 47.6 51-60 49 29.2 50 29.8 21 12.5 58 34.5 2 1.2 67 39.9 106 63.1 61-70 25 25.5 27 27.6 5 5.1 27 27.6 0 31 31.6 36 36.7 Over 70 14 28.6 10 20.4 5 10.2 13 26.5 0 13 26.5 22 44.9 Decade school completed 1940-1949 0 0 1 100 0 0 1 100 0 0 1 100 0 0 1950-1959 7 26.9 7 26.9 1 3.8 6 23.1 0 0 5 19.2 12 46.2 1960-1969 19 32.2 8 13.6 8 13.6 19 32.2 0 0 22 37.3 21 35.6 1970-1979 35 25.5 45 32.8 15 10.9 47 34.3 1 0.7 56 40.9 85 62 1980-1989 65 34.8 67 35.8 19 10.2 70 37.4 7 3.7 84 44.9 99 52.9 1990-1999 89 41.4 106 49.3 23 10.7 92 42.8 27 12.6 112 52.1 96 44.2 2000-2009 71 31.3 112 49.3 33 14.5 65 28.6 14 6.2 116 51.1 91 40.1 2010-2016 69 33.9 97 50 18 9.3 52 26.8 10 5.2 103 53.1 73 37.6

The STEM subject data by decade of school completion are also illustrated in Figure 12 (Advanced mathematics, Intermediate mathematics, and Elementary mathematics) and Figure 13 (Physics, Chemistry, IT/Computing, and Biology).

Figure 12. Percentages of all females studying Advanced mathematics, Intermediate mathematics, and Elementary mathematics in their final year of school by decade of school completion.

Page 21 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Figure 13. Percentages of all females studying Physics, Chemistry, IT/Computing, and Biology in their final year of school by decade of school completion.

Interesting trends over time are also revealed in Figures 12 & 13.

a. Biology: decreased after 1970-1979 b. Physics, Advanced mathematics, and IT/Computing: trended up until 1990-1999 then declined after that time c. Chemistry and Intermediate mathematics: trended up until 1990-1999, then remained fairly steady.

In summary, the decade of 1990-1999 appears to have been the period in which the participants’ enrolments in STEM-related subjects were at a peak. The decade was one in which gender equity in educational outcomes was a priority. At the same time, following a national move in the late 1980s for Australia to have a common national curriculum rather than separate state curricula, major changes in the subject offerings and assessment regimes in the final years of schooling were in evidence. In Victoria, for example, the examination-based one-year Victorian Higher School Certificate was replaced with the two-year Victorian Certificate of Education, in which school-based assessments as well as traditional timed examinations contributed to final results. In 1990, the federal government developed the policy, A fair chance for all: Higher education that’s within everyone’s reach. Aims included an “increase in the proportion of women in non-traditional courses, other than engineering, from the current level to at least 40% by 1995 [and] an increase in the proportion of women in engineering courses from 7% to 15% by 1995” (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2004). Between 1988 and 1992, it was reported that “the proportions of women enrolled in non-traditional courses increased” (ABS, 2004) and that “although there has been some movement of women into non-traditional courses, male students have continued to make conventional choices” (ABS, 2004). The impact of these efforts may partially account for the increased enrolments in STEM-based subjects during the decade. STEM subjects studied in final year of schooling: All females by school type attended (relates to Aims 1 & 2) The STEM subjects studied by females in their final year of schooling are shown in Table 5 separately for those from co-ed and SS schools, as well as for the total sample of females.

Page 22 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Table 5.

Subjects completed in the final year of schooling: All females by school type attended (single-sex or co-educational)

Co-ed Single-Sex Total Subject N % N % N % Advanced maths 71 43.3 306 31.7 377 33.4 Intermediate mathematics 66 40.2 406 42.1 472 41.8 Elementary mathematics 21 12.8 105 10.9 126 11.2 Physics 69 36.6 310 32.2 370 32.8 IT/Computing 11 6.7 52 5.4 63 5.6 Chemistry 77 47.0 450 46.7 527 46.7 Biology 65 39.6 447 46.4 512 45.4 None of these 12 7.3 77 8.0 89 7.9

The data in Table 5 reveal some minor differences between the single-sex and co-educational groups of female participants in the STEM subjects studied in the final year of schooling:

 A higher proportion of the co-educational group than the single-sex group had studied advanced level mathematics.  Slightly higher proportions of the co-educational group than the single-sex group had studied physics, IT/Computing, and elementary level mathematics  A higher proportion of the single-sex group than the co-educational group had studied biology in their final year of schooling  A slightly higher proportion of the single-sex group had studied intermediate level mathematics

In summary, there were slight differences in the profiles of the two groups with respect to the STEM subjects studied in the final year of schooling. It cannot be simplistically assumed school-type alone fully explains the differences found. For example, different pre-requisites were needed for tertiary qualifications, particularly in earlier times. Thus the occupations fields represented by the samples of females may have been a contributing factor.

It is worth noting that the VCE data for enrolments in the Victorian subjects equivalent to those listed in Table 5 by school type (see earlier in the report) differed somewhat from those for the sample in this study. For example, in Specialist maths (VCE subject) in 2015, there were 8.9% of females from single-sex schools and 4.8% of girls from co-education schools enrolled in the subject. This difference in favour of females from single-sex schools contrasts with the higher proportion of co-educational female respondents (43.3%) compared to 31.7% from single-sex schools indicating that they had studied Advanced maths (Table 5). There may be multiple reasons for the variations between the VCE and study samples. These include:

 While VCE data may be broadly representative of Australia as a whole, it can be seen in Figure 1 that Victoria has the highest proportion of single-sex girls’ schools in the country  The sample was biased in favour of respondents focussing on STEM subjects and careers.  Among the single-sex sample in the study, there were some alumnae of single-sex schools who indicated an interest in the STEM area and had studied STEM-related subjects in their final school of schooling, but not necessarily with the intention of building on them into STEM-focussed careers. Here’s what one alumna added at the end of the survey

Page 23 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Not sure if I was meant to do this survey? I was asked as an alumna of my school but don’t have any experience in STEM-related careers. I was specifically put off them at school because of advice that there was a lack of jobs, especially for women. (21-30 year-old, studied Advanced maths, biology, economics, business management, and Advanced English in her final year of schooling. Described her career as “business, finance, management”. Occupations fields: all females by school-type attended (relates to Aims 1 & 2) From a list of STEM occupations (as defined by the Chief Scientist of Australia), participants were asked to identify which broad field best fitted with their current occupations. The results are shown in Table 6.

Table 6.

Current occupational field: All females by school-type attended (single-sex or co-ed)

Co-ed Single-Sex Total Occupational field N % N % N % Physical or biological sciences 2 1.6 17 2.4 19 2.3 Agricultural, environmental, or related (science) 3 2.4 27 3.8 30 3.6 studies Information Communication Technology/Computing 5 4.0 30 4.2 35 4.1 Engineering 18 14.3 28 3.9 46 5.5 Mathematics 3 2.4 5 0.7 8 0.9 Health or allied health sciences 24 19.0 203 28.3 227 26.9 Science/IT/Mathematics teaching at secondary or 7 5.6 18 2.5 25 3.0 post-secondary level Other - please explain* 64 50.8 390 54.3 454 54.0 * About half of all participants selected “other”, choosing to describe their occupations in their own words. The diversity and complexity of the responses provided again proved to be an unmanageable task to handle. As can be seen in Table 6, there were differences in the response patterns for the two groups. A chi- square test revealed that the distribution of the specified occupational fields differed by school background (2 = 35.0, df = 14, p=.001). In particular, a higher percentage of females who attended single-sex schools than co-educational schools reported working in the health or allied health sciences (28.3% compared to 19.0%). On the other hand, a higher proportion of females from co- educational schools than single-sex schools reported working in Engineering (14.3% compared to 3.9%) and Mathematics (2.4% compared to 0.7%). These differences may partially explain the higher proportions of females in our sample from co-educational schools than single-sex schools having studied Advanced mathematics and Physics (see Table 5) in the final year of schooling. These subjects were pre-requisites (or highly recommended) for entry into Engineering courses, particularly in earlier times. The much higher proportion of females from single-sex than co- educational schools in the health and allied health sciences (28.3% compared to 19.0%) may be related to the numbers studying biology and intermediate level mathematics in their final year of schooling; these subjects are closely aligned to the recommended backgrounds for tertiary studies in the health field.

Page 24 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Factors influencing choice of initial career (NB. both SS and Co-ed data) Our survey respondents were asked to indicate which one or more, from a provided list of factors, were influential in their initial career pathways. They were also asked to identify which one of these was the most influential. Female participants’ responses by school type attended are shown in Table 7.

Table 7.

Factors influencing the choice of initial career: All females by school type attended

Co-ed Single-Sex Total Reason N % N % N % Good at ≥1 STEM subjects 73 44.5 362 37.6 435 3 Teachers 45 27.4 281 29.1 326 28.9 Career advice 38 23.2 225 23.3 263 23.3 Parents 64 39.0 418 43.4 482 42.7 Other family 17 10.4 119 12.3 136 12.1 Friends 25 15.2 130 13.5 155 13.7 Good employment prospects 57 34.8 307 31.8 364 32.3 Wanted STEM occupation 29 17.7 176 18.3 205 18.2 Employer help 8 4.9 40 4.1 48 4.3 Other 45 27.4 224 23.2 269 23.8

From Table 7 it can be seen that the three most frequently mentioned factors were parents, good at one or more STEM subjects, and good employment prospects, irrespective of school type attended. Parents were mentioned more frequently by those from single-sex schools (43.4%) than by those from co-educational schools (39.0%). Being good at one or more STEM subjects was the most frequently identified factor by those from co-educational schools (44.5% compared with 37.6% by single-sex participants).

When asked to select the most influential factor, females who attended single-sex schools chose being good at one of more STEM subjects most often (19.1%), followed by parents (18.5%), and good employment prospects (13.0%). Those who had attended co-educational schools similarly selected being good at one of more STEM subjects most often (20.4%), followed by parents (13.4%), and good employment prospects (13.4%). Interestingly, the ordering of the three most influential factors was the same. However, parents seemed to have somewhat greater influence on those who had attended single-sex schools.

While mentioned by many respondents, school-based influences such as teachers and career advice did not feature in the top three factors identified as influential, nor in the most influential factors. Single-sex only – more details The increase in the participation in Physics, Advanced mathematics, and Intermediate mathematics until the decade 1990-1999 was highlighted earlier. When we examined the data more closely for the large sample of respondents from single-sex schools who completed schooling in the decades 1980-1989, 1990-1999, and 2000-2009, we noted some minor, but interesting, variations. For those from the 1980s and the 2000s, parents were selected as the most influential factor (17.1% and 19.3% respectively) for choice of the initial career path, while in the 1990s, ‘being good at the subject’ was identified as the most influential factor (24.9%). A possible explanation for this variation

Page 25 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways is likely to be the same as that discussed in relation to the bump in enrolments in the STEM-related subjects in the 1990s (see discussion of social context on p. 15 of this report).

More information about the female respondents who attended SS schools (relates to Aims 1, 2, & 3) As can be seen from Table 1, 964 female respondents had attended a single-sex school. The data below refer specifically to this group. STEM subjects studied at year 12 (SS only) The percentages of female participants attending single-sex schools who studied the various STEM- related subjects in their final year of school are found in Tables 8 & 9.

Table 8.

Mathematics subjects and Biology studied in the final year of schooling by respondents’ age and decade of school completion (SS school females only)

Advanced Intermediate Elementary Biology maths maths maths N % N % N % N % Age 18-20 23 29.1 36 45.6 9 11.4 25 31.6 21-30 74 31.4 114 48.3 30 12.7 88 37.3 31-40 71 37.1 103 53.6 20 10.4 91 47.4 41-50 60 32.3 82 44.1 20 10.8 92 49.5 51-60 45 30.5 44 29.7 17 11.5 98 66.2 61-70 21 26.6 20 25.3 5 6.3 31 39.2 Over 70 12 27.3 7 15.9 4 9.1 22 50.0 Decade school completed 1940-1949 0 0 1 100 0 - 0 - 1950-1959 6 26.1 4 17.4 1 4.3 12 52.2 1960-1969 15 30.6 5 10.2 7 14.3 20 40.8 1970-1979 32 27.4 39 33.3 14 12.0 77 65.8 1980-1989 52 32.5 57 35.6 14 8.8 88 55.0 1990-1999 70 38.3 96 52.5 19 10.4 84 45.9 2000-2009 56 29.0 98 50.8 27 14.0 73 37.8 2010-2016 58 33.9 82 48.0 16 9.4 63 36.8

As for the full sample of females (see Table 4, Figures 12 & 13), it can be seen in Tables 8 & 9 that the decade 1990-1999 saw peaked enrolments in Advanced mathematics and physics. Possible explanations for this were discussed earlier.

