AARE blog

What teachers need now to survive (hint: not this old trick)

21st century teaching, social and emotional competence, , ,

The advice given to teachers entering the classroom for the first time is often ‘Don’t smile until Easter’. The expression suggests hostility, attempting to place the teacher as the enforcer and the one who will wield the power for the year. 

While the phrase might still ring true for some teachers, we, as teachers, are dealing with very different classrooms and students today that require a more socio-emotional approach. Classrooms are more heterogeneous than ever; the breadth of diversity and needs of students has grown. Students are entering the classroom with ever more diagnosed and undiagnosed disabilities, and growing wellbeing issues. 

The classroom can and should provide a warm, safe learning environment where students feel known and cared for. And whilst such an approach is highly applicable in primary schools, it also has its place in secondary classrooms. 

Teaching is social and emotional

We know teaching is a social and emotional practice, and using the first weeks of the term to build positive connections with students can have long term benefits for both teachers and students. Research tells us that positive teacher-student relationships can assist positive social and emotional development in students; influence student motivation and engagement; improve academic outcomes;  support at-risk students; provide a sense of belonging for students; and are beneficial for teachers and their wellbeing. The research is there, but how do teachers build these relationships in the classroom, especially in secondary schools when teachers often teach up to 180 students per week?

My research into teacher-student interactions in the classroom, collected data from 42 teachers across NSW secondary schools, covering all sectors and spanning 17 disciplines. I was curious to know how teachers interact with students in their classrooms to build teacher-student relationships and whether a teachers’ workload may be compromising these relationships. Many of the practices observed and counted are evidence-informed and low cost, high gain. The practices were split into those that teachers can proactively implement directly and those that indirectly contribute to creating and maintaining an optimal learning environment. 

Eye-contact, a warm voice and good manners

The early findings give insights into how teachers are navigating the classroom and their relational interactions with students (Figure 1). Highest counts came from teachers providing genuine praise, modelling respect, reflective and supportive listening, getting to know students and providing feedback. Teachers effectively used praise during lessons for positive behaviour, academic work and actions of individuals or a collective group. They modelled respect through eye-contact, a warm voice and good manners. Supportive and reflective listening through shared dialogue was characterised by teachers reflecting on a student’s thought or idea by supportively listening, then converting that thinking into further thinking and inquiry. Feedback came in the form of verbal advice to students of ways to improve and develop their thoughts. And teachers shared stories of themselves, and used familiar ‘teenage’ or contemporary examples to explain work or reference a students’ interest, to demonstrate knowing their students. 

Figure 1: Counted practices

Hello and goodbye

Two of the simplest techniques, positive greetings and farewells, which were only counted once per lesson, recorded one the lowest of counts. Over a third of teachers didn’t positively greet their students and a quarter of teachers didn’t finish the lesson with a positive farewell. This could reflect a number of things prevalent in the observation of lessons and the teacher interviews; the constant time constraints that teachers face such as the need to work through content or towards an assessment meant that teachers started lessons immediately with little personalisation; or the time it takes to travel to a new classroom each lesson, provide paper, pens and equipment for students, and student lateness often chewed up the time to genuinely greet students. The lack of time to build quality relationships was evidently a major concern for teachers in post interviews, claiming:

 “It’s a bit more of a lack of a chance to talk with them. There’s a lot of…’everything needs to be doing’ things all of the time and that lack of…slowdown to sort of have a chat with them and see them as people, to get them to see you as a person”. (Teacher 21)

“I wish that I had more time to interact with them in the classroom and I wish I had more time to interact with their drafts and things like that and give them that timely feedback. And I think that the fact that I don’t. I just have to go “You’ll be ok”  that makes me feel like I’m not doing enough for them.” (Teacher 28 )

What gets in the way

Many of the lower counts came from interpersonal practices that teachers adopt and can indirectly affect the teacher-student relationship and shape the learning climate (see red in Figure 1). These teacher actions can be done before and during the lesson. They help structure the learning environment, set the expectations and manage students positively. It is a way for teachers to bolster student confidence, build trust, and set and uphold classroom expectations. None of the 42 teachers in this study found time to write in a diary or provide a positive note to parents during the two observed lessons. Instead, time was taken up with constantly documenting student misbehaviour and negative incidences, all of which must be logged. A teacher reported:

I try to make a phone call to parents and say this kid has been good, but I just don’t have the time. I have 3 or 4 ‘negative’ calls to make, to inform a parent that their child is not working in class. (Teacher 23)

What do teachers value

Secondary school lessons can range from 40 to 75 minutes with the expectation that students sit still for the duration of the lesson. Studies show that small movement breaks contribute to less disruptions and better student concentration. Lesson time is often the most inactive part of a student’s day at school with the expectation, in a traditional sense, that students sit, listen and partake in learning. Three quarters of teachers provided no movement breaks during their lessons, even when observing students falling asleep and heads on table. Many lessons observed lacked peer collaborative strategies and student choice of their learning which can contribute to student motivation. Teachers reported resorting to ‘lecture style’ teaching or ‘talk-and-chalk’ due to the demands of additional work or workload which took away from planning and preparing for more engaging, student-centred lessons.  

