Chapter 2 - Parental and Community Support and Awareness
Introduction
2.1
The demise of the Aboriginal Student Support and Parent
Awareness (ASSPA) program as a result of amendments to the Indigenous Education
Assistance Act was the most contentious issue faced by the committee at its
meetings with indigenous communities. There are two elements to the
dissatisfaction resulting from this decision. The first is that it suggests to
indigenous communities that there is a retreat from a Government commitment to
self-determination, and has been widely regarded as an indication of lack of
trust in the good sense of indigenous representatives. The second element is
the more practical consequence of having greatly reduced levels of funding to
support educational programs, particularly in student welfare and attendance
support and in covering extra-curricular activities.
2.2
The Aboriginal Student Support and Parent Awareness
(ASSPA) program dates back to 1990. The 1990-91 DEET programs book describes
ASSPA as being designed to encourage educational opportunities for indigenous
students, at the same time as encouraging increased parental and community
involvement in education[12]. It may be
taken to mean that through ASSPA's role in strengthening the connection which
parents and extended families have with local schools, and through involving
them more in the decisions of the school, that over time students would be more
comfortable in a school environment in which their parents and grandparents
were familiar faces.
2.3
The number of ASSPA committees increased across the
country from around 2000 in 1991 to 3839 in 1999. Over 90 per cent of all
indigenous pre-school and school students attended schools which had ASSPA
committees. ASSPA funding entitlements ranged from $110 per student in a
primary non-remote school to $315 per student in a remote secondary school,
with funding ranging up to $100 000 for a particular school. Ten per cent of
schools received grants of over $10 000.[13]
2.4
ASSPA was conceived within the wider context of policy
promoting indigenous self-determination. The demise of ASSPA may be regarded as
one manifestation of the Government's impatience in attaining achievements in
this direction, and a change in emphasis to what it sees as transparent and
accountable ways of delivering programs which it believes will improve numeracy
and literacy standards. The committee notes some contradictions in efforts made
recently to balance responsibility with accountability. This is always a
problem with indigenous programs. Opposition senators, and many witnesses
appearing before the committee, take the view that ASSPA, despite the minor
shortcomings evident in some communities, was largely successful in maintaining
this balance. Whatever may be the shortcomings of programs in other portfolio
areas which have been associated with self-determination, the importance of
parental involvement in schools is beyond question. This holds good for any school
community anywhere.
2.5
The committee and Minister Nelson
appear to agree on this point. In April 2005 the Minister is reported to have stated
that public schools with high indigenous enrolments should be run like
independent schools for the purposes of ensuring parental control over
staffing. Speaking to Aboriginal representatives meeting in Cobar, the Minister
is quoted as saying:
You need to have the power to recruit your own principals. I
think the future for public education has increasingly got to be about giving
parents and the school itself the power to control their own destiny.[14]
2.6
Opposition senators wonder how it is possible to
reconcile the decision to abolish ASSPA with sentiments expressed above by Minister
Nelson. The Minister appears to be torn
between two conflicting policies: that of supporting local initiative and
self-management, which is now conventional wisdom; and imposing a Commonwealth
policy, with stringent conditions attached, likely to stifle local initiative
and impose a centralised micro-management regime. The committee urges that a
broad choice be made in favour of the former, with negotiations to produce a
satisfactory compromise on accountability measures.
2.7
In fact, ASSPA funding has been spent on a range of
projects, the vast majority of which fit broadly within the objectives of the indigenous
education program. Common projects include nutrition programs, swimming
classes, excursions (particularly where the school was remote and trips would
not otherwise be possible), curriculum support, artist or musician-in-residence
programs, and provisions for National Aboriginal Islander Day Observance Committee
(NAIDOC) Week. The quality of extra-curricular programs makes a crucial
difference to the success of the core curriculum.
2.8
The demise of ASSPA has not been adequately explained.