Page 26 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Table 9.

Physics, IT/Computing, Chemistry, and no listed STEM subjects studied in the final year of schooling, by respondents’ age and decade of school completion (SS school females only)

None of the listed Physics IT/Computing Chemistry STEM subjects N % N % N % N % Age 18-20 18 22.8 7 8.9 40 50.6 12 15.2 21-30 61 25.8 15 6.4 124 52.5 18 7.6 31-40 80 41.7 16 8.3 102 53.1 8 4.2 41-50 64 34.4 12 6.5 87 46.8 6 3.2 51-60 54 36.5 2 1.4 60 40.5 7 4.7 61-70 21 26.6 0 0 25 31.6 16 20.3 Over 70 12 27.3 0 0 12 27.3 10 22.7 Decade school completed 1940-1949 1 100 0 - 1 100 0 0 1950-1959 6 26.1 0 - 5 21.7 7 30.7 1960-1969 15 30.6 0 - 18 36.7 10 20.4 1970-1979 43 36.8 1 0.9 49 41.9 6 5.1 1980-1989 60 37.5 3 1.9 72 45.2 7 4.4 1990-1999 78 42.6 22 12.0 96 52.5 4 2.2 2000-2009 56 29.0 13 6.7 96 49.7 13 6.7 2010-2016 40 23.4 9 5.3 93 54.4 20 11.7

Educational and occupational data (SS females only) Shown in Table 3, 91.3% of all female respondents attending single-sex schools had continued on to post-school studies. These data are shown by respondent and decade of school completion in Table 10. Also included in Table 10 are the percentages of respondents in paid employment.

Table 10.

Single-sex school females who completed post-school studies after the final year of schooling, and are in current employment by age and decade of school completion

Post-school education In paid employment N % N % Age 18-20 47 60.3 45 59.2 21-30 215 92.3 199 86.1 31-40 188 97.9 178 93.2 41-50 177 95.7 164 90.1 51-60 140 94.6 115 79.3 61-70 71 91.0 38 48.1 Over 70 36 83.7 5 11.6 Total 874 91.3 744 78.6 Decade school completed 1940-1949 1 100 0 - 1950-1959 19 82.6 2 8.7 1960-1969 46 95.8 17 35.4

Page 27 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Post-school education In paid employment N % N % 1970-1979 110 94.0 88 76.5 1980-1989 154 96.9 141 89.2 1990-1999 177 96.7 163 90.6 2000-2009 182 94.8 176 92.1 2010-2016 130 77.4 116 70.3 Total 819 91.9 703 79.8

As expected, the data in Table 10 reveal that lower percentages of participants aged 18-20 and those over 60 years of age were currently employed. Factors influencing initial career paths, by age (SS females only) Earlier we discussed the influences on initial career paths for females who had attended single-sex schools – see Table 7 and related text. Factors supporting or hindering career paths and goals (SS females only; qualitative data) (related to Aim 3) Participants were asked to describe who or what had supported and/or hindered their career paths and goals. [This item was different from the question about initial career influences.] The open- ended responses were coded by theme for a random sample of 164 of the 964 female respondents from single-sex schools. The results are shown in Figures 14 & 15. [NB. Some respondents mentioned more than one factor, hence percentages do not add to 100%]

Figure 14. Factors supporting career paths and goals for females from single-sex schools

Supportive factors cited most frequently were parents, extended family, and teachers (see Figure 14). Again, the influence of parents can be seen to be very strong. School-based factors (teachers and the school itself) are mentioned frequently, but not as often as parents and extended family.

Some examples of what participants wrote about who or what supported their career paths and goals include:

My parents and the opportunities and support they have provided me with. (21-30 year old)

Supportive teachers at school who instilled in me the idea that anything was possible. (21-30 year old)

Page 28 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Family members and friends, getting into a university course that had the option of part-time so that I could start working sooner, HECS, industry colleagues. (31-40 year old)

Family has been the biggest support - always making me believe that I could pursue what I wanted to and never making me feel pressured into particular paths, even as I pursued multiple options and made changes through my career. Teachers and school were very supportive of pursuing science all the way as a school age student. A chemical engineering dean/professor who encouraged us from the start not to think of chemical engineering as "just a degree that lets you work in a petrochemical plant" but instead as a blueprint of how to deconstruct and solve complex problems in any field. Flexible and supportive workplace in Australia that let me take a year off to pursue a Masters of Law overseas; and then the mind-expanding experience of my overseas study which ultimately led me to relocate and pursue a whole different career that culminated and expanded on my previous study and experiences. Another big factor was staying open minded to changing path rather than getting "stuck" in one kind of job - and to having enough faith in my inherent employability that I could take risks and make changes, without being unduly influenced by a perception of needing "stability", which I think hampers many people in their goals. (31-40 year old)

Father who insisted that girls could and should do what they like. (51-60 year old)

My mother as a single mother raising three children following the death of her husband and having an education that was interrupted by the war and very little money was very committed to getting her two daughters educated in case they met the same fate. From 24 my husband as an older and reasonably senior and highly committed public servant provided a mentor type role for most of the rest of my career. (61-70 year old)

Figure 15. Factors hindering career paths and goals for females from single-sex schools

Obstacles mentioned most frequently were children and parenting responsibilities, self belief, and gender stereotyping (see Figure 15). While mention of these barriers was not surprising from older participants, disappointingly, they were also cited by younger women. That some respondents indicated that they had not experienced any particular hindrances is noteworthy, as were the dual impacts of parents and of self belief (supportive according to some but cited as a hindrance by others).

Representative examples of what participants wrote about who or what hindered their career paths and goals include:

Society stereotypes and some teachers who weren’t supportive (18-20 year old)

Career advice was very narrow minded at times, which meant it was hard to come up with back ups if you didn’t get into your first choices in what you wanted to do, career counsellor had less information than what was online. (21-30 year old)

Page 29 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

At school: expectations that as successful student I should apply for law or medicine, and lack of extracurricular activities for maths and the physical sciences compared to sporting pursuits and the arts. In general: stress due to family circumstances, perfectionism, physical injury. (21-30 year old)

Nothing really - even having children of my own has not been a significant impediment as I have been fortunate to have flexible employers that are willing to let me work part time doing the same kind of work. Given my choice not to work full time while I have a very young family, that is a barrier to taking further steps towards management positions. But this barrier is a self-imposed choice due to my desire to give my children the same kind of supportive and stimulating environment that I had growing up. (31- 40 year old)

I came across very few barriers prior to taking maternity leave and then everything changed. (31-40 year old)

Being female had some barriers - I had to prove myself to be accepted. (41-50 year old)

The lack of mentoring at my school, coupled with a number of horribly indifferent (aka bitchy) private girls served as a barrier as it completely shattered my sense of self worth. (41-50 year old)

My choice of medical specialty was influenced by gender bias including little availability of family friendly training options. (51-60 year old)

I created my own barriers through a lack of self-confidence due to this I have not sought promotion or applied for promotion. In fact I applied for promotion on my own volition for the first time a few weeks ago. I have usually waited to be invited to apply. Don’t ask me where this lack of self confidence came from but it has been a real barrier. Despite this I have been very lucky and have had a very interesting career including working for working for the XXX (international organisation) on river basins under the YYY Program in the 1990s. Added to this I have probably followed my husband too early. I followed him to Melbourne in the early 80s with one subject to go on my masters at (state-based) University. This was a result of not be able to negotiate our future effectively. (61-70 year old)

Factors influencing change of career (relates to Aims 2 & 4) Participants (males and females) who had attended Co-ed schools Participants were asked if they had changed careers and, if so, what the main factors influencing their decisions were. Given that the sample of males from single-sex schools was too small for any analyses, we turned to the samples of males and females who attended co-educational schools to explore possible gender differences in factors influencing career changes.

The sample of participants who had attended co-educational schools comprised 164 females and 58 males. Just under half of the 222 respondents (93 = 42%) indicated that they had changed careers: 75 (46%) of the females6, and 18 (31%) of the males. The higher proportion of younger males than younger females in the co-educational sample may be one explanation for proportionally fewer males than females having changed careers.

The co-educational females gave multiple reasons for the career changes made. These included natural progression, wanted a change, retirement, redundancy, change of location, but most frequently children/raising a family and personal circumstances by 17 (23%) of the female participants.

Typical examples from 41-50 year old females include:

6 By way of comparison, 57 of the 164 females (35%) in the random sample from single-sex schools indicated they had changed career.

Page 30 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

It is still a struggle to be a parent and a leader in major corporations, unless like me you have a home dad for your kids. It is a struggle. (F, 41-50)

The decision was work/home balance. Left Management to enter retail sector. Ability to care for children and work whilst one parent was home. Not a choice but a necessity. Office Management hours were not available to fit with raising children. (F, 41-50)

Opportunity. Never stopped looking for work. Probably never will now. Had an on-going job; fell pregnant; required to return to work full-time when childcare was not available for sick children; been job-hopping ever since (16 years ago). Did a PhD under time, under budget when the kids were small because I could not find a job and needed something to do and an income. The MOST critical factor limiting work options was lack of networks and peer identity as a professional with professional interests/skills. I think this compromises your confidence and creates a negative cycle that is very hard to get out of (because there is no help and considerable social pressure to be ‘grateful’ because you are a female and somehow meant to desire unpaid primary care while also not meant to need financial independence as much as a male (despite living longer). I have a lot of issues with the endless pressure to be grateful for being desperate to work, never able to use your skills, finding no support, while at the same time biologically/socially/financially charged with mentoring your daughters to believe they have equal opportunity! It is not very encouraging!! (F, 41-50)

Another common reason provided by females was personal circumstances, often – but not always - overlapping with children/family responsibilities. This reason was provided by 14 (19%) of the females. Examples include:

Changed personal circumstances. After maternity leave for my first child I returned to my management consulting job. When I planned to have a second child, it was too much to juggle so I resigned and took a break from paid employment while my second child was a baby. I took this child to ZZZ (a child care centre) which I then found out was for sale and I liked it so much I bought the business. After 11 years, I sold the business, as it became too much physical work and too time intensive to manage the business, run sessions and manage casual staff. (41-50 year old)

Wanted… an occupation with lower personal pressure and responsibility, and that supported a better work-life balance. (31-40 year old)

Change of personal circumstances made necessary to leave science degree just short of graduating. On returning to study, continued pursuit of multiple years required to specialise in an area of science was not possible. Completed education degree and began working. (41-50 year old)

Didn’t enjoy my first career path (or the second...). Wanted to work in the Mining Industry. Changed personal circumstances meant coming back to Australia to study became attractive, so went back to university in AAA (state) to study engineering. (21-30 year old)

The male participants typically volunteered natural progression/ better opportunities, or not liking their previous job as the reason for their career change. None mentioned children or family responsibilities as the reason. Career change among female participants who had attended SS schools (relates to Aims 2 & 3) We briefly examined the responses of the whole sample of female participants who had attended single-sex schools: 846 reached this question in the survey. Answers were provided by 315 of the 846, that is 37% of the group7. We assumed that if the question was left blank that there had not been a career change.

7 Note that 35% in the random sample from single-sex schools indicated they had changed career.

Page 31 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

As noted above, factors associated with age may be related to career change. We analysed the data by age group and the results are shown in Table 11.

Table 11

Percentages of female participants who attended single-sex schools who changed careers, by age

Those who changed careers Age Sample size N % 21-30 237 56 24 31-40 193 65 34 41-50 187 84 45 51-60 148 80 54 61-70 81 30 37 Total 846 315 37

It can be seen in Table 11, that a larger percentage of the 51-60 year olds (54%) than of any other age group had changed jobs. With the exception of the 61-70 year olds, the percentages changing jobs increased with age (as would be expected).

It was of interest to see what reasons were given for job changes among the 51-60 year old age group (most of whom would have completed school in the 1970s). Personal circumstances, parenting, the impact of gender stereotyping, and issues associated with career opportunities were among the most commonly expressed reasons. Examples from the 51-60 year olds include:

Bullying - this behaviour is endemic in the medical profession making an already stressful environment a miserable workplace.