Teachers were also asked what they value in their teaching, with 42.9% stating relationships, and 57.1%  stating other factors such as the curriculum, getting through the content, planning and preparation, and student understanding. Many of these teachers, speaking about how they form relationships with students, were unclear how this happens, whilst others spoke about specific tasks they may do at the beginning of the year as a way of getting to know their students.

Bingo

These involved asking students to write introductory letters; informing students about yourself and your interests; learning their names and using them regularly; collaborative making of classroom rules, goals and expectations; playing ‘getting to know others’ bingo; or general discussions, either as a group or individually about likes, dislikes, interests etc. Much of the research, using student voice, reported care as a quality students want to see in teachers often commenting that the teacher doesn’t know them personally. Students also respect teacher competence; not being able to ‘run the room’ can be the quickest way to lose the students. 

Teachers influence their students, not only through their pedagogy and behaviour, but also in teaching and modelling social and emotional constructs. Creating positive teacher-student relationships is not about making friends. As the adults in the room, teachers instruct, direct and guide their students and their behaviour, not hesitating when difficulties arise. But also as the adult and leader in the room, teachers can help students feel safe, known and cared for, something which might not be happening at home.

Smile on day one?

So perhaps standing by the belief of  “Don’t smile until Easter” is an outdated adage. Instead, bring the humanness back to teaching; show a little of yourself, bring humour, get to genuinely know students and show you care. Underpin this with established routines and structure, transparency and predictability, and trust, to create a conducive learning environment that builds strong teacher-student relationships.  

Julianna Libro is a PhD candidate at The University of Sydney. She is interested in teachers’ growing workload and the consequences this has on teachers themselves, their practice and relationships with students. Julianna has over 20 years teaching experience in secondary schools as an English and History teacher and has taken on a variety of leadership roles throughout her career. Recently, Julianna presented her initial findings at ICERI Conference in Seville, Spain and AARE, Melbourne.

Toil and trouble: why time-poor teachers choose these texts today

English Curriculum, , ,

When Queensland introduced a prescribed text list in 2019, teachers had a smorgasbord of choice, but they went with the bread and butter options.

New data from the Queensland Curriculum And Assessment Authority about the texts shows English teachers play it safe when it comes to the texts they teach in Units 3 and 4 (Year 12). 

A major system overhaul in 2019 increased external quality assurance measures; introduced externally designed, unseen examinations; and a placed a limitation of text choice for teachers. 

But this sort of syllabus reform reduces teachers’ sense of self-efficacy and agency as well as increasing the stakes for each assessment. That has a trickle down impact on younger year levels. 

Research at the time revealed a great deal of anxiety among teachers. While this was an opportunity to reinvigorate their practice, a lack of time given to support the transition seems to have stymied this reinvigoration; teachers’ text selection choices are shaped by a range of pressures, and so the canon is the surefire solution. 

Schools are given a choice of eight texts for the External Assessment. Of the 508 Queensland schools offering the General English syllabus, 347 of them (68%) select Macbeth, and the next nearest text, with 68 schools, is another Shakespearean work, Hamlet, meaning over 80% of schools select a Shakespearean play. The three Australian authors on the list for the External Examination (Hannah Kent, Andrew McGahan and Tara June Winch) are studied by less than 50 schools collectively (9%). 

The big numbers for the three internal assessments are also strongly canonical: The Great Gatsby dominates the list of novels, with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, George Orwell’s 1984 and Tim Winton’s The Turning the only other text to have greater than 50 schools using them. The list of poets is the most balanced, but still leans canonical, with Dawe, Duffy, Frost, Plath and Owen topping 100 schools each. 

The QCAA advice regarding text selection requires:

There must be a range and balance in the texts … Courses should include texts from different times, places and cultures, including texts that aim to develop in all students an awareness of, interest in, and respect for the literary traditions and expressions of other nations in the Asia–Pacific region. Australian texts, including texts by Aboriginal writers and/or Torres Strait Islander writers, must be included across the course of study and within each unit pair of the course. At least one of the Australian texts studied over the four units of the course must be by an Aboriginal writer or Torres Strait Islander writer. Schools may include texts translated from other languages.

Yet the data clearly suggests that while text selections may meet the technical requirements of the syllabus, they do not take up the spirit of inclusion and diversity suggested by the QCAA. This disconnect between aims and reality is well established, as Shakespeare, mid-20th century dystopia and well-known poetry are safe-havens, which don’t require the development of new resources, or the teaching of contentious issues in a fraught political climate. 