At the Melbourne hearing, DEST officials were asked about the evidence upon
which the decision to abolish ASSPA was based. The committee heard that the
government drew on a number of findings in a 1999 performance review, including
criticisms that ASSPA has little influence on decision-making within schools,
and being insufficiently concerned about educational outcomes.[15] However, the committee notes that
other parts of the review appeared to reflect very favourably on the usefulness
and performance of ASSPA, especially in its role of increasing participation
rates. Indeed, at the time of tabling the committee's interim report of this
inquiry in March 2005, the DEST website continued to report on the
effectiveness of ASSPA in addressing and improving educational outcomes,
according to evaluations made and anecdotal evidence provided. Particular
comment is made on the positive effects of cultural activities on learning
outcomes, and on improvements to student self-esteem, confidence and pride.[16]
2.9
It should be noted that the effect of the disbanding of
ASSPA is likely to be uneven. The committee has found that in Western
Australia, public schools will see a large measure of
continuity preserved as a result of the Commonwealth's agreement to run the
PSPI through established state structures. Regard is being paid to Western
Australian legislation which requires Commonwealth money to public schools
being paid through the state education department. District Aboriginal Councils
will play a key role in advising DEST on funding allocations. Western
Australia is committed to school-based budgetary
decision-making, and each school has a plan for indigenous education.[17] Submissions from the governments of Queensland,
South Australia and Tasmania
do not make it clear how they will deal PSPI. Submissions were not received
from either New South Wales or Victoria.
The committee has no information on the extent to which these states have
developed structures for accommodating Commonwealth initiatives.
The effectiveness of ASSPA
2.10
The committee heard substantial evidence of the successful
role played by ASSPA over its years of operation. Successes included increasingly
confident participation by parents and extended families in school operations,
as well increased attendance and fewer behavioural problems. Parents have
become noticeably more confident in their participation in school events and at
meetings, as was even evident to the committee. The committee also heard of
ASSPA's role in fostering student pride in their school and culture through activities
such as NAIDOC week. These improvements to school tone and morale were due to
programs which, at the time of the committee's visits to some of these schools,
were under threat or had stopped.
Nutrition programs
2.11
The 1999 review of ASSPA found that perceptions of
efficiency were influenced by opinion as to whether some expenditure was in the
category of 'welfare' rather than 'education'. The committee encountered this
argument during its visits, hearing documented evidence of recent decisions by
local DEST officers to the effect that provision of breakfasts and nutritious
food during the day did not fit expenditure guidelines, resulting in funding
applications being rejected. These included a letter from DEST to the Parramatta
State School
in Cairns declining to accept its
concept plan, and clearly stating that:
Under the program we will not be funding excursions, teacher
aides, tutors, the professional development of teachers, TRS, NAIDOC, sports,
nutrition programs, resources, artists, workshop presenters, camps and fees.[18]
2.12
The committee notes the assurances it has received from
a senior DEST official during the hearings on the additional estimates to the
effect that a school nutrition program could be fairly regarded as an
attendance initiative, and as such was a major priority for the Government.[19] It appears that this message has been ineffectively
transmitted to DEST's regional decision-makers, at least until recently, when
DEST issued modified guidelines. However, schools continue to report
discouraging messages from DEST in relation to nutrition and other so-called
'welfare' based programs. At the committee's final hearing, DEST submitted that
nutrition programs were able to be supported only where they were shown by
schools to be linked to 'core objectives'. This view was reiterated when DEST
appeared before the committee on the budget estimates on 2 June 2005.[20]
While DEST's response would have been appreciated, the committee understands
that principals and teachers became frustrated with official efforts to have
them make submissions on such obvious matters.
2.13
Notwithstanding DEST's inconsistent approach, schools
continue to provide the services they know to be important, sometimes relying
on teachers to dip into their own pocket for food.[21] At Shepherdson
College, the ASSPA committee funded
a breakfast and fruit program, as did many other energetic committees across
the Northern Territory and the
states, with the results as described:
One of the huge benefits is behaviour management. Three years
ago we used to have fights and trouble in all the classrooms all of the time.
As we got to understand the importance of nutrition and health, we had very few
behaviour management problems within the school because, through research and
in combination with the health centre, we were able to link those together. If
you are going to improve literacy and numeracy outcomes, you have to make sure
that all the things that go together to make that happen in an Indigenous
community are in place, otherwise literacy and numeracy are not going to suddenly
improve on their own.