The first career change was due to frustration and disappointment. After completing Honours in Geology (in Sedimentology), I went for job interviews. Instead of being asked about my Honours research I was asked how long I planned to work, if I had a boyfriend and planned to marry! The other Honours students (male, there were 2 female honours students) were asked about their research. This was infuriating! I landed a short-term job with BBB (A state-based electricity commission). I was first woman to work in CCC (coal mining) there. But, I had to fight to go into the mines; the union did not want me there – wanted me to wear different gear, tried to stop me as there were no female toilets, etc. etc. I did go, however, to do stability survey of open cut with another young geologist (male). I then worked in fieldwork for DDD (company) Australia (gold surveys) – again with men who, incidentally, had to sign non- harassment agreements! I had had enough.

Changed from hands on laboratory work to a more administrative role overseeing government policy for science and funding for innovation. Research and development – more career opportunities.

At University during my initial degree, I realised that I did not want to work in a scientific role, so I did postgraduate study to allow me to move into administration.

Did not change career as such, but moved from clinical practice to education in pharmacy as interest in teaching and opportunity arose.

Personal circumstances; became a mother and couldn’t travel or work full-time

Began Dental Therapy. Completed. Worked full time, part time and then stopped to raise large family.

The reasons provided by younger respondents (most of whom would have completed schooling from the 1980s to more recent times) were similar. However, gender stereotyping was less commonly cited as a reason, but better remuneration, dissatisfaction with (STEM-related) career,

Page 32 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways and wanting a change (or being burnt out, or to follow interests) were more often mentioned. Examples include:

Started dentistry, completed 3 years but didn’t enjoy it. Chose to switch to teaching, something that was discouraged when I was in high school as I was ‘too smart for that’ and ‘could do better’. (21-30 year old)

Two young children at home to prioritise. Being self-employed as a childbirth educator is more flexible than being employed as a psychologist. (21-30 year old)

B.Sc without PhD had low employability and offered less career pathways/opportunities, forcing me to take up master’s degree in a more employable occupation such as nursing. My interest also shifted from academic science to healthcare delivery. (21-30 year old)

I entered my degree with the intention of becoming an academic and practising clinician in psychology. I am three months out from completing my PhD at present. When I finish, I will be pursuing a career as a psychologist, not an academic. I love clinical work AND research and teaching. The factors behind my decision not to pursue academia, are the lack of funding in academia and the resulting work environment i.e. excessively long working weeks, lack of support, scarcity of grants and the need to travel internationally for short-term contracts that will likely take many years, if at all, to eventuate into a stable job. (21-30 year old)

No longer enjoyed profession/burnt out. (31-40 year old)

Changed interests. (31-40 year old)

Personal circumstances, changed my mind on what I want to do, redundancy. (31-40 year old)

Becoming a mum, makes it hard to maintain a research career which is field based. Also as you progress in career using science to influence decision making and policy becomes more appealing than doing the science. (31-40 year old)

Science research is a terrible career for a woman. Have moved into communication and management as it is more friendly for work life balance. Better pay; less hours; more job satisfaction and job security. (31-40 year old)

Not changed fields, but went from university research environment into industry because the research I did would have required moving overseas, most likely. Also changed for less lab work, for more money, and more "real" experience. (31-40 year old)

Realised I didn’t want to be an engineer. Really didn’t want to be an engineer. (41-50 year old)

Moved from Veterinary Surgeon into a pharmaceutical industry role for more consistent hours. (41-50 year old)

Having children + change of location. (41-50 year old)

My initial choice of career, which dictated my initial choice of degree, was based on my love of my chemistry teacher and the wish to be a skilled employee, ie professional qualifications. However, the interest in engineering waned during the course. Switching to another option to be a professional ie accounting and being employed in the chartered world, was done during uni and so I did not ever switch careers per se - but definitely the direction of my career path... (41-50 year old)

Yes - Science to Finance. Really enjoyed science but my father is a science academic and my mother always said don’t marry an academic, they don’t make enough money. I liked it but didn’t love it. Hence the change. (41-50 year old)

Page 33 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

School choice to promote STEM interest for boys and girls (relates to Aims 4 & 5) Towards the end of the survey, participants were asked to indicate their recommendations for school choice (single-sex, co-educational, or either – depends on the child) to provide for both a boy’s and a girl’s interest in STEM-related studies. The data were analysed separately for the full samples of female and male respondents. Females’ (all) recommendations As can be seen from the data in Table 12, almost half of the female respondents thought that a single-sex school setting would promote STEM-related studies for girls, compared with 14% who thought this was the case for boys.

Table 12

School setting thought to promote STEM related studies for boys and for girls (all females)

For boys For girls Recommendation N % N % Single-sex school 138 14 427 43 Co-educational school 98 10 79 8 Either, depends on the child 739 76 485 49 Total 975 991

Whether the type of school the respondents themselves attended seemed to influence the school setting they nominated can be gauged from the data in Table 13.

Table 13

Recommendation of school setting by respondents’ own schooling

School attended Co-educational Single-sex Recommendation N % N % single-sex school 10 7 128 16 To promote a boy’s co-educational school 32 22 66 8 interest in STEM either, depends on child 107 72 632 77 single-sex school 27 18 400 48 To promote a girl’s co-educational school 35 24 44 5 interest in STEM either, depends on child 87 58 398 47

It can be seen in Table 13 that a higher percentage of those who had attended a single-sex school considered single-sex schools (16%) as more suitable than co-educational schools (8%) to promote a boy’s interest in STEM-related studies. On the other hand, a higher percentage of those who attended a co-educational school thought boys would benefit from attendance at co-educational schools (22%) than single-sex schools (7%). The differences in the settings nominated were statistically significant (χ2 = 30.09, df = 4, p<.001).

A comparable pattern can be seen in Table 13 for promoting girls’ interest in STEM. Of those who attended single-sex schools, a higher percentage nominated single-sex schools (48%) than co-

Page 34 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways educational schools (5%) to promote a girl’s interest in STEM. Of those who had attended co- educational schools, a higher percentage recommended co-educational schools (24%) than single- sex schools (18%) to promote a girl’s interest in STEM. The different patterns nominated were statistically significant (χ2 = 81.55, df = 4, p<.001).

Also noteworthy are the smaller percentages of those attending both single-sex and co-educational schools who nominated “could be either” for girls (47% and 58% respectively) than for boys (77% and 72% respectively).

Respondents were also asked to provide the reason(s) for their choice of school setting to promote STEM interest for a girl and for a boy. For these analyses we focussed on the 164 females who had attended a co-educational school in their last year of schooling and on the randomly selected sample of 164 who had attended a single-sex school in their last year of schooling. The explanations of those whose recommendations for boys and girls differed were of particular interest. A selection of responses are shown below:

To promote a BOY’S interest in STEM To promote a GIRL’s interest in STEM Attended single-sex schools Either, depends on child Single-sex school Boys are seen as more naturally gravitating Girls are rarely told these days (I hope) that towards these subjects. In fact, although I am ‘girls don’t do that’, but that doesn’t mean that pronouncing on matters about which I know the subtle societal messages don’t do a damn next to nothing, I would have thought that a good job of making sure girls ‘know’ that STEM boy in a single-sex school might have more subjects are not feminine, and what’s more, difficulty pursuing humanities. Whether the that femininity as defined by society is an child is in a single-sex school or a co-ed school overarching goal. I recall being encouraged at a (and therefore, perhaps, opinions of their peers single-sex school to take STEM subjects because about their choice of subjects) probably has I was smart, and good at them, and perhaps I much less significance from a gender felt that I should take them in case I needed perspective. them. Co-educational school Single-sex school Look at industry - males don’t seem to need I think girls benefit from a single-sex schooling any consideration here - system seems to be system where they are given the tools and working for men in STEM. ideological foundation to believe they can achieve anything - before having to identify with the gender bias and inequalities that exist in STEM. Either, depends on child Single-sex school Boys don’t get told they are not good at maths Peer pressure and gender stereotypes are more or science so I think choice of school is not as likely to arise at a co-ed school important Single-sex school Either, depends on child My brothers went to all boys schools and really …. Girls are super bitchy at that age and maybe loved it. Plus boys are hyped up on it would lessen the bitchiness if there were testosterone as is, let alone at that age, and I some guys around, or make it worse. think it would help to focus them and/or remove the insecurities of having girls around

Page 35 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

To promote a BOY’S interest in STEM To promote a GIRL’s interest in STEM Single-sex school Co-educational school Some may feel a single-sex school environment As boys have a stronger affinity towards STEM- will enhance their interest in STEM as the male related studies, it may influence girls’ interest. population generally take up such related studies compared to women. Attended co-educational schools Either, depends on child Single-sex school Each child learns differently and is to be Girls I have observed in 15 years plus teaching nurtured for their individual learning style are more confident and driven in a single-sex setting Single-sex school Co-educational school Majority of the guys I studied with at university Women need to be aware of the job came from single-sex schools opportunities outside the traditional options to encourage them to study STEM subjects. I found there was active discouragement from a number of parties that may have prevented me from pursuing STEM subjects. It was only because of my parents and select teachers that I was given the opportunity Co-educational school Either, depends on child Girls are generally more motivated than boys, [No explanation provided] in co-ed school boys can be encouraged by the motivation of the female classmates. Co-educational school Single-sex school I think a boy would be able and encouraged to I think that the old adage that boys benefit enter STEM-related fields regardless of the most from co-ed and girls from single-sex is school. However, growing up and learning with probably true, unless the school works actively girls could set their expectation that girls can, to foster a culture of equality and non- should, and do have an interest in, and aptitude distinction between “girls” subjects and “boys” for STEM subjects. Therefore no preconceived subjects. idea of women as greater or lesser in these fields on entering university/the workforce

Additional analyses for females who had attended SS schools The responses of the females who had attended single-sex schools were also disaggregated by respondent age. Recommendations for school type to promote a girl’s interest in STEM are shown in Table 14, and recommendations for boys in Table 15.

Page 36 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Table 14

Recommendations of school type for promoting a girl’s interest in STEM-related studies, by respondent age (all females)

Single-Sex Co-ed Either (depends) Age N % N % N % 18-20 28 48.3 7 12.1 23 39.7 21-30 107 54.0 7 3.5 84 42.4 31-40 82 46.6 3 1.7 91 51.7 41-50 75 46.3 5 3.1 82 50.6 51-60 65 47.8 10 7.4 61 44.9 61-70 25 34.7 7 9.7 40 55.6 Over 70 18 45.0 5 12.5 17 42.5 Total 400 47.5 44 5.2 398 47.3

As can be seen in Table 14, the 21-30 age group had the highest percentage recommending single- sex schools (54.0%) to promote girls’ STEM interests, and the 61-70 age group had the lowest percentage (34.7%)

Table 15.

Recommendations of school type for promoting a boy’s interest in STEM-related studies, by respondent age (all females)

Single-Sex Co-ed Either (depends) Age N % N % N % 18-20 12 21.4 4 7.1 40 71.4 21-30 35 17.8 17 8.6 145 73.6 31-40 16 9.2 5 2.9 153 87.9 41-50 23 14.3 8 5.0 130 80.7 51-60 26 19.5 15 22.3 92 69.2 61-70 10 14.3 11 15.7 49 70.0 Over 70 6 17.1 6 17.1 23 65.7 Total 128 15.5 66 8 632 76.5

From Tables 14 and 15, it can be seen that the female respondents were considerably more likely to recommend either school type (depending on the child) to promote a boy’s interest in STEM than to promote a girl’s interest in STEM. At the same time, they were much more likely to recommend a single-sex school to promote a girl’s interest in STEM than for a boy. It can be inferred from these findings that females’ views are consistent with the widespread belief that single-sex schools are more likely than co-educational schools to promote a girl’s interest in STEM.

Page 37 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Final Summary The catalyst for the work summarised in this report came from interest expressed by the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia members in two main research areas:

overall academic and life outcomes for girls educated in single-sex schools compared with girls educated in co-educational schools, measured by indicators including national/international testing results, tertiary entrance scores, level of post-school qualifications, occupation, wages and labour force participation

the engagement of girls from single-sex schools in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) compared with girls from co-educational schools, as measured by participation in subjects such as advanced mathematics and physics at school, and/or the number of girls from single-sex and co-educational schools choosing to study STEM degrees at university and enter STEM-related careers, particularly in traditionally male-dominated areas such as mathematics, engineering, information technology and physical sciences.

(Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia Research Grant Guidelines 2016)

In our study, we aimed to address aspects of both research areas. To explore the issues we designed an online survey in which we aimed to:

1. compare STEM participation rates at school level and beyond for females who attended single-sex and co-educational schools, in different time periods (e.g., by decade), by school type attended (government and non-government), and by country (Australia and New Zealand); 2. identify and compare the life/career trajectories of these females; 3. identify systemic and/or personal factors facilitating or inhibiting STEM participation of these females; and 4. compare the above with responses from a male sample.