It is important to note that the data about text selection focuses on Units 3 and 4, but it is Unit 2 that has a unit focus on Australian texts, so this is where it is most likely to encounter Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander- authored works. While schools are not bound by the prescribed list in Units 1 and 2 (Year 11), a number of forces work to push teachers towards ‘sticking to the list’. Queensland has a textbook hire scheme, in which schools provide textbooks to students at a substantial discount. These texts are returned and reused the following year, which means that schools cannot change the set texts regularly, and that class sets of texts become a resource that can be swapped between year levels or between schools, perpetuating the original text choice. These systemic forces are not unique, and while they vary from state to state, they have the same effect of narrowing text choices. 

The other key and most pressing impetus for text selection is resourcing: if teachers choose a text no one else is doing, they have to start from scratch in terms of developing the teaching materials. Online teacher forums and Facebook groups are filled with requests for resources and teaching ideas, as time poor teachers look to work as efficiently as they can. The other advantage of homogenous text selection is safety in numbers. In preparing students for an unseen examination, having a resource-rich professional community teaching the same text offers teachers security that they are preparing their students well. 

As Head of English and Languages at The Glennie School in Toowoomba, Emily Scott, explains, text choice is in part constrained by a school’s existing resources. Complying with the syllabus requirements across the 4 units  is akin to “a jigsaw puzzle. Building upon students’ prior knowledge, development of skills, and varying genre types are key factors to consider when selecting texts”. Further, Scott suggests teachers also have to consider “school culture, and the interests and needs of your students when choosing texts from the prescribed text list. What may work for one school may not necessarily be best placed in another context”. 

This focus on supporting learners in their contexts is reiterated by Cate Park-Ballay, Head of Faculty- English at St Hilda’s School on the Gold Coast:

we find ourselves in an educational landscape where we are no longer perceived as the ‘sage on the stage.’ Instead, we actively promote an environment that empowers student agency. Our goal is to extend learning beyond the traditional classroom boundaries, selecting texts that not only facilitate independent student exploration but also provide easy access to excellent resources shared by knowledgeable colleagues worldwide.

Both of these reflections from experienced curriculum leaders highlight the many competing pressures and priorities at play in designing a course of study and making suitable text selections. The time and workload pressures placed upon teachers mean there is an increasing gulf between “being the kind of teacher they want to be, and the type of teacher they have time to be”. This time poverty means teaching the dominant text, with the extensive resources available through professional networks, is the logical choice. With an onslaught of systemic processes like textbook hire, a high stakes testing environment and workload demands working against teacher agency and creativity, it is little wonder that we retreat behind the canon, perpetuating a more monocultural narrative with reduced teacher autonomy. As a result of curriculum and systemic pressures, have we lost sight of the joy of reading?

Alison Bedford is a senior lecturer in history curriculum and pedagogy at the University of Souther Queensland. She provides supervision to students undertaking systematic and scoping literature reviews and is interested in the methods of discourse analysis in her own work. You can find her on LinkedIn and Threads.

Australia doesn’t need a ‘Behaviour Curriculum’. We need to implement Social and Emotional Learning now

social and emotional competence, , ,

Last month, the Senate Education and Employment References Committee released an interim report on the Senate Inquiry into increasing disruption in Australian school classrooms – and it looks like we will get the final report today. It used an unsubstantiated decline in Australia’s rank in the OECD’s disciplinary climate index to claim Australian classrooms as among the most disorderly around the world and raised concerns about teacher safety, job satisfaction, and retention, and the impact of classroom disruption on students’ academic learning. Meanwhile, rigorous research has demonstrated no decline in three of four measures of learning.

The interim report’s recommendation for a ‘Behaviour Curriculum’ is similarly flawed. Student behaviour is complex, shaped by a myriad of social, economic, political, and environmental factors. Consistency in the school-wide use of evidence-based classroom management techniques, such as the use of clear routines and coherent reward/consequence systems, provide effective parameters for expected behaviours but they are not enough on their own. There is also significant danger in a simplistic “tips and tricks” approach that implies that all problem behaviours are misbehaviours that can be corrected by teachers who have mastered basic techniques to which they have (allegedly) never been introduced.

It is seductive to imagine that all challenging behaviours can be magically fixed by teachers learning how to “run a room”, but this ignores the reality with which today’s classroom teachers must grapple. Many of the most troubling behaviours for teachers are not deliberate actions of indolent children who could otherwise comply with the help of stricter discipline. Rather, they reflect differences in cognitive processing, underlying stress responses, and/or the outcome of emotional overwhelm by students who have experienced childhood complex trauma or who have a disability.

There is a disturbing current of ableism running through the report and through the submissions of various advocates for the behaviour curriculum. Look, for example, at the definition of disruptive behaviour used in the interim report. The parallels between these five criteria and the diagnostic criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are obvious to anyone with any knowledge or experience of ADHD but, as that is clearly not the case for some, we have placed both in a table to highlight the overlap.

Senate Interim Report Definition of Disruptive Behaviour (p. 3)Diagnostic Criteria for ADHD
1.      talking unnecessarily and calling out without permissionOften talks excessively.Often blurts out an answer before a question has been completed.
2.   being slow to start work or follow instructionsOften avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that require sustained mental effort. Often has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks.
3.   showing a lack of respect for each other and staffOften does not listen when spoken to directly.Often interrupts or intrudes on others.Often leaves seat in situations when remaining seated is expected.
4.   not bringing the right equipmentOften loses things necessary for tasks or activities.
5.   using mobile devices inappropriatelyIs often easily distracted by extraneous stimuli.

