Social inclusion education policy in South Australia: What can we learn?

被引:11
|
作者
Bills, Andrew [1 ]
Howard, Nigel [2 ]
机构
[1] Flinders Univ S Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
[2] Univ South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia
关键词
Policy analysis; social inclusion (SI); educational disadvantage; student retention; marginalised young people; secondary schools; SCHOOL; RISK;
D O I
10.1177/0004944116689165
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
In this article, we interrogate the policy assumptions underlying a significant South Australian public education re-engagement initiative called Flexible Learning Options, formulated within South Australia's social inclusion policy agenda, beginning in 2006. To this end, we applied Baachi's 'What's the Problem Represented to be?' policy analysis framework to a historical range of departmental Flexible Learning Options policy documents and evaluations to uncover how Flexible Learning Options (1) understands the problem of early school leaving, (2) defines the notion of being an 'at risk' young person and (3) interprets and enacts the intervention process for young people identified as 'at risk' of early school leaving. Our policy analysis indicates re-engagement in learning - as measured by improved retention - to be the key Flexible Learning Options policy driver, with schools 'silently' positioned as a significant part of the retention in learning problem. The Flexible Learning Options engagement in learning intervention directed at 'high-risk' students' works to remove them from schools into places where personalised support and an alternative curriculum are made available. 'Lower risk' students are given a combination of in-school and off-school learning options. Our What's the Problem Represented to be? analysis also reveals that (1) the notion of 'risk' is embodied within the young person and is presented as the predominant cause of early school leaving; (2) how the educational marketplace could work to promote Flexible Learning Options enrolment growth has not been considered; (3) schools are sidelined as first choice engagement options for 'high-risk' young people, (4) secondary school redesign and family intervention as alternative reengagement strategies have largely been ignored and (5) through withdrawal from conventional schooling, the access of many Flexible Learning Options to students to an expansive curriculum delivered by teachers within well-resourced school learning architectures has been constrained.
引用
收藏
页码:54 / 74
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A population study of fractures: what we can learn and what we cannot learn
    Henderson, Richard
    DEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE AND CHILD NEUROLOGY, 2013, 55 (09): : 779 - 780
  • [32] What can we learn today?
    Nesland, JM
    ULTRASTRUCTURAL PATHOLOGY, 2002, 26 (03) : 123 - 123
  • [33] Pneumomediastinum - What can we learn?
    Furuse, M
    INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1998, 37 (10) : 802 - 803
  • [34] What Lessons Can We Learn?
    Hart, W. A.
    JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION, 2012, 46 (04) : 663 - 673
  • [35] Afghanistan: What can we learn?
    Osland, Kari M.
    Torjesen, Stina
    INTERNASJONAL POLITIKK, 2015, 73 (01) : 78 - 88
  • [36] What Can We Learn Privately?
    Kasiviswanathan, Shiva Prasad
    Lee, Homin K.
    Nissim, Kobbi
    Raskhodnikova, Sofya
    Smith, Adam
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 49TH ANNUAL IEEE SYMPOSIUM ON FOUNDATIONS OF COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2008, : 531 - +
  • [37] WHAT CAN WE LEARN PRIVATELY?
    Kasiviswanathan, Shiva Prasad
    Lee, Homin K.
    Nissim, Kobbi
    Raskhodnikova, Sofya
    Smith, Adam
    SIAM JOURNAL ON COMPUTING, 2011, 40 (03) : 793 - 826
  • [38] WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THAT
    JULIANO, C
    TRUESWELL, JC
    TANENHAUS, MK
    BULLETIN OF THE PSYCHONOMIC SOCIETY, 1992, 30 (06) : 473 - 473
  • [39] What can we learn from it?
    Bogaerts, A
    Gijbels, R
    ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 1997, 69 (23) : A719 - A727
  • [40] WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM RANDOMIZED FIELD EXPERIMENTS IN SOCIAL POLICY? ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEPENDENCE
    Dupas, P.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 169 : S128 - S128