Description:
In this paper I argue that values of democracy and social justice in education would seem to have been displaced in recent decades by managerialist norms that are linked to the presumed needs of business and the economy of the nation. I am concerned that conceptualizations of the nature and purpose of education, and of the roles of teachers, are restricted in this neoliberal climate and policy framework. I argue that there is an urgent need to restore notions of educational and social responsibility to the forefront of educational policy making. In particular, I argue, if educational success for all students is to be a key aim of education (and surely most commentators would claim it should be), then schools will have to ensure that they reach out to all students and their communities, welcome them, and engage them in learning that is relevant and meaningful to their lives within their particular social, cultural and economic circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Critical Studies in Education is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Description:
In order to critique the notion of ‘learner voice’ in vocational education and training (VET) policy, this paper draws from a project conducted by the authors on behalf of the Australian National VET Equity Advisory Council (NVEAC). The term ‘learner voice’ is used extensively throughout NVEAC documentation to describe the engagement of ‘disadvantaged’ students within the VET system. However, the concept of ‘voice’ being advocated, we argue, is a particularly ‘thin’ one which is linked to notions of client feedback, managed participation and the commodification of training rather than any broad sense of democracy, equity or social transformation. The paper critically examines current practices in relation to learner voice within the VET policy framework and their implications for the contested role of VET in contributing to social equity and redress of social and economic disadvantage.
Description:
The paper provides a critique of ‘school choice’ research, which is particularly relevant for Australia where ‘choice’ of school is strongly advocated by government. The promotion of choice, along with policies of market competition in education, the commodification of schooling, and rigid accountability policies that require the publication of national, standardised test result, illustrates the extent to which neoliberal education policies have been adopted in Australia. The paper argues that more holistic research on school choice needs be centred on processes of choice-making within the powerful political context of neoliberalism and in relation to the aspirations and imagined futures of students, parents, teachers, schools and communities. Such research must also acknowledge and understand that, as key elements of the neoliberal world view (such as competition, choice and high stakes accountability) are normalised in the day-to-day practices of schooling, the norms and values that characterise not only our education system, but also our society and democracy, are also affected.
Description:
This article examines information and communication technologies (ICTs) practices in the home and school settings of four disadvantaged families. It reports the findings of a year-long study that investigated the nexus between computer-mediated literacy practices at home and at school and whether this inter-connectivity could make a difference in school success. The findings indicate that there was disjunction between home and school use. The ``digital divide'' exists for the families of this study, not in terms of access but in the gap between ICT practices at home and school. Schools in this study did not integrate ICT skills learned and demonstrated in the home environment into ICT practices at school. The study concludes that constructing pedagogical connections between home and school ICT practices may begin to bridge the ``digital divide''.
Description:
This article examines information and communication technologies (ICTs) practices in the home and school settings of four disadvantaged families. It reports the findings of a year-long study that investigated the nexus between computer-mediated literacy practices at home and at school and whether this inter-connectivity could make a difference in school success. The findings indicate that there was disjunction between home and school use. The ``digital divide'' exists for the families of this study, not in terms of access but in the gap between ICT practices at home and school. Schools in this study did not integrate ICT skills learned and demonstrated in the home environment into ICT practices at school. The study concludes that constructing pedagogical connections between home and school ICT practices may begin to bridge the ``digital divide''.
Description:
This collection explores the political philosophy and theoretical foundations of educational administration and leadership as they influence our understanding, analysis and practice in the field.
Description:
This paper explores the complex issues of student engagement and school retention from a critical/sociological perspective. Dominant discourses on youth alienation, estrangement and underachievement are generally couched in a language of blame and deficits with responsibility for the problems being sheeted home to (a) individual students, families, neighbourhoods and/or cultural groups (b) teachers and schools, and (c) public education systems. What is largely missing from these discourses is a lack of recognition of the structural inequalities which pervade society and sustain educational disadvantage. Drawing on Paulo Freire’s philosophy and pedagogy, I argue that an analysis of student engagement and disaffection must involve both a critique of the dehumanising forces that operate within and outside schools, and the development of a renewed project for a critical pedagogy that challenges the logic of instrumental reason and neoliberal approaches to education policy. With reference to recent ethnographic research, I discuss the tensions involved in implementing school-based responses in the current policy environment and highlight some of the innovative responses to concerns of educational disadvantage and student engagement in the secondary years of schooling.
Description:
This paper explores the complex issues of student engagement and school retention from a critical/sociological perspective. Dominant discourses on youth alienation, estrangement and underachievement are generally couched in a language of blame and deficits with responsibility for the problems being sheeted home to (a) individual students, families, neighbourhoods and/or cultural groups (b) teachers and schools, and (c) public education systems. What is largely missing from these discourses is a lack of recognition of the structural inequalities which pervade society and sustain educational disadvantage. Drawing on Paulo Freire’s philosophy and pedagogy, I argue that an analysis of student engagement and disaffection must involve both a critique of the dehumanising forces that operate within and outside schools, and the development of a renewed project for a critical pedagogy that challenges the logic of instrumental reason and neoliberal approaches to education policy. With reference to recent ethnographic research, I discuss the tensions involved in implementing school-based responses in the current policy environment and highlight some of the innovative responses to concerns of educational disadvantage and student engagement in the secondary years of schooling.
Description:
The paper will report on an ongoing research project being conducted by the authors, on behalf of the Australian National VET Equity Advisory Council (NVEAC), in which we are required to conduct “a review and analysis of effective models and underpinning principles for gathering and responding to feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners”. The term “learner voice” is used throughout the NVEAC documentation to describe engagement with students of vocational education and training. But the “voice” that has unashamedly dominated the policy discourse in vocational and adult education and training in recent decades has been that of business and industry. Recently, however, particularly in England during the final term of the New Labour administration, and increasingly is some Scandinavian and European countries, a renewed emphasis on policies of social inclusion has introduced the notion of “learner voice” into policy considerations. Especially important are the voices of learners who are perceived to be disadvantaged or marginalised. In Australia, too, discourses of both inclusion and human capital have led to policies of involving students, their interests and their views in some way in the education project. The engagement of students with the tertiary education sector and institutions has come to be regarded as a way of promoting students’ learning by making their education and training more relevant to, and inclusive of, their “needs” while simultaneously contributing to the more efficient utilisation of human capital in an increasingly competitive national economy. Such inclusiveness, therefore, is promoted as facilitating the twin virtues of equity and efficiency, and is seen by some as having the potential to empower learners and transform their learning experience, and also to transform and expand Vocational Education and Training (VET) and Adult and Community Education (ACE). The paper will critically examine the dynamics of the vet policy framework and the range current practice in relation to learner voice. It will particularly emphasise contradictions in both practice and policy in relation to who speaks and with what authority, and who listens to what effect.