In fact, all five are consistent with ADHD, a neurodevelopmental disorder which is underrecognised and poorly understood/supported in Australian schools. Education providers are obligated to provide reasonable adjustments to ensure that students with a disability, including those with ADHD, can access and participate in education on the same basis as students without disability. Yet these students are commonly do not receive adjustments and are commonly (but mistakenly) perceived as wilfully non-compliant. Not surprisingly, they are overrepresented in school suspension, exclusion, and early school leaving.

While we acknowledge that challenging behaviours exist in classrooms and that these can be better managed (and that these students can and should be better supported), the real solution extends beyond a reductive curriculum focusing only on ‘behaviour’. What Australia needs is a holistic, forward-thinking approach that prioritises the whole child; one that addresses not just the symptoms but the root causes of disruptive behaviour.

Thankfully this need is being recognised elsewhere in government, judging by various recommendations to implement Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS). MTSS is a comprehensive and integrated service delivery framework that systematises the provision of evidence-based prevention and intervention support across all developmental domains (academic, behavioural, and social-emotional) in three tiers (universal, targeted, intensive) that increase in specialisation and intensity.

Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) is a key component of MTSS, which recognises that there is more to education and child development and wellbeing than academics and behaviour, and that all three are inextricably linked. SEL involves teaching children to understand and manage their emotions, set goals, show empathy, establish healthy relationships, and make responsible decisions. SEL is both preventative and educative, proactively laying the groundwork for children to gain a deeper understanding of themselves and others, while cultivating the essential skills necessary for positive life outcomes.

(Close, 2023).

SEL is operationalised through evidence-based programs, integration into core academic instruction, and student-centred learning environments. Implementing SEL through a multi-tiered, systematic approach ensures it reaches all students and is integrated into various aspects of their lives, including the classroom, school, family, and community. The aim is to provide students with the skills they need to actively engage and succeed, rather than merely setting up a framework of rules and routines designed to contain and constrain with consequences when some students inevitably transgress.  

Developing students’ social-emotional competencies is already a recognised priority in Australia, as evidenced by the Personal and Social Capability strand of the General Capabilities, which includes four of the five core SEL competencies: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and social management (akin to relationship skills). The fifth competency, responsible decision-making, is integrated within the social management domain. The Personal and Social Capability strand provides an encouraging starting point for SEL, indicating that the curriculum infrastructure already exists.

The critical issue that has so far prevented this approach from achieving its aims in Australian schools is that this aspect of the curriculum is not assessed. And, due to the emphasis on literacy and numeracy—which is assessed—this important area of child and adolescent development does not currently receive the time and attention needed for it to be effective.

The recommendations emerging from the Review to Inform a Better and Fairer Education System and the Review of the National School Reform Agreement before it, are an ideal opportunity to streamline student mental health and wellbeing support across Australia. Traditional approaches, such as defaulting to a behaviour curriculum, the concept of which has been imported from England, is not the answer.

Australia needs to adopt a more intentional approach to address challenging behaviours, transitioning from reactive methods to proactive approaches. This involves laying the groundwork to explore how SEL can be implemented within an Integrated Multi-Tiered System of Support that includes—but is not limited to—evidence-based approaches to positive behaviour intervention and support. Relying on a behaviour curriculum of the type being advocated in submissions will continue to leave students behind who struggle with social-emotional skills, particularly those exhibiting the most challenging behaviours —the very students who stand to benefit most from SEL.

Melissa Close is an Outreach and Engagement Officer with the Centre for Inclusive Education at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). She has over a decade of experience as an educator in international and domestic settings. She holds a Master of Education (Leadership and Management) and is currently pursuing a Master of Philosophy at QUT focused on the systemic implementation of Social and Emotional Learning in educational settings in Australia and the United States. 

Linda Graham is professor and director of The Centre for Inclusive Education at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). She has led multiple externally funded research projects and has published more than 100 books, chapters and articles. Her international bestseller, Inclusive Education for the 21st Century, is now in its second edition. In 2020, Linda chaired the Inquiry into Suspension, Exclusion and Expulsion processes in South Australian government schools. She also gave evidence to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability on the use of exclusionary school discipline and its effects.

School funding: Is this Australia’s most important moment for reform?

School funding, , , , , ,

School funding policy burst back onto the national agenda last Tuesday. Federal Education Minister Jason Clare announced a ‘statement of intent’ had been signed with Western Australia to fully fund the state’s public schools by 2026.

This language is important. A statement of intent is not  a signed, five-year, bilateral funding agreement. There is still much water to go under the bridge.