In addition we explored:

5. perceptions of single-sex or co-educational schooling to promote STEM for girls and boys.

Participants were recruited via Facebook and through communications with alumnae of member schools of the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia. Completion rate of the survey was high (for Australian participants). From this we infer that they considered the scope of the survey both important and relevant. While our particular focus was on females who had completed their final year of schooling (N=964) in single-sex schools, our sample also comprised females and males from co-educational schools (N=164 and N=58 respectively). The STEM school-level subjects we considered were: physics, chemistry, biology, information technology (IT), and three levels of mathematics subjects. Data contained in the body of the report confirmed that the people who responded to our online survey were indeed STEM-oriented individuals.

Using the aims listed above as headings, we summarise our main findings below.

Page 38 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

1. Compare STEM participation rates at school level and beyond for females who attended single-sex and co-educational schools, in different time periods (e.g., by decade), by school type attended (government and non-government), and by country (Australia and New Zealand)  The percentages of females in the sample from single-sex schools who studied each of the STEM subjects was higher than the percentages of the female 2015 VCE cohort who did so.  The recruitment strategies adopted for the study resulted in a sample skewed towards STEM interest and/or STEM career involvement.  Most (91%) of the female respondents attending single-sex schools had continued on to post-school studies.  The decade of 1990-1999 was found to be the period in which the participants’ enrolments in STEM-related school-level subjects were at a peak. In particular: o Biology: decreased after 1970-1979 o Physics, Advanced mathematics, and IT/Computing: trended up until 1990-1999 then declined after that time o Chemistry and Intermediate mathematics: trended up until 1990-1999, then remained fairly steady  The samples of female participants who completed their final year of schooling in single-sex and co-educational schools were very similar. o There were no major differences in the age profile of the two groups of females, nor between their profiles with respect to the decade of school completion o With respect to higher education and post-school qualifications, there was again no appreciable difference between the two groups. Both groups of females were well qualified compared with the Australian female population, with about 75% of each group having completed at least a bachelors degree, 17% a Masters degree, and around 7% a doctoral degree. Thus data from female respondents who attended a co-educational school serve as a useful context for comparative purposes.  The vast majority of respondents had attended schools in the metropolitan capitals.

Note: For reasons explained in the body of the report, our data are restricted to those who attended schools in Australia. 2. Identify and compare the life/career trajectories of females who attended single-sex and co-educational schools  A high proportion of respondents (around 80%) were in paid employment at the time of completing the survey.  A higher percentage of females who attended single-sex schools than co-educational schools reported working in the health or allied health sciences (28%).  A higher proportion of females from co-educational schools than single-sex schools reported working in Engineering. Recruitment bias may be a partial explanation of this. As discussed in the report, there were some respondents from single-sex schools who had studied STEM- related subjects in the final year of schooling but had not planned to pursue a STEM-related career path, or had been advised against this career trajectory.  The different proportions of females from single-sex and co-educational schools in the health and allied health sciences and engineering may be related to the numbers studying

Page 39 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

respectively biology and advanced mathematics, and physics, that is, subjects which are closely aligned to the recommended backgrounds for tertiary studies in the health and engineering field. While acknowledging that science, technology, engineering and mathematics are invariably areas associated with STEM, the importance of STEM proficiency in other fields should also be fore-grounded.  For both females who attended single-sex and co-educational schools, being good at one or more STEM subjects, parents, and good employment prospects were the most important influences affecting their choice of initial career. While the ordering of the three most influential factors was the same for both groups, parents seemed to have a somewhat greater influence on those who had attended single-sex schools.  While mentioned by many respondents, school-based influences such as teachers and career advice did not feature in the top three factors identified as influential, nor in the top three list of most influential factors.

3. Identify systemic and/or personal factors facilitating or inhibiting STEM participation of these females who attended single-sex and co-educational schools  Obstacles mentioned most frequently were children and parenting responsibilities, self belief, and gender stereotyping.  While mention of these barriers was not surprising from older participants, disappointingly, they were also cited by younger women  About one-third of the group had changed career. The reasons for the career change mentioned frequently by the older participants were: personal circumstances, parenting, the impact of gender stereotyping, and issues associated with career opportunities.  Younger respondent still nominated gender stereotyping but less frequently. Instead, they focussed on an opportunity for better remuneration, dissatisfaction with their (STEM- related) careers, and wanting a change or wishing to pursue other interests.

Note: The open-ended responses were coded by theme for a random sample of 164 of the 964 female respondents from single-sex schools. 4. Compare data with responses from a male sample. Note: As explained in the body of the text, time and budget constraints limited the number of male respondents to the survey. Nevertheless, some useful between sample comparisons could be made.

 VCE 2015 data revealed that higher proportions of males than females studied physics, chemistry, specialist mathematics, mathematical methods, further mathematics, and the two IT subjects.  Similarly, in the study sample, higher proportions of males than females reported studying physics, chemistry, advanced level mathematics, intermediate level mathematics, elementary level mathematics and IT in their final year of schooling.  For both the VCE 2015 group and our sample, there were higher proportions of females than males who studied biology.  Thus the pattern of gender differences in subject participation found for the 2015 VCE cohort was also evident in the enrolment data provided by the respondents to our survey.  Common reasons for a career change put forward by male participants included natural progression/ better opportunities, or not liking their previous job as the reason for a career

Page 40 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

change. In contrast to our female samples, none mentioned children or family responsibilities as the reason. 5. Perceptions of single-sex or co-educational schooling to promote STEM for girls and boys  Many still considered that single-sex schools are more likely than co-educational schools to promote a girl’s interest in STEM. Almost half of the female respondents thought that a single-sex school setting would promote STEM-related studies for girls, compared with 14% who thought this was the case for boys.  The school attended by the respondent influenced the preference of a single-sex or co- educational setting.  For the full female sample, the younger respondents (the 21-30 year old group) had the highest percentage recommending single-sex school for girls while the older respondents (61-70) had the lowest percentage.

Page 41 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Implications of the findings The sampling issues identified earlier in this report needed to be borne in mind when considering any implications of the findings in this study. A consequence of the sampling issues was that some of the comparisons encompassed in the aims listed above could not be conducted, while others that were undertaken were less robust than the ideal.

As noted above, the targeting of people with STEM-backgrounds to participate in the study was successful.

It was clear that the female participants from single-sex and co-educational schools were similar with respect to age and decades of school completion profiles, enrolment patterns in the STEM- related subjects in their final year of schooling (with minor variations), and they had similar post- school study profiles. However, it was found that a higher proportion of females from co-educational schools than from single-sex schools had completed engineering studies, while a higher proportion of females from single-sex than co-educational schools had completed studies in health-related fields (identified by the Chief Scientist of Australia as a STEM professional field). Perhaps related to this was the finding that the parents of those who had attended single-sex schools were identified more often as influences on career-related decisions than were parents among females who had attended co-educational schools. Are parents of girls in single-sex schools more likely to encourage girls into health-related areas than the hard sciences, including engineering? It would appear worthwhile exploring this issue further.

Another interesting finding was that school-based factors (teachers, career advice) were not found among the top three factors identified as influencing career decisions, nor were they in the top three listed “most influential” factors. Can, or should, teachers and careers advisors be more active in promoting STEM-related studies and career paths for female students?

The data about supporters and barriers of career trajectories were also informative. For the females (single-sex and co-educational backgrounds), but not for the males, the traditional gender stereotyped role expectations of females to serve as main carer for children were not only evident among older participants, but disappointingly also among younger respondents. These same gender stereotyped role expectations, as well as harassment/bullying in workplaces that are traditionally male dominated (e.g., engineering), also emerged as explanations for career changes. Clearly workplace cultures need to be addressed by those working in the pertinent fields. However, is there a role for schools to educate young women about their rights as employees in non-traditional fields, and how to report unacceptable incidents or practices in the workplace?

Overall, respondents considered single-sex schools more likely than co-educational schools to promote a girl’s interest in STEM. While about half of all female respondents thought that a single- sex school setting would promote STEM-related studies for girls, only about 14% thought this was the case for boys. Clearly the experiences of learning setting in which respondents had been educated had influenced their views on the issue. To promote a girl’s interest in STEM, the females who had been educated in a single-sex school (about 90% of the sample) were more likely to say single-sex than were the females who had been educated in a co-educational environment. It was of interest, however, that large proportions of respondents identified that either school setting would be appropriate depending on the child her(him)self. These findings augur well for children, that is, that the child is likely to be central in the decision about school type to attend.

Page 42 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

References

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, 2006. Government and non- government schooling. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/7d12b0f6763c78caca257061001cc588/9fa90aec587590e dca2571b00014b9b3!OpenDocument

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics), (2012). 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, Sep 2012. Education differences between men and women. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features20Sep+2012

Cobbold, T. (2015). A review of academic studies of public and private school outcomes in Australia. Save our schools. Retrieved from http://www.saveourschools.com.au/file_download/194

Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices. Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585-609

Finkel, A. (2016). Australia’s STEM workforce. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/Australias-STEM-workforce_full-report.pdf

Good Schools Guide. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.goodschools.com.au/news/singlesex- versus-coeducational-schooling Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. London: Routledge. OECD. (2017). The pursuit of gender equality: An uphill battle. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264281318-en

Professionals Australia. (n. d.). Women in STEM in Australia. Retrieved from http://www.professionalsaustralia.org.au/professional-women/wp- content/uploads/sites/48/2014/03/WOMEN_IN_STEM_v2.pdf

Roberts, K. (2014). Engaging more women and girls in mathematics and STEM fields: The international evidence. Report prepared for the Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute. Retrieved from http://amsi.org.au/wp- content/uploads/2014/08/RobertsGenderSTEMreport2014.pdf

Page 43 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Appendices Appendix A Examples of Facebook advertisements used to recruit participants

Initial advertisement targeting Australian and NZ participants

Revised advertisement only targeting Australian participants

Variation of advertisement aimed at increasing Australian male participation rate

Page 44 of 46

Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Appendix B Copy of the online survey used in the study.

Page 45 of 46

7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

Default Question Block

Schooling, careers, and STEM (Monash University Project Number: CF16/1318 2016000698)

This study is being conducted by:

Professor Helen Forgasz ([email protected]) and Adjunct Professor Gilah Leder ([email protected]).

By completing the survey, you are consenting to participate. It should take about 20 minutes to complete.

You are free to exit the survey at any time if you do not wish to complete it, and you do not have to answer questions you are uncomfortable about. Once you have submitted the questionnaire, you are unable to withdraw your responses.

Data collected will be stored on password controlled computers. Only members of the research team will have access to the data.

Aim of the study

For this study, we have accepted the view of the Chief Scientist of Australia that “studying STEM opens up countless job options”.

Our aim is to explore the impact of school setting (single-sex or coeducation) on females’ and males’ subject choices and their eventual career paths and occupations, with a particular focus on STEM (Science Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). Of interest are the STEM subjects studied at school and post-school, and the wide range of occupations in which this knowledge is applied.

Findings from this study may be presented at conferences and in published journals and book chapters. For further information about this project, contact the researchers via the email addresses listed above.

Complaints

If you have any concerns or complaints about the conduct of the project, contact the Executive Officer, Monash University Human Research Ethics (MUHREC):

Executive Officer Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (MUHREC) Room 111, Building 3e Research Office Monash University VIC 3800 Tel: +61 3 9905 2052 Fax: +61 3 9905 3831 Email: [email protected]

Thank you.

Helen Forgasz and Gilah Leder

Instructions

The survey is divided into several sections. Please complete each section.

In many cases you only need to select your response to a question from a given list of options. There are also some questions for which you are asked to provide an explanation.

When you have finished the survey, please click the “Submit” button.

https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 1/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

Section A: About You

Are you: Male

Female

X (non-binary)

How old are you? 18-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

61-70

Over 70

Section B: About your schooling

Did you complete your final year of schooling in Australia

New Zealand

Other Country

At that time, was this school: A Government school

A Catholic school

An Independent school

Other - please explain

At that time, was this school: Public school

Private school

Other - please explain

https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 2/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

In which year did you complete your final year of schooling?