2.14
When asked about the perceived link between a
nutritious diet and good behaviour, one principal illustrated his response with
an anecdote:
We have three [deputy principals] looking after each block, and
when a child comes to them I want them to be able to tell me why that child is
misbehaving. In week one of term one of 2005, we had nine students sent to our
senior block deputy...nine out of nine of those students by one o'clock in the
afternoon had not had breakfast, morning tea or lunch and all reported that
their tummies were growling and they were hungry...if you are tired and if you
are hungry then you are not going to learn and you are not going to behave
yourself. It is just not going to happen. It never has and it never will. [22]
2.15
Evidence was offered to the committee from almost every
school it visited on the link between 'full tummies' and learning
responsiveness. But there are other consequences, too. The committee heard that
students who have now to buy their lunch are less likely to attend school at
all, due to the shame involved in taking a handout.[23]
2.16
To complement nutrition programs such as these, at
least two schools visited by the committee operate a system whereby deductions
are made by Centrelink from parents' accounts and in return the school provides
students with breakfast and lunch, ensuring that at least two meals per day are
eaten. In addition to avoiding being shamed, this provides an added incentive
for school attendance, as parents insist that their child attend school and eat
the food which has been paid for.[24] A
variation on this scheme was the running by the school canteen of an optional account
system, allowing block payments and a 'line of credit' arrangement for
students. As every school principal will attest, an inability for students to
pay cannot exclude a student from benefits available to other students.
2.17
One participant in Cairns
suggested that policy makers need to be realistic about ways to achieve
learning outcomes:
[A]s teachers and principals in schools we know that if we have
a hungry kid they cannot learn and we need to deal with that issue. Everybody
wants to fund the big picture thing about improving literacy outcomes. But they
do not necessarily want to address all the nitty-gritty issues. If there is one
thing I have learned about improving the literacy of Indigenous kids it is that
it is a complex issue, and it needs to be addressed in a variety of ways
depending on the circumstances.[25]
Other activities
2.18
Another ASSPA responsibility that may be forgone under new
arrangements, and which also contributed significantly to school attendance, is
travel for the purposes of sport. The sports and music teacher at Milingimbi
School told the committee of one
problem, possibly insignificant to policy makers, but not so to children in Arnhem
Land:
from what I can see this year, the impact of the stalling
process has probably already blown our sports program—not just ours but that of
the whole Arnhem region; I do not
know which other regions. ...To enter students into competitions for the NT
school sport program in town—nearly all those events occur next term—the bid
for the team to be nominated has to be in very soon. You have to get them in a
month before the event. So, by the sound of things, if we are not going to know
for weeks whether we are getting any money it sounds like all those programs,
at least for this year, anyway, are going to be blown out of the water. So kids
in the Arnhem region will not get
to play sport or compete in sport in the Territory this year. That is my
perception in terms of immediate impact, and, again, things like music
excursions and just basic resources for the classroom, as Ingrid
was talking about. We are all very much in the dark. We would like some
answers.[26]
2.19
Since the committee visited Milingimbi in March, the
school has learned that it will receive $40 000 under PSPI, half of what it
received under ASSPA in 2004. The sports program still remains under threat.
2.20
Similar concerns about inter-school sport were voiced
at Shepherdson College
and at the Yarrabah School.
In both cases, it was ASSPA funding which kept the inter-school
sports program afloat in a region where travel is very expensive. Yet, as the
committee was told in several schools, sports participation is a key to
literacy and numeracy for a high proportion of boys.
2.21
Teachers and community representatives in Yarrabah
spoke of the threat to the work experience program at the school. The program
provides access for students to a broad range of industries and types of work
experience in Cairns, which lies 76
kilometres away. Hence, a bus service is needed, for which ASSPA funding was essential.[27] This must have been taken up by a
local DEST officer present at the committee's hearing. The committee was
pleased to hear later that funding had been arranged for the bus through a
different program.[28]
2.22
The committee points out the connection between
maximising participation and learning effectiveness, on the one hand, and
nutrition and sports programs on the other. The committee is struck by the fact
that neither the Minister nor DEST have made an authoritative statement recognising
the link between nutrition and fitness and learning readiness, and putting
these concerns to rest. Local DEST officials needed more guidance on this point,
as DEST has belatedly admitted. As the Commonwealth chooses to become
increasingly more involved in the minutiae of direct school contact, it will
find many similar problems awaiting it. They require a much closer acquaintance
with school culture than would be currently possessed by many DEST officials.