Yet, on face value, the announcement is good news. It signals the federal government’s intention to boost overall funding for public schools in WA by an extra $777.4 million over five years. In doing so, lifting its share of public school funding from 20 percent to 22.5 percent. Importantly, priority is also given to the state’s most disadvantaged public schools to ensure they are the first to receive the new funding.

As part of the deal, the WA government committed to providing at least an equivalent amount over this period, or 77.5% of the SRS, bringing total additional investment in public schools to $1.6 billion.

In theory at least, this will bring all WA schools regardless of sector up to 100% of the Student Resource Standard by 2026, in school funding policy terms, a quick turnaround.

So why was WA the first cab off the rank?

A review of the annual reporting of states and territories concerning their bilateral funding agreements shows that in 2018, WA actually funded schools at 104% of the SRS, with the WA state government providing 84.43% of the SRS in addition to the federal government’s 20% contribution. From 2019, each year, WA has incrementally dropped its funding to the plateau in 2021, 2022 and 2023 of 75%.

In short, for the federal government to achieve a much needed political and public victory concerning school funding, WA was low hanging fruit. It was sitting on 95% of the SRS in 2023, and only years before schools had been funded in excess of 100%.

WA is also in strong budgetary position vis a vis the other states and territories with a $3.7 billion net operating budget surplus now forecast for 2023‑24.

Perhaps in a sign of things to come, included in the signed statement of intent was a no-disadvantage clause. This means the WA will net hundreds of millions more for education if the Eastern states secure a higher share.

Judging from the initial reaction from some eastern seaboard states, who rejected outright the federal government’s 2.5% increase in funding, Minster Clare faces a rocky negotiation path ahead.

Don’t get too excited

There’s a lot we don’t know. And a lot to worry about if history repeats itself. Our school funding history in relation to equity and needs-based funding is not reassuring.

Minister Clare obviously hopes that the WA agreement will set the scene for other state and territory agreements. He wants all parties to negotiate in good faith and with noble purpose.

But the much-travelled path of federal/state school funding negotiations is littered with disagreements —protracted and fierce. Their results have seldom been fair let alone noble. 

At this stage Victoria and Queensland are not agreeing to 22.5. In equally good faith they are pushing for 25% funding from the federal government.

The Australian Education Union concurs. Its Every school. Every child campaign has long made this clear. It also asks for 40% for the NT where public schools are in dire straits.

Funding war?

Some observers are foreshadowing another ‘funding war’. The exact strategies and tactics of the combatants remain to be seen. Or not. Wider publics are seldom privy to manoeuvres behind-the-scenes. 

The usual funding wars also involve the private schools. Independents, Catholics, the federal government and the states/territories all go into battle for self-interest.

These current negotiations are focused on  the needs-based funding of public schools. Yet Private schools may still enter the funding fray. They always have. 

Currently, for all schools, the SRS is topped up with ‘equity loadings’. We don’t yet know how these will be built into these new funding arrangements. 

There is also the 4% depreciation and other costs loophole that allows the states and territories to reduce their funding in real times. Without its removal, WA Public schools will receive 96% of the SRS rather than the suggested 100%. 

Will disadvantaged schools, with time poor teachers, be given additional support to claim such loadings.  

This federal money is to be tied to various ‘practical reforms’. The Improving Outcomes for All review is the touchstone. These reforms will, in the Minister’s words, ‘help children to keep up, catch up and finish school’.  

But we don’t yet know how these reforms will be rolled out. We don’t know how they will be devised and evaluated, or the assessment and accountability mechanisms involved. 

It is not clear if the Commonwealth has any claw back mechanisms if the states/territories don’t measure up.

Commonwealth accountability mechanisms are notoriously complex, obscure and unhelpful. Danger lurks here.  

Matters to keep in mind

These recent WA developments are an important starting point for the National School Reform Agreement (NSRA) and the new bilateral funding agreements to be negotiated this year.

But, while the haggling over the percentage of government contributions toward the SRS continues, we urge all parties to keep in mind that the SRS represents the minimum standard of funding needed to meet the educational needs of students. 

The WA negotiations have also signalled the federal government’s capacity to move beyond the arbitrarily imposed 80/20% funding split that has shaped federal funding reform since 2017.

This is an important development. It demonstrates there is no constitutional or legislative reason why it can’t move beyond the 22.5% it agreed to on Tuesday, toward the 25% sought by other states.  

We also suggest that substantially strengthened transparency measures be built into the new NSRA and bilateral funding agreements.

Invisibility of funding data

At present, publicly available and easily comprehensible information on how money is spent by governments, and then allocated by schooling sectors is limited. Gaps exist in the visibility of funding data. This is especially problematic given that SRS funding from the federal government is not directly sent to all schools, but redistributed in line with state and sector-based funding models.

These gaps are even more worrisome when considered in relation to the additional government money allocated to priority equity groups (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, students with disability, students with socio-educational disadvantage, students with low English proficiency, small schools and schools in regional and remote locations).

On this, a 2023 Productivity Commission report established that there is ‘no publicly available data on school-level spending on students’ from these cohorts.