At that time, was this school situated in a metropolitan (major city) area? Yes No

At that time, was this school co-educational

single-sex boys

single-sex girls

Other – please explain

Which one or more of the following STEM subjects did you study in your final year of schooling (mark all those applicable) Advanced Mathematics

Intermediate Level Mathematics

Elementary Level Mathematics

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Information Technology/Computing

None of the above

Other subjects you studied in your final year of schooling - please list all

1

2

3

4

5

6

https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 3/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

Please add any other information you believe is relevant about your final year of schooling (e.g. did final year of schooling part-time, left school early and returned, completed my schooling in a none traditional setting....)

Section C: About your post school education or training

Did you complete higher education studies at any time after your final year of schooling? Yes No

Which one, or more, qualifications did you complete? For each provide the requested details.

Certificate. Please specify (e.g. Certificate III in Drafting, Certificate 5 in Tourism)

Diploma. Please specify (e.g., Diploma in Human Development)

Advanced diploma. Please specify (e.g., Advanced Diploma of Oral Health)

Bachelors degree. Please specify (e.g., Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science)

Graduate diploma. Please specify (e.g., Graduate diploma of Education)

Graduate Certificate. Please specify (e.g., Graduate Certificate in Nursing)

Masters degree. Please specify (e.g., Master of Engineering, Master of Business Administration)

Doctoral degree. Please specify (e.g., PhD in Education, Doctor of Letters)

Other

Please add any other information you believe is relevant about your post school education or training https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 4/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

Section D: About your work

Are you in currently in paid employment? yes No

Indicate which one of the following broad fields best fits with your current occupation Physical or biological sciences

Agricultural, environmental, or related (science) studies

Information Communication Technology / Computing

Engineering

Mathematics

Health or allied health sciences

Science/IT/Mathematics teaching at secondary or post-secondary level

Other - please explain

Please provide more details about the specifics of your current occupation

If you have had a previous career/occupation please indicate which one or more of the following broad fields best fits with your previous employment. Not applicable

Physical or biological sciences

Agricultural, environmental, or related (science) studies

Information Communication Technology / Computing

Engineering

Mathematics

Health or allied health sciences

Science/IT/Mathematics teaching at secondary or post-secondary level https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 5/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

Other - please explain

Please provide more details about the specifics of your previous occupation(s)

Have you ever been in paid employment? Yes No

Indicate which one or more of the following broad STEM-related fields best fit with your previous occupation(s) Physical or biological sciences

Agricultural, environmental, or related (science) studies

Information Communication Technology / Computing

Engineering

Mathematics

Health or allied health sciences

Science/IT/Mathematics teaching at secondary or post-secondary level

Non-STEM-related. Please explain

Other - please explain

Please provide more details about the specifics of your previous occupation(s)

Factors influencing your original career paths

Which one or more of the following factors influenced your INITIAL career pathway? 1. Good at one or more school level STEM subjects (maths, science, IT)

2. Teachers https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 6/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

3. Career advice

4. Parents

5. Family members other than parents

6. Friends

7. Good employment prospects

8. Wanted to work in a STEM-related occupation or profession

9. Employer supported study

10. Other. Please explain

Which one of the 1-10 above was the MOST influential factor? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

If you have changed careers, what were the main factors influencing your decision? (e.g., changed personal circumstances, redundancy, change of location etc.)

Perceived support and barriers

Who or what served to support you in your career path(s)/goal(s)?

Who or what served as barriers to your career path(s)/goal(s)?

Section E: Advice to others about schooling and interest in STEM

https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 7/9 7/29/2017 Qualtrics Survey Software

To promote a boy’s interest in STEM-related studies, would you recommend: A single-sex school

Co-educational school

Could be either, depending on the child

Please explain your choice

To promote a girls’ interest in STEM-related studies, would you recommend: A single-sex school

Co-educational school

Could be either, depending on the child

Please explain your choice

Please add any comments about single-sex or co-educational schooling and STEM related careers

Block 1

Please add any comments you may have about the survey, or add additional information you think is relevant about your schooling and career path.

https://az1.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 8/9 Forgasz & Leder Single-sex versus co-educational schooling and STEM pathways

Appendix C Publications and presentations based on data gathered in the study Publications completed and submitted, as well as other presentations, based on the data gathered in this research study, are listed below. Copies of pertinent papers follow. Papers in refereed conference proceedings Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2017). Gender and VCE mathematics subject enrolments 2001-2015 in co- educational and single-sex schools. In A. Downton, S. Livy, & J. Hall (Eds.), 40 years on: We are still learning! Proceedings of the 40th Annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 253-260). MERGA: Adelaide. Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2017). Mathematics enrolments: Single-sex and co-ed. In B. Kaur, W. K. Ho, T. L. Toh, & B. H. Choy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, p. 192). Singapore: PME. Leder, G., & Forgasz, H. (2017). STEM and single-sex schools: What counts? In B. Kaur, W. K. Ho, T. L. Toh, & B. H. Choy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, p. 230). Singapore: PME. Papers submitted Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2017). STEM enrolments at school and factors influencing career paths. Alliance Magazine (October issue). Conference abstracts: Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2017). Gender and VCE enrolments in mathematics subjects 2001-2015: Does school type matter? WIMSIG conference 2017: Celebration of women in Australian mathematical sciences (p. 61). Adelaide: University of South Australia. Leder, G., Forgasz, H., & Zmood, S. (2017). From school to career: A snapshot of supports and obstacles. WIMSIG conference 2017: Celebration of women in Australian mathematical sciences (p. 62). Adelaide: University of South Australia. Other Forgasz, H., Leder, G., & Zmood, S. (2017). Using Facebook for recruiting research participants. [Workshop presentation]. In A. Downton, S. Livy, & J. Hall (Eds.), 40 years on: We are still learning! Proceedings of the 40th Annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (p. 710). MERGA: Adelaide. Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2016, April). Alliance funds new study on STEM participation. In Alliance, 56, 6. Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2016). STEM enrolments in Victorian single-sex and co-educational schools. Paper presented at the Australian Association of Research in Education annual conference, Melbourne. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/publications-database.php/10707/STEM- enrolments-in-Victorian-single-sex-and-co-educational-schools

Page 46 of 46

RESEARCH REPORTS

Gender and VCE Mathematics Subject Enrolments 2001-2015 in Co-Educational and Single-Sex Schools

Helen Forgasz Gilah Leder Monash University Monash University [email protected] [email protected]

Declining enrolments in advanced level mathematics at the school level are noted with concern. Whether school type (single-sex school or co-education) affects participation in mathematics continues to be debated. In this article we examine, by school type and gender, statistical data from 2001 to 2015 on Victorian Certificate of Education enrolments in the three mathematics subjects offered at that level. Also explored are the choice of, and reasons for, the school setting assumed to promote STEM studies for girls and boys.

Introduction The debate on the relative merits of single-sex and co-educational schooling for girls and for boys persists in Australia. Passionate protagonists are found on both sides. Whether the context is academic achievement, leadership opportunities, or confidence development, one of the most pervasive views put forward is that single-sex schooling is better for girls, while co-education is better for boys. As in the past (see Ainley & Daly, 2002), the reality in contemporary Australia is that there are more single-sex schools for girls than for boys. This pattern is more marked in some states than in others (see Figure 1), and in the ACT, the opposite is found. One consequence of having more single-sex schools for girls than for boys is that girls are outnumbered by boys in co-educational schools.

Figure. 1. Percentages of single-sex (boys/girls) and co-educational schools in Australia in 2016, by state/territory. [Data derived from https://www.goodschools.com.au/.]

(2017). In A. Downton, S. Livy, & J. Hall (Eds.), 40 years on: We are still learning! Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 253–260). Melbourne: MERGA. 253 RESEARCH REPORTS

Single-sex schooling in Australia is predominantly found in the fee-paying sectors of education (Good Schools Guide, 2016). Within the government sector, single-sex schools generally have selective entry, based on academic achievement. While there are some academic scholarships offered in fee-paying schools, those attending them are generally from higher socio-economic backgrounds than students attending government schools. That school and family backgrounds are major contributing factors to student achievement is widely accepted (e.g., Hattie, 2009). Cobbold (2015) maintained that in Australia, and elsewhere, “school SES has a much larger impact on student achievement than individual family SES” (pp. 4-5). Student prior achievement and confidence levels, expectations of those in the social milieu, and school factors including teachers and subject offerings all contribute to subject choice decisions (e.g., Eccles et al., 1983; Hattie, 2009). Declining enrolments in advanced level mathematics at the school level (e.g., Barrington & Evans, 2014) and the under-representation of females in these subjects (e.g., Barrington & Evans, 2014; Finkel & Sherry, 2017) continue to be of concern. Forgasz (2016) noted the frequency of claims, and strength of beliefs, that girls attending single-sex schools are more likely than girls in co-educational schools to study mathematics and science subjects. But where is the statistical evidence to support these claims? In this article, we present statistical data from 2001 to 2015 on Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) enrolments in the three mathematics subjects offered (specialist mathematics, mathematical methods, and further mathematics) by gender and school type (single sex girls, single-sex boys, co-educational girls, and co-educational boys) obtained from the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA). Our aims in examining the VCE mathematics enrolment data, 2001-2015, were to examine enrolment patterns over time for girls and for boys attending single-sex and co- educational schools, and to determine whether girls and/or boys are more likely to study these subjects if they attend single-sex schools. In addition, to tap current views in Australia about the suitability of single-sex schools for girls and boys to study science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects, we draw on survey data from a larger study about schooling, careers, and STEM pathways.

Previous Research in the Field Research has been conducted to compare the mathematics achievement of males and females attending single-sex and co-educational schools; attitudes and beliefs have also been investigated. Thien and Darmawan (2016) reported that in 12 countries participating in the first international study of mathematics, “the greater the ratio of single sex to co- educational schools the greater the difference between the sexes in Mathematics Performance, with boys outperforming girls at the 13-year old level” (p. 89). Lenzer (2006) noted the contradictory findings with respect to girls’ mathematics and science achievement and participation in single-sex and co-educational schools. In some studies girls attending single-sex schools, compared to girls in co-educational schools, “are more likely to have confidence or be interested in mathematics and to choose mathematics and or natural sciences as a subject of study later on” (p. 58). But she also reported that “[W]hen students entering single-sex or co-educational schools are matched for background variables, the effect of gender-segregated education on non-traditional subject choice… disappears” (p. 58). Billinger (2008) surveyed single-sex schooling within the US and similarly concluded that the “apparent benefits of single-sex schooling can largely be attributed to selection bias in the pool of students who choose SSE” (p. 402). Thus, school culture appears to be a critical factor implicated in girls’ non-traditional subject choice.

254 RESEARCH REPORTS

The effects of single-sex classes within co-educational secondary schools have also been explored. Leder & Forgasz (1998) reported mixed results on students’, teachers’, and parents’ attitudes to the introduction of single-sex mathematics classes at grade 9 in one Australian co-educational school. “Single-sex classes per se”, they concluded, “would appear to be too simplistic a strategy to address identified gender inequities in mathematics education” (p. 177). Writing about single-sex classes in the middle years of schooling, Crosswell and Hunter (2012) concluded that “there is no ‘right’ answer due to the multiple variables that could be playing out in any classpace” (p. 25), and that underpinning “the seemingly simple question of single sex classes in co-education schools, is the much more complex socio-political issue of assumptions about sex and gender” (p. 25). Australian research on participation in mathematics subjects in co-educational and single-sex schools is scarce. Some work has been conducted internationally, and there are some Australian findings related to STEM participation more generally, and in the physical sciences. Ainley and Daly (2002) reported raw data on physical science participation in single-sex and co-educational schools in Australia in 1998. They found that girls attending single-sex schools were more likely than girls in co-education schools to study these subjects. However, when a multivariate analysis was conducted, this “apparently greater participation… was not statistically significant after allowance was made for other influences that were associated with school gender context” (p. 256). The factors involved in the multivariate analysis included: language background, socio-economic status, earlier school achievement, residential location, and school type. In summary, the literature is mixed about the benefits of single-sex schooling (or classes) for girls and their achievement and attitudes towards mathematics. Little appears to be known about girls’, compared to boys’, relative enrolments in senior level mathematics in Australia, nor about females’ views and recommendations of school type for boys or girls interested in STEM-related subjects. In this study, we address these issues.