Criticisms of ASSPA
2.23
An internal review of IEDA, including the ASSPA
component, was conducted by the (then) Department of Education, Training and
Youth Affairs in 2000, with a final report published in 2004. The final (2004)
report of the review of IEDA is presumably the basis on which the Government
made its decision to disband ASSPA and replace it with PSPI. The committee
asked about the details of the review of ASSPA at the budget estimates hearings
in June 2004. It learned that in reviewing ASSPA functions, DEST selected 400
of the 3800 ASSPA committees at random (albeit a statistically significant
sample) and sent them a discussion paper for comment. There were 10 responses.[29] The committee therefore has some
doubts about the veracity of the final report.
2.24
Most submissions and witnesses held the view that ASSPA
funds were expended on a broad range of programs which were eminently helpful
in achieving the objectives of the program. As Principal Jan
Matthews told the committee in South
Hedland, WA:
I think there are a lot of things we use the funding for that
lead to improvement, but it is like going up a mountain – there are a lot of
pathways up a mountain...you have got to make people want to learn...you are not
necessarily going to make people want to learn by just saying 'What we are
looking at is literacy and numeracy'.[30]
2.25
The 2000 Review considered that ASSPA had provided an
appropriate and effective mechanism for increasing the participation of indigenous
parents, but was in favour of changes. Specifically, the reviewers stated:
There is broad consensus that the success of ASSPA within a
particular school community is heavily reliant upon the attitudes, skills and
motivation of the Indigenous parents, the school principal ... the most
successful ASSPA committees are those where there is a genuine partnership
between the committee and the school.[31]
2.26
The review found that:
These programs continue to be appropriate, and they enjoy strong
support from the community, because program objectives and outcomes align very
closely with Government priorities and initiatives as well as meeting client
needs at the local level. These programs have been effective in achieving
overall program objectives.[32]
2.27
In contrast, the 2004 review finds that:
The involvement of Indigenous parents and communities in
education is still an appropriate policy response, but the ASSPA program in
itself is no longer an appropriate intervention to achieve this...mainstream
education providers and peak parent bodies should be encouraged to step up
their activities to encourage and engage Indigenous parents in school education
issues in particular.[33]
2.28
The committee is puzzled by the stark differences in
the findings, over a relatively short four year time span. Apparently, the ASSPA
program went from being a successful program to a failed program in a very
short time, in spite of the program's successful alignment with government
priorities being listed as a key strength in 2000. The committee is unable to identify
what changed between 2000 and 2004, or how such changes precipitated a radical
shift in the policy of program delivery. DEST officials agree that the negative
and positive findings on ASSPA in the final report are 'observations from both
sides of the fence', but that the Government drew on the report in support of
changes.[34] They are not referred to in
the 2004 report, so it must be assumed that this report is a signal for a
policy change, rather than a report which gives reasons for a change. The
committee has looked in vain for a missing link in the argument.
2.29
The Australian Education Union (NT) considered that
problems with ASSPA Committees were more about a lack of structural support
from DEST in integrating Committees with mainstream school management
structures and in providing support and advice to ASSPA members.[35]There may not be any structural support
available to the new PSPI creations in the new funding, but it does appear to
be the Government's intention to integrate them into mainstream school
management.
2.30
The committee noted that even supporters of ASSPA were
aware of the uneven performance of the committees. The Director of the Catholic
Education Office in the Northern Territory
warned of the view of holding an over romantic view of ASSPA, and there was
support for this view from other roundtable participants in Darwin.
But as the CEO later conceded in its evidence, there was no doubt that ASSPA
provided a focus and a locus where indigenous parents have felt comfortable and
able to come in and make a contribution to education policy and the way the
school is run.[36]
2.31
Personalities play a part in the stability and success
of ASSPA committees, as does community mobility. For instance, the committee
visited Koormilda College,
one of the largest Protestant boarding schools in the country, and learnt about
the problems faced by boarding schools whose ASSPA committees were drawn from
many communities, creating complications for school management.