Bolster accountability

Enhanced transparency mechanisms would serve to curtail any potential ‘accounting loopholes’ or cost shifting that have historically beset funding agreements. They would also bolster accountability and enforceability in line with the needs-based principles of the SRS which should remain a central focus of any future funding reform.

There is much at stake for public schools and their students, teachers, and leaders around Australia in the coming months as the school funding negotiations ramp up.

Jane Kenway is an elected Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, Australia, Emeritus Professor at Monash University and Professorial Fellow at the University of Melbourne. Her research expertise is in educational sociology.  

Matthew P. Sinclair is a lecturer of education policy at Curtin University’s School of Education in Western Australia. His research and teaching focuses on education policy, school funding, globalisation, education futures, and equity in schooling.

Jason Clare, Federal Minister for Education

Elisa Di Gregorio is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne. Her research focus is the sociology of education policy, with a particular interest in articulations of equity in school funding policy.

Youth voice, dissent, marginalisation: reflections for our AARE community

AARE conference, , , , ,

Like many AARE members, in late 2023 we were in Naarm attending the AARE conference ‘Voice, Truth, Place: critical junctures for educational research’. As researchers whose work centres on engaging with the voices of young people, the conference theme presented an important opportunity to think about the place of voice in education research – but also to dialogue about the processes and outcome of the national referendum on The Voice to parliament, in a professional community that has long foregrounded considerations of voice and power in education and research.

At this AARE 2023 conference, we (the authors) all experienced a particular moment that caused us to reflect on whose voices can be missing in conference spaces, whose voices are heard, and whose voices are romanticised, absent, marginalised, minimised and/or silenced.

There are barriers and blockages to ‘voice’, even before a conference begins. The costs and structures of conferences can be prohibitive for students and precariously employed academics, including youth co-researchers such as those that some of us collaborate with. This means many voices may be missing from conference discussions – voices that have the potential to trouble, stretch and enrich the assumptions and practices of educational researchers.

What we witnessed in one of the keynote lectures was a protest by a young person – not an official attendee of the conference – that was shut down, the young person pushed out, and their political views and actions vocally belittled. 

While the protest was unsettling for the audience, we consider that this is the purpose of protest: to unsettle, to raise awareness, to speak up. In this piece, we take this disruption as an opportunity for reflection and to raise provocations for our community to wrestle with collectively.  This piece is not intended to in any way be a criticism of any individual, but a prompt for collective reflection. We deliberately do not aim to prescribe solutions. We hope that our provocations (expressed as questions below) prompt further conversation about the place for young people’s voices in educational research spaces, particularly when they dissent from the status quo, and how we support and nurture a diverse community of education researchers.

How do we take young people’s voices seriously?

As members of an organisation dedicated to education, we believe that the voices and views of young people should be at the forefront of our work. While not all education research is focused on schools or youth issues, how young people think about and interact with the world should matter to all educational researchers. In recent years young people have led social movements on issues such as climate justice, Black Lives Matter and Indigenous education. Most recently school and university students have stood up against the Israeli occupation and bombardment of Palestine and Gaza. We believe young people engaging in these issues are informed by history, science and a social conscience that impels them to act for a better world.

What do these recent protests and campaigns, led by young people, have to do with educational conference gatherings? To return to the act of protest during one of the keynotes at AARE 2023, we wonder if there could have been further conversation about the differing individual, collective and organisational responses to this act of protest. How were these individual and collective responses differentially experienced by those in the lecture theatre? What do our individual and collective responses to this protest say about how we, individually and collectively, view young people and their political concerns?

Did some of these responses to a young person’s protest suggest a view of young people as ill-informed, obstructive, difficult and in need of schooling and controlling? What if the former approach were shifted to perceiving young people as informed, engaged, concerned and valuable? Could a shift in perceptions have changed the manner in which these young people and their (perhaps uncomfortable or unsettling) views at the conference were met?

These are issues for all of us as education researchers to reflect on. As noted in one pre-conference blog post, we can all ask ourselves the questions: Whose voices are important in your research? Who is silenced? How can we amplify their voices? We think these questions are important to ask of our conference gathering too.

How can space be made for dissenting voices?

AARE as a research organisation is not homogenous, just as society is not homogenous; thus many, sometimes clashing, views and positions may be present at one time in one space. The challenges of how to manage contestation and dissensus in debates has intensified in the current, often polarising, social media-fuelled world. However, we believe that facing the challenge of dissenting voices and robust debate within this scholarly community is something to be taken particularly seriously. Given the complexity and instability of our current world, this is something that we (the educational research community) must get better at doing well.

Issues of power need to be in the foreground when weighing the dissonances between differing views. When dissenting voices cause disruption, it frequently indicates that these voices or views may not have much space to be heard. It is also possible that the listener might have the individual experience of wanting to push away or silence views that one finds confronting, controversial, unpopular, unsettling or that they don’t understand.