The Study

Methods The VCAA data. In response to a request to the VCAA, VCE enrolment data for the years 2001-2015 for specialist mathematics, mathematical methods (CAS), and further mathematics, were provided by gender within school type (single-sex and co-educational); permission was denied for a further break-down of the data by school sector (government, Catholic, and independent). Also provided were the number of students within each school type by gender who were eligible to complete VCE in each year, allowing for the proportions of students enrolled in these subjects by gender within school type to be calculated. Analyses of VCE data by gender within school type are unique; the VCAA had not previously been requested to provide data of this kind (Bui, personal communication). In consultation with VCAA, it was determined that the most effective enrolment comparisons would result from comparing the percentages of students eligible to complete VCE who were enrolled in each subject, that is, not to include students who were studying the subjects as part of their year 11 of the two-year VCE. For each year, 2001 to 2015, the percentages of students eligible to complete VCE enrolled in each subject were calculated for boys and for girls in single sex and in co- educational schools. These percentages are shown in Figures 2-4 below for each of the three mathematics subjects.

255 RESEARCH REPORTS

The survey data. The items in which survey participants were asked whether, to promote a boy’s/girl’s interest in STEM-related studies, they would recommend a single- sex school, a co-educational school, or neither (that it would depend on the child), were of particular interest for this article. Also of interest were the explanations provided for the choices nominated by the respondents.

Results The VCAA data. Trends in the data for each mathematics subject (see Figures 2 to 4) were examined, and the enrolment pattern findings for each subject are reported below. Specialist mathematics. The data in Figure 2 reveal that: • Higher proportions of boys in both single-sex and in co-educational schools study specialist mathematics than girls in single-sex or co-educational schools (that is, boys dominate over girls irrespective of school type). • The difference in the proportions of boys and girls studying specialist mathematics is about the same in each school type • A higher proportion of girls in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study specialist mathematics; the same pattern is evident among the boys. • Over time, there was a steady decrease in the proportions of boys and girls in both school types studying specialist mathematics until 2012, after which increases for girls in both school types, and inconsistencies among boys in both school types, are evident.

Figure. 2. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in specialist mathematics, 2001-2015.

Mathematical methods (CAS). The data in Figure 3 reveal that: • A higher proportion of girls in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools study mathematical methods; the same pattern is evident among the boys. • Higher proportions of students (both boys and girls) in single sex schools than in co-educational schools study mathematical methods (CAS)

256 RESEARCH REPORTS

• Over time, there has been a steady decrease in the proportions of boys and of girls in both school types studying mathematical methods (CAS); interestingly the decreases have been greater for girls in both schools types (single-sex: 8.8%; co-educational: 6.2%) than for boys (single-sex: 7.3%; co-educational: 3.9%), and greater in single-sex schools for both girls and boys than for boys and girls in co-educational schools.

Figure. 3. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in mathematical methods (CAS), 2001-2015.

Figure. 4. Percentages of girls and boys eligible to complete VCE in single-sex and co-educational schools enrolled in further mathematics, 2001-2015.

Further mathematics. The data in Figure 4 reveal:

257 RESEARCH REPORTS

• Similar patterns of enrolments in further mathematics for boys and for girls in both school types • Over time, the proportions of boys and girls in both school types enrolled in further mathematics have increased at very similar rates. The survey data. The survey sample comprised over 1,100 females, aged from 18 to over 70. Most had studied mathematics in their final year of secondary school: advanced level (N = 377), intermediate level (N = 472), and elementary level (N = 126) mathematics; some (N = 89) had not studied any mathematics. Consistent with the focus of the larger study on single-sex schools, the majority of respondents (N = 964) had attended a single- sex school and a smaller number (N = 164) a co-educational school. As can be seen from the data in Table 1, almost half of the female respondents thought that a single-sex school setting would promote STEM-related studies for girls, compared with 14% who thought this was the case for boys. Table 1 School Setting Thought to Promote STEM-Related Studies Recommendation For boys For girls Single-sex school 138 (14%) 427 (43%) Co-educational school 98 (10%) 79 (8%) Either, depends on child 739 (76%) 485 (49%)

Total 975 991

Whether the type of school the respondents themselves attended seemed to influence the school setting they nominated can be gauged from the data in Table 2. Table 2 Recommendation of School Setting by Respondents’ Own Schooling Recommendation Attended co- Attended single- educational school sex school To promote single-sex school 10 (7%) 128 (16%) a boy’s co-educational school 32 (22%) 66 (8%) interest either, depends on child 107 (72%) 632 (77%) To promote single-sex school 27 (18%) 400 (48%) a girl’s co-educational school 35 (24%) 44 (5%) interest either, depends on child 87 (58%) 398 (47%)

It can be seen in Table 2 that a higher proportion of those who attended a single-sex school considered single-sex schools (16%) as more suitable than co-educational schools (8%) to promote a boy’s interest in STEM-related studies, while a higher proportion of those who attended a co-educational school thought boys would benefit from attendance at co-educational schools (22%) than single-sex schools (7%). The differences in the settings nominated were statistically significant (χ2 = 30.09, p<.001, effect size, V=.18). A comparable pattern can be seen in Table 2 for promoting girls’ interest in STEM. Of those who attended single-sex schools, a higher proportion nominated single-sex schools 48%) than co-educational schools (5%) to promote girls’ interest in STEM. Of those who

258 RESEARCH REPORTS

had attended co-educational schools, a higher proportion recommended co-educational schools (24%) than single-sex schools (18%) to promote girls’ interest in STEM. The different patterns nominated were statistically significant (χ2 = 81.55, p<.001, effect size, V=.29). Also noteworthy are the smaller proportions of those attending single-sex and co- educational schools who nominated “could be either” for girls (47% and 58% respectively) than for boys (77% and 72% respectively). As indicated earlier in the paper, respondents were also asked to provide the reason(s) for their choice of school setting to promote STEM interest for girls and for boys. The explanations of those whose recommendation for boys and girls differed were of particular interest. Space constraints allow only a small but representative set to be included here.

To promote a BOY’S interest in STEM To promote a GIRL’s interest in STEM and Attended single-sex school; advanced and intermediate maths in final year of school Either, depends on child Single-sex school Boys are seen as more naturally gravitating Girls are rarely told these days (I hope) that towards these subjects. In fact, although I am 'girls don't do that', but that doesn't mean pronouncing on matters about which I know that the subtle societal messages don't do a next to nothing, I would have thought that a damn good job of making sure girls 'know' boy in a single sex school might have more that STEM subjects are not feminine, and difficulty pursuing humanities. Whether the what's more, that femininity as defined by child is in a single sex school or a co-ed society is an overarching goal. I recall school (and therefore, perhaps, opinions of being encouraged at a single sex school to their peers about their choice of subjects) take STEM subjects because I was smart, probably has much less significance from a and good at them, and perhaps I felt that I gender perspective. should take them in case I needed them. Attended single-sex school; advanced and intermediate maths in final year of school Co-educational school Single-sex school Look at industry - males don't seem to need I think girls benefit from a single sex any consideration here - system seems to be schooling system where they are given the working for men in STEM. tools and ideological foundation to believe they can achieve anything - before having to identify with the gender bias and inequalities that exist in STEM. Attended single-sex school; advanced and intermediate maths in final year of school Either, depends on child Single-sex school Boys don't get told they are not good at Peer pressure and gender stereotypes are maths or science so I think choice of school more likely to arise at a co-ed school is not as important Attended co-educational school; intermediate mathematics in final year of school Either, depends on child Single-sex school Each child learns differently and is to be Girls I have observed in 15 years plus nurtured for their individual learning style teaching are more confident and driven in a single sex setting

Summary of Findings Higher proportions of boys in single-sex and in co-educational schools than girls in single-sex and in co-educational schools are enrolled in specialist mathematics. While for

259 RESEARCH REPORTS

specialist mathematics there was a higher proportion of girls from single-sex than co- educational schools enrolled, the same was true among boys in the two school types. Higher proportions of girls and boys in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools were enrolled in mathematical methods CAS. The proportions of students enrolled in further mathematics is virtually identical among boys and girls in single-sex and co- educational schools. It is too simplistic to conclude that the gendered setting of the school alone contributes to the differences found, particularly considering that the same proportions of boys and girls in both school types were enrolled in further mathematics. Yet from the explanations provided for the preference expressed for a single-sex or co-educational school to promote STEM-related subjects it can be seen that respondents were influenced by their own school history and that, among this group of generally well-educated females, the belief that girls more often than not benefit from attendance at a single-sex school persists.

Acknowledgments This study was partially funded by the Alliance of Girls Schools in Australasia. We thank Natalie Kalkhoven and Simone Zmood, who assisted in the data analyses.

References Ainley, J., & Daly, P. (2002). Participation in science courses in the final year of schooling in Australia: The influences of single-sex and co-education schools. In A Datnow & L. Hubbard (Eds.), Perspectives on single-sex and co-educational schooling (pp. 243-262). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, 2006. Government and non- government schooling. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/7d12b0f6763c78 caca257061001cc588/9fa90aec587590edca2571b00014b9b3!OpenDocument Barrington, F. & Evans, M. (2014). Participation in year 12 mathematics 2004-2013. Retrieved from http://amsi.org.au/publications/participation-year-12-mathematics-2004-2013/ Billinger, S. M. (2008). On reconstructing school segregation: The efficacy and equity of single-sex schooling. Economics of Education Review, 28, 393-340. Cobbold, T. (2015). A review of academic studies of public and private school outcomes in Australia. Retrieved from http://www.saveourschools.com.au/file_download/194 Crosswell, L., & Hunter, L. (2012). Navigating the muddy waters of the research into single sex class-rooms in co-educational middle years settings. Australian Journal of Middle Schooling, 2(2), 16-27. Eccles (Parsons), J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectations, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Soence (Ed), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman. Finkel, A., & Sherry, A. (2017, January 23). Girls should never settle for second in science. The Australian. Retrieved from http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2017/01/article-girls-should-never-settle-for-second-in- science-the-australian/ Forgasz, H. (2016, April 1). Single-sex vs coeducational schools: How parents can decide the best option for their child. The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/single-sex-vs-coeducational- schools-how-parents-can-decide-the-best-option-for-their-child-55758 Good Schools Guide. (2016). Single-sex versus co-educational schooling. Retrieved from http://www.goodschools.com.au/news/singlesex-versus-coeducational-schooling Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. London, England: Routledge. Leder, G. C., & Forgasz, H. J. (1998). Single-sex groupings for mathematics: An equitable solution? In C. Keitel (Ed.), Social justice and mathematics (pp.162-179). Berlin, Germany: Freie Universitat Berlin. Lenzner, A. (2006). Women in mathematics. A cross-cultural comparison. Munster, Germany: Waxmann Verla. Thien, L. M., & Darmawan, I. G. N. (2016). Factors associated with Malaysian mathematics performance in PISA 2012. In L. M. Thien, N. A Razak, J. P. Keeves, & I. G. N. Darmawan (Eds), What can PISA 2012 data tell us? (pp. 81 – 106). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense.

260

MATHEMATICS ENROLMENTS: SINGLE-SEX AND CO-ED

Helen J Forgasz and Gilah C Leder Monash University

Single-sex schools flourish in a number of countries, including Australia (OECD, 2009) and have grown in popularity in others, for example, the United States (Pahlke & Hyde, 2016). Whether a single-sex or mixed (co-educational) school setting affects mathematics learning has generated much research, most often explorations of achievement outcomes. Participation rates in post compulsory mathematics courses, important determinants for entry into STEM-related tertiary studies and careers, have received less attention. Previous inconsistent research findings are attributed to various factors, including the paucity of evidence based studies. More research is clearly needed. We report enrolment data for grade 12 mathematics subjects gathered over 15 years in Victoria, Australia, a site with sufficient data for credible analyses. Three mathematics subjects are offered at the grade 12 level: Advanced (A), Intermediate (I), and Elementary (E). Enrolments in these subjects were examined by school type and gender: single-sex boys (SSB), single-sex girls (SSG), co-education boys (CB), and co-education girls (CG). To enable comparisons, percentages of enrolments by school type and gender were calculated. Enrolment patterns revealed:  For A, boys’ enrolments consistently exceeded girls’. SSB had the highest enrolment (15.2% in 2015), followed by CB, then SSG, with CG having the lowest enrolment (4.8% in 2015). For all groups, enrolments initially decreased over time but since 2012 have shown a small annual increase.  For I, the pattern of enrolment was SSB (48.3% in 2015), SSG, closely followed by CB, and then CG (21.6% in 2015). There have been minor fluctuations in enrolment since 2008, for all groups.  For E, there has been a steady increase in enrolments over time, for all groups. There were only minor differences in the percentage of males and females enrolled, irrespective of school type. In summary, it could be argued that a greater percentage of students in single-sex than in co-educational schools are engaged in mathematics (subject I), or that a higher percentage of boys than girls enrol in mathematics (subject A), or that school type has little effect on participation in mathematics (subject E). Clearly, factors other than school type alone, or student gender, influence mathematics enrolment numbers. References Pahlke, E., & Hyde, J. S. (2016). The debate over single-sex schooling. Child Development Perspectives, 10(2), 81-86. OECD. (2009). Equally prepared for life? How 15-year-old boys and girls perform in school. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/42843625.pdf

______1-192 2017. In Kaur, B., Ho, W.K., Toh, T.L., & Choy, B.H. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 41st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, p. 192. Singapore: PME.