2.32
Varying effectiveness was recognised, particularly
between those schools which had a high or almost exclusive indigenous enrolment
and those which did not. The principal of the Kurrawang
CAPS School
in Western Australia told the
committee:
The sheer facts that these [Aboriginal Independent Community
Schools] are Indigenous and are run by Indigenous boards and that Indigenous
parents have a major part in the day to day running of those schools means that
ASSPA worked incredibly effectively...ASSPA was probably one of the most
effective programs that was running.[37]...However,
if you look at the broad range of schools across Australia,
the comment that I have heard is that some were not effectively administered
and some schools did not have ASSPA committees, which is possibly the case in
suburban areas where the Indigenous population is quite small. ...I cannot
understand why something that was not broken needed to be fixed, but perhaps in
other spheres and aspects of ASSPA across Australia
there were some issues that needed to be dealt with...
2.33
ASSPA committee stalwarts, as might be expected, were
eager to describe their role and its importance in the life of the school. The
committee noted that many of these people were depressed about the fact that
their active involvement in school life was nearing its end, and it noted what
a considerable loss to the community and to education programs they would be.
The committee was told in Alice Springs that while ASSPA attracted a core of
active parents, the PSPI program would not. Indigenous parents would be
unwilling to serve on school council sub committees. They would resent being
'mainstreamed'.[38]
Homework Centres
2.34
Apart from ITAS and the PSPI, the other component of
the Whole of Schooling Implementation Strategy (WOSIS) which is relevant to
this chapter is the funding of homework centres. According to DEST, funding for
centres may be applied for independently or as part of the school's concept
plan. In order for the application to be successful, as with other elements of
a concept plan, it must be established that it was developed by the school and indigenous
parents and community in partnership. It must also demonstrate clear milestones
and performance measures. In common with other WOSIS programs, there is a
requirement that an application for funding must show that a homework centre
would achieve specific educational objectives. DEST advised that 88 homework
centre applications had been approved as at 27 April 2005, and that figure had risen to 100 by 2
June 2005.[39]
2.35
The committee recalls the enthusiasm with which
homework centres were extolled during its 1999-2000 inquiry into indigenous
education. It was interesting, therefore to hear the views of the Western
Australian Department of Education and Training. There is less enthusiasm there
at system level where industrial issues loom as significant.
...homework centres are not a part of the concept planning process
in Western Australia for the
government school sector. We made a decision, along with the state DEST office,
that the homework centre process was one that we were not prepared for our
school principals to manage. The information was provided to us in late
December that DEST expected the principalship to manage homework centres. We
refused to allow that to happen, only because we have not gone through a due
and appropriate process with regard to the principalship taking over homework
centres. It has EBA ramifications and a whole stack of other ramifications.[40]
2.36
The committee has not pursued this issue with other
state departments.
The importance of continuing indigenous involvement
2.37
The changes to structures and to funding do not give
promise of continuing strong involvement of indigenous parents. The Independent
Education Union of the Northern Territory (IEUNT) warned that while ASSPA may
not have been perfect, its replacement with PSPI has the potential to
disenfranchise indigenous parents of students studying in urban and independent
schools. The IEU added that:
To argue that after 13 years of operation the ASSPA program
produced negligible evidence in improving educational outcomes of [I]ndigenous
students is to ignore that those
outcomes can only improve if the students attend school on a frequent basis and
feel comfortable in the school environment.[41]
2.38
Most schools with an ASSPA committee reported that, if
not completely disbanded, the residual group of active indigenous parents was fewer
in number after the changes. As one witness told the committee; parental
involvement will dwindle because too many restrictions are put on parent
committees. Interest would be lost because of unwarranted concern with the
mechanics of accountability, all because of occasional instances of
mismanagement.[42]
2.39
For most, however, it is the loss of decision making
power that has brought about a reduced interest in ASSPA-type committees by indigenous
parents. Typical of sentiments were these observations from a teacher speaking
at Kirwan State
High School in Townsville:
If we were having some issues with getting parent involvement,
we will now have big issues because if there is no ASSPA committee and if those
people have no power and do not have some money and resources to work with to
make some decisions that really do impact on their kids, they are not coming.[43]
2.40
DEST acknowledged that concerns such as these were
evident from the committee's transcripts, and conceded that one of the
challenges they faced was improved involvement and engagement of parents in the
schools.[44] The committee is curious as
to why DEST would have expected a different reaction to that reported here. It
raises questions as to the policy rationale and the process by which it was
arrived at, and the sources of that advice. These are decisions which are
reached by governments within a sphere of policy about which there is often public
and parliamentary indifference.