Voices and views tend to be suppressed when they are challenging or unsettling to the status quo. We witnessed suppression of teacher and student voices expressing Palestine solidarity in Victoria at the same time that the conference was happening. This is very concerning, and as a scholarly community we should be demonstrating the possibilities of different approaches to dissensus. 

What would it look like to make space for dissensus and debate on the issue of Israel-Palestine in a spirit of ‘agonistic pluralism’ (as was argued for by Professor Deborah Youdell in her paper at the AARE conference ‘Revisiting agonism pluralism, dissensus and dialogue in education’ drawing on the work of Laclau and Mouffe)? What could it look like to make space for genuine, perhaps difficult, dialogue, where issues were wrestled with collectively and carefully? What could it look like to try to hold the tensions of different positions together, rather than stronger, more powerful positions cancelling out others? 

How can the AARE community not demonise those who might be already marginalised?

Caring for and within diverse communities means considering how we hold each other accountable, how we examine the ways that power operates in our community and how we commit to generosity and understanding in the presence of difference. AARE as a research organisation (like many of our universities) is characterised by white, settler, patriarchal hegemonies. Within these spaces, collective care requires us to be cognisant of how those who are made marginal by such hegemonies experience a rupture like the one that occurred at the AARE conference. As some of our colleagues write in this piece, a flippant comment like ‘I hate rap’, followed by applause, can send a message of denigration to an artform grounded in struggles for racial justice. 

A scenario such as this, unfortunately, often has the effect of keeping white dominance safe. Similar to the ejection of dissent and the belittling of youth voice and protest, the support of this statement from those of us in the audience shows a lack of knowledge, of understanding of history and of tolerance for difference in expression and opinion. How might we have instead paused in that moment and considered how colleagues from minoritised groups might have been feeling? How might we have resisted playing off one or other minoritised group against another and instead tried to understand what was being reckoned with, in and beyond one act of protest?

We offer these thoughts in the hope that we might all reflect on how we can continue to work on creating and maintaining scholarly and community spaces that are welcoming of marginalised voices, histories and perspectives.

From left to right: Melanie Baak (she/her) is a senior lecturer in UniSA Education Futures and co-convenor of the Migration and Refugee Research Network (MARRNet). Her research and teaching are underpinned by understandings of how systems and structures work to marginalise sections of the population, particularly culturally, racially and linguistically diverse groups. She has an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award 2023-2025 investigating how schools can enhance belonging for African diaspora youth and was a chief investigator on an ARC Linkage project exploring how schools foster refugee student resilience. @Melanie_Baak. Sophie Rudolph (she/her) is a senior research fellow at the Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne. Her research and teaching involves sociological and historical analyses and is informed by critical theories. She is currently working on a DECRA project investigating the history and politics of racialised school discipline and exclusion in Victoria. Eve Mayes (she/her) is a senior research fellow at Research for Educational Impact (REDI) within the Faculty of Arts and Education at Deakin University, Australia. Her work is centrally concerned with young people’s differential experiences of attempting to affect political change in colonial institutions in and beyond schooling. She is currently working on the ARC DECRA project Striking Voices: Australian school-aged climate students’ justice activisms (2022-2025). Jenn Brown (she/they) is a doctoral candidate in UniSA Education Futures and a lived experience advocate in the areas of sexual violence, fat liberation and complex mental illness. Jenn’s work primarily aims to trouble settler-colonial logics and interrogate institutional structures that perpetuate dehumanising violence and harm about and upon marginalised communities. LinkedIn.

Part two: A new way forward for toddlers, teens, educators, parents

Early childhood education and care, social and emotional competence, , , , ,

Educators and parents often complain about toddlers and teenagers. In the first article of this two-part series, we explained similarities in their physical, social and emotional development. In this second article, we explore the cognitive similarities, share tips on building positive relationships, and provide ways to address their mental health and wellbeing.

What are the similarities?

Cognitive

Both age groups are still learning how to assess risk, yet they think they are invincible. This, combined with the rapid physical development, can lead to high rates of hospital emergency department admissions.

Additionally, teenage hormone surges interrupt concentration, which is frustrating for educators and parents as they sometimes think messages are not going through. Teenagers are often off task and can spend considerable amounts of time day dreaming.

Communication can also be a struggle. While toddlers might struggle to find the right words to say (even if they understand the words), teenagers might find it challenging to express what they really feel. This can lead to grunting, then either tantrums (toddlers), or slammed doors, rolled eyes and sighs (teenagers). There is often a lot of dissatisfied whining and grumbling. Often children just cannot name the emotions they are feeling so they fall back onto the perennial grunt of “nothing” despite clear evidence that they are feeling something. It is useful to use descriptive language, labelling the feelings their behaviour indicates. For younger children, reading books that improve emotional literacy can help. Many of these are available in libraries.

Tips for positive relationships

It is important to maintain a positive relationship with both age groups despite the challenges.

Remembering that it is a frustrating age for children as well as educators and parents. They are not trying to be painful, rather, they are trying to grow up and learn about who they are and how the world works. When they are grumpy, teaching them to be civil is important.