STEM AND SINGLE-SEX SCHOOLS: WHAT COUNTS?

Gilah C Leder and Helen J Forgasz Monash University

In many countries females are underrepresented in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) fields (OECD, 2012). Differences in study areas selected by males and females also persist. It has been suggested (e.g., Cherney and Campbell, 2011) that single-sex [SS] schools enable females to develop the subject prerequisites and skills important in STEM fields. However, lack of control in research about SS schooling has confounded the evaluation of research outcomes. As part of a larger study about schooling, careers, and STEM, we explored if participants assumed that STEM-related studies are more strongly encouraged in SS than co-educational schools. Survey participants were asked whether, to promote a boy’s/girl’s interest in STEM-related studies they would recommend a SS school, a co-educational [CS] school, or neither - that it would depend on the child. The survey sample comprised 1157 females, aged from 18 to over 70. Most had studied mathematics in their final year of secondary school: an advanced (N=377), or intermediate (N=472), or elementary (N=126) mathematics course. We aimed to explore perceptions about SS schools - specifically if they were thought to promote interest in STEM-related studies, whether such beliefs were held similarly for boys and girls, whether beliefs varied according to the type of school attended by respondents, and by the amount of mathematics respondents themselves had studied. Our findings included:  For boys, 14% recommended SS, 10% CS, and 76% “depends on the child”; For girls, 43% recommended SS, 8% CS, and 49% “depends on the child”  Type of school attended by respondents influenced their recommendation. Those who had attended SS were more likely to recommend SS; those who had attended CS were more likely to recommend CS (for both boys and girls)  Level of mathematics course studied in the final year of school did not affect the recommendation made, but a higher proportion of those who had taken a mathematics course would recommend a SS for girls than those who had not. Assumptions persist that, particularly for girls, SS schools assist STEM-related pathways. Well planned research is needed to test the efficacy of these expectations. References Cherney, I.D., & Campbell, K.L. (2011). A league of their own: Do single-sex schools increase girls’ participation in the physical sciences? Sex Roles, 65, 712–724. OECD. (2012). Gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/employment/50423364.pdf

______1-230 2017. In Kaur, B., Ho, W.K., Toh, T.L., & Choy, B.H. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 41st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, p. 230. Singapore: PME. STEM enrolments at school and factors influencing career paths Helen Forgasz & Gilah Leder Monash University

We invited women and men interested in STEM-related fields to complete an online survey. As well as biographical data, and a range of questions related to school enrolments in STEM subjects (physics, chemistry, biology, IT, and three levels of mathematics subjects), questions about career paths were also included.

The sample of female respondents was as follows:

 Attended single-sex schools = 964 (85.5% of all female respondents)  Attended co-educational schools = 164 (14.5% of the female sample)

The ages of the female respondents ranged from under 20 to over 70, and the decades in which school had been completed ranged from 1950-1959 to the present (2016).

In this article, we focus on the responses of those who had attended single-sex schools in their final year of secondary school. We examine their participation in STEM subjects by decade of school completion, and explore their responses to questions about factors influencing their initial careers, as well as factors that facilitated and hindered their career paths or goals.

To set the study in the contemporary context, we begin with an examination of female enrolments, and in particular those attending single-sex schools, in STEM-related Year 12 subjects that were offered in the Victorian Certificate of Education [VCE] in 2015 (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Female enrolments in Year 12 STEM-related subjects in VCE, 2015

The data in Figure 1 reveal that, in general, the percentages of females attending single-sex schools enrolled in the STEM-related subjects are higher than for all females in four subjects (physics, chemistry, specialist mathematics, mathematical methods CAS), lower in three subjects (biology, further mathematics, and software development), and the same in one subject (IT applications). It could be argued that the subjects in which there are higher percentages of females at single-sex schools than for females overall are those which have the potential for higher study, and later career paths, in the physical sciences and engineering. The very low percentages of females in IT-related subjects is of concern.

In Figure 2 we show enrolment data in STEM-related subjects for the sample of females from single- sex schools from across Australia who completed the online survey. The data are presented by subject and by decade in which schooling was completed. [NB. The subject names for the three mathematics subjects are generalised to “advanced level”, “intermediate level” and “elementary level” as defined by Barrington and Brown (2005)]. It is evident from our data that we successfully targeted people with STEM-backgrounds for our study. For example, from Figure 1 it can be seen that 7.5% of all Victorian single-sex females studied physics in 2015, and from Figure 2, that 23.4% of the single-sex female online survey sample from 2010-2015 indicated that they had studied the subject.

Figure 2. Single-sex female participants’ STEM subjects studied in the final year of schooling by decade of school completion.

Interesting trends over time are also revealed in Figure 2.

a. Biology: steady decrease after 1970-1979 b. Physics, Advanced mathematics, and Intermediate mathematics: trended up until 1990-1999 then decline after that time c. IT/Computing: also peaked in 1990-1999 (but low), then virtually disappears d. Chemistry: trends up until 1990-1999, then remains fairly steady.

In summary, the decade of 1990-1999 appears to have been the period in which the participants’ enrolments in STEM-related subjects were at a peak. The decade was one in which gender equity in educational outcomes was a priority. At the same time, following a national move in the late 1980s for Australia to have a common national curriculum rather than separate state curricula, major changes in the subject offerings and assessment regimes in the final years of schooling were in evidence. In Victoria, for example, the examination-based one-year Victorian Higher School Certificate was replaced with the two-year Victorian Certificate of Education, in which school-based assessments, as well as traditional timed examinations, contributed to final results. In 1990, the federal government developed the policy, A fair chance for all: Higher education that's within everyone's reach. Aims included an “increase in the proportion of women in non-traditional courses, other than engineering, from the current level to at least 40% by 1995 [and] an increase in the proportion of women in engineering courses from 7% to 15% by 1995” (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2004). Between 1988 and 1992, it was reported that “the proportions of women enrolled in non-traditional courses increased” (ABS, 2004) and that “although there has been some movement of women into non-traditional courses, male students have continued to make conventional choices” (ABS, 2004). The impact of these efforts may partially account for the increased enrolments in STEM-based subjects during the decade.

Factors influencing initial career path Our survey respondents were asked to indicate which one or more, from a provided list of factors, were influential in their initial career pathways. They were also asked to identify which one of these was the most influential. Participants’ responses are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Factors influencing initial career pathways (single-sex and all females)

All females Single-sex Influences Influences Most influential Factor N % N % N % Good at ≥1 STEM subjects 435 38.5 362 37.6 157 19.1 Teachers 326 28.9 281 29.1 64 7.8 Career advice 263 23.3 225 23.3 55 6.7 Parents 482 42.7 418 43.4 152 18.5 Other family 136 12.1 119 12.3 26 3.2 Friends 155 13.7 130 13.5 27 3.3 Good employment prospects 364 32.3 307 31.8 107 13.0 Wanted to work in STEM occupation 205 18.2 176 18.3 79 9.6 Employer support 48 4.3 40 4.1 9 1.1 Other 269 23.8 224 23.2 147 17.9

From Table 1 it can be seen that for females who had attended single-sex schools, parents were mentioned most frequently as influential in career direction (43.4% of respondents), followed by being good at one or more STEM subjects (37.6%), good career prospects (31.8%), and teachers (29.1%). When asked to select the most influential factor, being good at one of more STEM subjects was selected most often (19.1%), followed by parents (18.5%), and good employment prospects (13.0%). While mentioned frequently, school-based influences such as teachers and career advice did not feature in the top three most influential factors.

The increase in the participation in Physics, Advanced mathematics, and Intermediate mathematics until the decade 1990-1999, was highlighted above. When we examined the data in Table 1 more closely for participants completing school in the decades 1980-1989, 1990-1999, and 2000-2009, we noted some minor, but interesting, variations. For those from the 1980s and the 2000s, parents were selected as the most influential factor (17.1% and 19.3% respectively) for choice of the initial career path, while in the 1990s, ‘being good at the subject’ was identified as the most influential factor (24.9%). One interpretation of this finding is that the emphasis on “girls can do anything”, that was part of the feminist agenda of the late 1980s and into the 1990s and was also highlighted in the popular media, had made its mark. In 1988 in Victoria, for example, there was an advertising campaign, Maths multiplies your choices, that was aimed at parents. It featured the slogan “Don’t pigeon-hole your daughters” (see McAnally, 1991). An evaluation of the campaign revealed that females’ enrolments in Year 11 mathematics increased dramatically in the following year. The success of the campaign resulted in funding being withdrawn, as there was a sense that the ‘girl problem’ had been solved. Thus, that enrolments in STEM subjects among the survey participants were higher in the 1990s may partially be explained by the social context of the times, resulting in a greater level of self-confidence among young women, while simultaneously challenging the dominant stereotype of girls not being good at, or suitable to pursue studies in, mathematics and science.

On the survey, participants were also asked to describe who or what had supported and/or hindered their careers. The open-ended responses were coded by theme for a random sample of 164 of the 964 female respondents from single-sex schools. The results are shown in Figures 3 for supporting factors and Figure 4 for factors that served as hindrances. [NB. For each question, some respondents mentioned more than one factor, hence percentages do not add to 100%]

Figure 3. Factors supporting career decisions

Figure 4. Factors hindering career decisions

As can be seen in Figure 3, supportive factors cited most frequently by the participants were parents (42%), extended family (26%), and teachers (17%), while obstacles mentioned most frequently were children and parenting responsibilities (25%), self belief (15%), and gender stereotyping (14%) - see Figure 4. While mention of these barriers was not surprising from older participants, disappointingly, they were also cited by younger women. That some respondents indicated that they had not experienced any particular hindrances is noteworthy, so too was the dual impact of parents and self belief (supportive according to some but cited as a hindrance by others). Final comment What might we learn from the findings we have reported in this article? Clearly, females in single-sex schools are enrolling in STEM related subjects in their final year of schooling in good numbers. Completing these subjects can lead to STEM careers. However, career obstacles faced by females decades ago appear to persist to the present time.

Being good at STEM subjects, parents’ encouragement, and employment prospects all play an important role in encouraging career choices. Surprisingly, teachers and career advice seem to play a less important role. Should this be of concern? References Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS]. (2004). Participation in education: Gender differences in higher education. 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, 1994. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/7d12b0f6763c78caca257061001cc588/0660ad7a5d3e 0e31ca2570ec00786347!OpenDocument

Barrington, F., & Brown, P. (2005). Comparison of year 12 pre-tertiary mathematics subjects in Australia 2004-2005. Melbourne: Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute.

McAnally, K. (1991). Encouraging parents to stop pigeon-holing their daughters: The “Maths Multiplies Your Choices” campaign. VIER (Victorian Institute of Educational Research) Bulletin, 66, 29-38. Gender and VCE enrolments in mathematics subjects 2001-2015: Does school type matter?

Helen Forgasz Gilah Leder Monash University Monash University [email protected] [email protected]

In Australia, there are ongoing concerns about declining enrolments in mathematics, and in females’ under-representation in mathematics and science studies and related careers.

On a regular basis, the relative benefits of single-sex or co-educational schooling are debated in the public sphere, with passionate supporters on both sides. There is a widely held belief that single-sex schooling has distinct advantages for girls in general, and for the study of science and mathematics, in particular. At the same time, co-educational schooling is viewed as beneficial for boys.

In Australia, in the government sector of education, entry into single-sex schools is generally selective, based on academic achievement. It is in the fee-paying sectors of education that single-sex schools predominate. In general, students attending non-government schools have higher socio- economic backgrounds than students attending government schools.

The literature is equivocal about the benefits of single-sex settings for girls with respect to achievement and attitudes towards mathematics. Little is known about the mathematics enrolment patterns for boys and girls attending single-sex and co-educational schools. If single-sex schooling does indeed favour girls’ likelihood to study and succeed in the maths/science fields, is this apparent in enrolment patterns in grade 12 mathematics? In this paper we explore the enrolment patterns in the three Victorian Certificate of Education mathematics subjects offered at the Grade 12 level for girls and boys attending co-educational and single-sex schools over the time span 2001-2015. We also report on survey responses from adult females on their views of whether single-sex or co- educational schools will best serve boys and girls interested in STEM studies.