Testing the mettle of school principals
2.41
A side effect of the changes has been the need for principals
to use school funds for essential services, previously funded under ASSPA. The
committee heard of the unease of a number of principals with this course of
action, because it risks a breach of financial guidelines on the use of
mainstream school funds. In the event that PSPI funding does not arrive, principals
would be accountable. As one principal said:
A lot of us have our backsides hanging out bigtime, because we
are funding things from our school budgets that we are hoping we will then get the
money back for, and we do not know whether that will happen. I cannot, as a
human being, justify not doing what I think is right and proper, having
consulted with my community, because I am waiting for bureaucracy to catch up.[45]
2.42
A number of other principals admitted to following the
line of 'spend and be damned'. They could not bear to see valuable programs
cease simply because of uncertain funding. The principle of La
Grange Community School
on the north-west coast of Western Australia
south of Broome is one such principal, though he put it more gently when he
affirmed that he was taking $300 a week fruit money out of school funds, while
awaiting for an as yet unknown amount of PSPI funding:
We are looking on the positive side. Our attitude is that people
want us to do what is right. We are working on the principle that if people can
see that we are doing the right thing they will come to the party. We will
worry about it if it does not turn out that way. As I said, we work on the
principle that people will do that. We work on the principle that if it is
really obvious people will support us in that endeavour.[46]
2.43
The committee is gratified to know that in their role
as 'risk managers' school principals are increasingly prepared to put the
immediate welfare interests of their students before other considerations.
Their role and vocation gives them no option, and governments have no option
but to support them.
Conclusions
2.44
From the evidence put before it, the committee
concludes that ASSPA was a program which enjoyed considerable success in
achieving its stated objectives. The committee heard ample evidence that, by
their nature, ASSPA committees promoted indigenous involvement in school
activities, and that this had definite benefits for indigenous student
education outcomes. The committee acknowledges that the ASSPA program was not
perfect, but heard little evidence that it required serious reform. The
overwhelming majority of stakeholders who contributed to the inquiry supported
the ASSPA program, even if, in some cases, in amended form, and saw its abandonment
as a retrograde step.
2.45
The committee's second observation is that while PSPI's
designers may have intended concept plans to promote simplicity and community
involvement in the types of activities applied for, this has not eventuated. The
disbanding of ASSPA committees has in many cases left principals without
confident and committed indigenous people from whom to take advice. Principals
themselves have in some cases found difficulty in interpreting DEST policy
intentions regarding new ground rules. This has been made more difficult
because of reports of conflicting advice from DEST, which have filtered down
through the principal's 'grapevine'.
2.46
The final, and most telling observation is that the
committee is unconvinced that the PSPI program, as it has been 'rolled out' so
far, will promote indigenous involvement in schools. Indeed, the early evidence
suggested that a sizeable proportion of the former ASSPA committees have
completely disbanded and have not been reformed. Only with great difficulty are
they likely to be resurrected as PSPI committees. The transferral of funding
from an indigenous parent and community-based committee to the school principal
has been interpreted as a vote of no confidence by the Government in indigenous
people, and this has resulted in a fall-off in indigenous parental and other
community support which the program seeks to attract.
Recommendation 1
The committee
recommends that the Government ensure that under PSPI there is a genuine engagement
with parents and the community to ensure the achievement of learning outcomes
for all students.
Recommendation 2
The committee recommends that as a matter
of preference, PSPI reverts to guaranteed per capita funding, and in the event
that this does not occur, that PSPI be applied for twice yearly, with
conditions which recognise the circumstances of individual schools and their
diverse educational needs.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page