The data reveal that for Specialist Mathematics, there are higher proportions of boys than girls in both single-sex and in co-educational schools enrolled. While there was a higher proportion of girls from single-sex than co-educational schools enrolled, the same was true among boys in the two school types. For Mathematical Methods CAS, higher proportions of both girls and boys in single-sex schools than in co-educational schools were enrolled. For Further Mathematics, the proportions of students enrolled was virtually identical for boys and girls in both school types.

Considering that the same proportions of boys and girls in both school types were enrolled in further mathematics, it is simplistic to conclude that the gendered settings of schools alone contribute to the differences found for the other two mathematics subjects. Explanations by a well-educated group of adult females we surveyed on their reported preferences for a single-sex or co-educational school to promote STEM-related subjects for girls and for boys suggest that personal histories play a part. There was evidence that the belief that girls, more often than not, benefit from attendance at a single-sex school persist. From school to career: A snapshot of supports and obstacles

Gilah Leder Helen Forgasz Simone Zmood [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Monash University Monash University Monash University

Abstract Drawing on data from a larger study on schooling, careers, and STEM, we focus on students who attended a co-educational school in Australia. To achieve a national sample efficiently and within a limited budget, we relied primarily on Facebook for recruitment. Financial and time constraints dictated the length of the data gathering period.

The sample of interest for this presentation comprised 164 females and 58 males, aged 18 years and over. The majority of those who completed their schooling in 2009 or earlier were in paid employment when they completed the survey: 86% of the males and 83% of the females. As anticipated from the content of the Facebook “advertisement”, many participants indicated that they had completed an advanced or intermediate mathematics course: 43.7% and 43.2% respectively had done so. Other subjects with a substantial participation rate by this group were chemistry (48.6%), physics (39.6%), and biology (34.7%). These participation rates are high compared, for example, to the participation rates in comparable VCE [Victoria Certificate of Education] STEM subjects. In our sample – as in state and national cohorts – more males than females completed intermediate mathematics, physics, and chemistry; proportionately more females than males completed biology and elementary mathematics. However, the gender difference in participation in advanced mathematics consistently reported in state and national data was not replicated in our sample: the proportion of males (44.8%) and females (43.3%) enrolled in advanced mathematics was very similar.

In the remainder of the session we present quantitative and qualitative data on the factors which influenced the males and females in their choice of initial careers, on the factors cited as supports or barriers for their chosen career path(s), and on elements which determined a change in career. We focus on personal and environmental issues, and examine whether perceptions of barriers have changed over time. Differences in the factors nominated by these STEM-oriented females and males as career path obstacles are identified and highlighted.

Workshop Sessions

Workshop sessions were held for 40 minutes on 3rd July 2017. The nine workshops and presenters are listed below.

Title Presenter(s) 1. Using Qualtrics to design an online survey Hazel Tan 2. Using Facebook for recruiting research Simone Zmood, Gilah Leder, participants Helen Forgasz 3. Building an online presence: Sharing Catherine Attard resources, exchanging ideas 4. Thesis examination: Similarities and Merrilyn Goos differences from journal article and conference paper reviewing 5. Beyond scholarly journals: Why inform the Kevin Larkin profession and the general public 6. Engaging teachers of mathematics in Doug Clarke, Barbara Clarke professional growth 7. Reviewing for MERGA conference papers Tom Lowrie 8. International Mathematical Modelling Jill Brown, Peter Galbraith, Challenge: An Australia perspective (2017) Trevor Redmond, Gloria Stillman, Luke Bohni 9. Building a track record in readiness for major Jane Watson grant writing

(2017). In A. Downton, S. Livy, & J. Hall (Eds.), 40 years on: We are still learning! Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (p. 711). Melbourne: MERGA.

710

STEM enrolments in Victorian single-sex and co-educational schools

Helen Forgasz & Gilah Leder Monash University

There is increasing concern about Australian workforce participation in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics [STEM] (e.g., Office of the Chief Scientist, 2016). In particular, the need to encourage an increase in female participation in STEM has been flagged (e.g., Office of the Chief Scientist, 2013). The Office of the Chief Scientist (2013) provided descriptions of the fields of study encompassed by the acronym STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). The Victorian year 12 VCE subjects consistent with these descriptions include: the three mathematics subjects (Specialist Mathematics, Mathematical Methods, and Further Mathematics), Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and the two Information Technology subjects (IT applications, and Software Development).

It is a widely held belief that girls are more likely to study STEM subjects in single-sex than co- educational schools. Logically, later participation in STEM-related studies and careers should follow. However, in an analysis of Australian Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth [LSAY] data gathered in 2009, Sikora (2013) reported that “Girls in girls-only schools are more likely to take up physical science subjects than their female counterparts in coeducational schools. However, single-sex schooling does not affect the likelihood of girls planning a physical science career” (p. 3). In a relatively small recent study in the USA, the authors also concluded that “gendered or other types of school environments do not seem to increase female participation in these [STEM] types of careers” (Cherny & Campbell, 2011, pp. 722-723).

In this paper we report large scale data not readily available publicly: enrolments in year 12 Victorian Certificate of Education [VCE] STEM subjects for males and females in single-sex schools, and in co- educational schools. Our aim was to explore the patterns of enrolment in the VCE STEM subjects over time (2000-2015). In this presentation, we will discuss the patterns of enrolment by sex over time for students in co-educational and single-sex settings.

References Cherny, I. D., & Campbell, K. L. (2011). A league of their own: Do single-sex schools increase girls’ participation in the physical sciences? Sex Roles, 65, 712-724.

Office of the Chief Scientist. (2013). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics in the national interest: A strategic approach. Canberra: Australian Government.

Office of the Chief Scientist. (2016). Australia’s STEM workforce: Science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Canberra: Australian Government.

Sikora, J. (2013). Single-sex schools and science engagement. Adelaide: NCVER. FORGASZ/LEDER STEM REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

Part 1: Data on STEM subject enrolments in Victoria 2001-2015 Data was obtained by Professor Helen Forgasz and Adjunct Professor Gilah Leder of Monash University from the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) for enrolments in all STEM subjects for students eligible to sit the VCE (Victorian Certificate of Education) from 2001 to 2015 for single-sex and co-ed schools and, importantly, by gender within these schools (p. 9). As a result, statistics for Victorian enrolments in eight STEM subjects can be compared between single-sex girls, co-ed girls, single-sex boys and co-ed boys.

Chemistry (Fig. 3, p. 10) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were significantly more likely to study chemistry than girls in co-ed schools (27.6% vs 15.4%). • In fact, girls at single-sex girls were equally as likely as boys at single-sex schools (27.0%) and more likely than boys from co-ed schools (20.1%) to study chemistry.

Mathematical Methods (intermediate mathematics) (Fig. 6, p. 12) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were significantly more likely to study intermediate mathematics (Mathematical Methods) than girls in co-ed schools (36.3% vs 21.6%). • In fact, girls at single-sex girls were equally as likely as boys at co-ed schools to study intermediate mathematics (36.3% vs 36.2%), though less likely than boys from single-sex schools (48.3%).

Specialist Mathematics (advanced mathematics) (Fig. 7, p. 13) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were more likely to study advanced mathematics (Specialist Mathematics) than girls in co-ed schools (8.9% vs 4.8%). • The enrolment of single-sex girls in Specialist Mathematics declined from 14.0% in 2001 to 6.9% in 2012, but has since been rising steadily and, at the 2015 level of 8.9% is closing in on co-ed boys at 11.3%. • The enrolment of girls at co-ed schools in advanced mathematics was at its highest in 2003 (8.0%) but declined steadily over the next ten years to 4.0% in 2012. Since then there has been a small annual increase and was 4.8% in 2015, just over half the rate for girls at single-sex schools (8.9%). • Boys at single-sex schools are the most likely to study Specialist Mathematics, although their enrolment dropped from 21.6% in 2001 to 15.2% in 2015.

Physics (Fig. 4, p. 11) • In 2015, girls in single-sex schools were more likely to study physics than girls in co- ed schools (7.5% vs 5.1%). • It is concerning, however, that this is a decline since 2001 when 11.8% of girls in single-sex schools and 6.5% of girls in co-ed schools studied physics. • In addition, boys are far more likely to study physics with 2015 figures showing that 24.7% of boys in co-ed schools and 22.4% of boys in single-sex schools studied physics.

Other subjects Enrolments in other STEM subjects were similar for girls in single-sex and co-ed schools in 2015: • Biology: single-sex girls 29.1% and co-ed girls 29.0% (Fig. 2, p. 9). • Further Mathematics (elementary mathematics*): single-sex girls 53.4% and co-ed girls 58.8% (Fig 5, p. 11). • IT Applications: single-sex girls 1.6% and co-ed girls 1.5% (Fig. 8, p. 13). • Software Development: single-sex girls 0.1% and co-ed girls 0.3% (Fig. 9, p. 14).

* Forgasz and Leder used the terms elementary, intermediate and advanced to describe the three levels of mathematics offered in Victoria.

Notes: (1): The higher proportion of co-ed girls taking elementary mathematics (Further Mathematics) may possibly be explained by the higher proportion of single-sex girls taking intermediate and advanced mathematics subjects. (This was not discussed in the Forgasz/Leder report – this is my suggestion of a possible explanation.)

(2) The dramatic fall in the number of both girls and boys taking IT Applications and Software Development very concerning. In 2001, between 20% and 36% of girls and boys in both school types took IT Applications. In 2015, less than 10% boys and 2% of girls took this subject. In 2001, about 12% of boys in single-sex and co-ed schools took Software Development compared with less than 2% of girls in both school types. In 2015, about 5% of boys and less than 1% of girls were enrolled in Software Development. This is an alarming development, particularly for girls, right at the time when IT and computing professionals are highly in demand.

Part 2: Survey of girls’ school graduates regarding STEM To tease out the complex interplay of factors impacting on the differences in STEM subject enrolments for girls attending single-sex and co-ed schools, as well as the larger differences between girls’ and boys’ schools, Forgasz and Leder conducted an online survey of graduates of single-sex and co-ed schools (p. 15). Results include:

A higher proportion of females from single-sex schools than co-ed schools had completed studies in STEM-related health fields (28.3% vs. 19.0%). Smaller differences in favour of girls’ school graduates were also seen in physical or biological sciences; agricultural or environmental sciences; and IT/computing (Table 6, p. 24). A higher proportion of females from co-ed schools than single-sex schools had completed engineering studies (14.3% vs. 3.9%). Smaller differences in favour of female co-ed school graduates were also seen in mathematics; and the teaching of STEM subjects at secondary or tertiary level (Table 6, p. 24).

However, it should be noted that 50.8% of survey respondents did not use these categories to describe their occupation but used their own words. Forgasz and Leder stated that they were unable to categorise these responses due to the “diversity and complexity of the responses provided” (p. 24).

Forgasz and Leder write that (p. 15): “This may be related to the finding that parents of females who had attended single-sex schools appeared more influential in their daughters’ career choices than parents of females who had attended co-educational schools.”

For females graduates of single-sex schools, the most influential factors on their initial career choice were parents (43.4%), being good at STEM subjects (37.6%) and good employment prospects (31.8%). For females who attended co-ed schools, the most influential factors were being good at STEM subjects (44.5%), parents (39.0%) and good employment prospects (34.8%) (Table 7, p. 25).

Also (p. 15): “From the survey data, it was also found that the traditional gender stereotyped role expectation that females serve as the main carer for children was evident not only among older participants, but also, disappointingly, among younger participants. This gendered expectation, as well as harassment and bullying in male- dominated fields (e.g., engineering), were provided by many survey respondents as explanations for career changes away from STEM.”

And (p. 15): “A noteworthy finding was that the female respondents were far more likely to say that they would recommend a single-sex school to promote a girl’s interest in STEM than for a boy. This finding is consistent with the widespread belief that single-sex schools are more likely than co-educational schools to promote girls’ interest in STEM.”

Nearly half (43%) of all female respondents said that they would recommend a single-sex school to provide for a girl’s interest in STEM-related studies, compared with only 8% who would recommend a co-educational school as promoting STEM-related studies for girls. The remaining 49% said they would recommend either school type to promote STEM-related studies for a girl, depending on the child (Table 12, p. 34).

Among females who attended single-sex schools, 48% nominated single-sex schools as better than co-ed schools (5%) to promote a girls’ interest in STEM. Of those who had attended co-ed schools, 24% recommended a co-ed school to promote a girls’ interest in STEM and 18% recommended a single-sex school (Table 13, p. 34).