Using humour can make a world of difference when they are sullen, sulky or recalcitrant. Letting them know their efforts are appreciated (whether they succeed or not), and that you understand that life is frustrating at times. 

It is important they know they belong, they are important, they are a valued part of the family or learning environment, not a burden and that you appreciate them being here. It can help to identify what you see as their strengths, particularly at times when they are overwhelmed by frustration at what they see as their failures. Using a strengths-based approach and listening to them can make a big difference to the outcomes.

Boundaries

Both age groups will push against and even throw tantrums about any boundaries you put in place. For a toddler, a boundary might be that they can only play with the blocks when they have helped pack up the train set. For a teenager, it might mean they need to finish their work before they can do something fun, or their behaviour needs to be at a certain level before they can be trusted to go on an excursion.

It is their job to push boundaries and tell you the rules are not fair. It is your job to clearly set limits and stick to them, reinforcing consequences and gradually easing the limits as they mature and show their ability to follow them, and self-regulate. Those without boundaries feel lost and uncared for, so they try riskier activities and poorer behaviour to get attention.

Friends

It is not an educator or parent’s job to be friends with a child or teenager. They have their own friends. There will be moments of friendship, and these are wonderful, and likely to increase as the child matures. However, it is the adult’s job to be a coach and mentor. Their friends are not coaches, so you need to take on that role.

Opinions

Teenagers are learning how to express their opinions and they need support to know how to do this appropriately. This means learning how to:

  • calmly state their opinion,
  • spot the difference between opinion and fact,
  • value a range of opinions,
  • agree to disagree respectfully, and
  • appreciate that you approve of those with different opinions than your own.

Mental health

Not every child, despite all your best efforts, is going to be able to grow up without help being

provided to the family and to those carrying the responsibility for their welfare. There are a range of family support services available upon which families can call. Educators can recommend the mental health resources available at the service, school or community.

Mental health challenges, particularly in the teenage years, are not uncommon and there are a range of supports available (see Teens mental health: services and links and Teenage mental health – treatments and causes. However, understanding the similarities in these age groups and looking after yourself can support educators’ and parents’ efforts and reduce their stress levels.

Marg Rogers is a senior lecturer in early childhood education. She researches marginalised voices within families and education especially in regional, rural and remote communities. Marg is a postdoctoral fellow within the Commonwealth Funded Manna Institute.

Margaret Sims is a professor in early childhood education and care and has worked in the areas of family support and disabilities for many years. She researches in the areas of professionalism in early childhood and higher education, families, disabilities, social justice and families from CaLD backgrounds. She is an honorary professor at Macquarie University.

Toddlers and teens: the news educators and parents need right now

Early childhood education and care, social and emotional competence, , , , , ,

Among educators and parents, the most often complained about age groups are toddlers and teens. Physically, socially, emotionally and cognitively there are many similarities in these developmental ages. Understanding these similarities can reduce frustrations and help us better connect with them.

In this two-part series, we explore the physical, social and emotional similarities. In the second article (published tomorrow), we will explore the cognitive similarities, share tips on building positive relationships, and provide ways to address their mental health and wellbeing.

What are the similarities?

Physical

This is a time of rapid physical growth for both age groups. Brains are struggling to keep up, causing what might seem like clumsiness and frequent accidents as they learn how to move and be in their rapidly changing bodies. They might not know their own strength and accidently break something or hurt someone as they test shifting limits. It is important to avoid overreacting and attaching a purpose behind these actions as there may be none. Letting them know you are upset and that you do not want them doing that again is okay, but try to leave it there.

This rapid growth means both toddlers and teenagers need loads of sleep. This can be tricky for teenagers who like to stay up late, then struggle with morning routines and learning activities. Additionally, gaming, streaming and social media means there is more to occupy them in the evenings. Parents are often unpopular if they take devices off children at bedtime, but it might mean a big difference enabling them to get the physical rest they need.

Emotional

Both ages are times of opposites. One minute children seem to be clingy and wanting attention and support, then the next they are pushing you away, expressing their opinions, and saying ‘No! I can do it’, snarling or grunting. They are still very needy at all times, despite the bravado. 

Learning to step back and allowing them some freedom is important, but letting them know you are there whenever they need you is vital. The saying ‘Children need your love when they least deserve it’ is very true. Teach them that if they want to do something themselves, or have time to themselves that it is okay, but that they need to express this wish in a way that is not hurtful. Providing example sentences can help them choose appropriate words.

Social

Socially, children are still learning what is acceptable, what will elicit a response, and how to navigate relationships. Emotionally, they are more likely to find rejection heartbreaking because they are forging their identity. Feeling rejected for toddlers might look like someone not sharing their toys, or pushing them over. For teens it is far more complex, and involves feeling liked and belonging within friendship or sub cultural groups. 

To be mentally healthy all humans need to feel a sense of belonging. We need an identity that locates us safely in groups of others. For toddlers those groups include the family and possibly the educators and peer group in their early childhood setting. For teenagers the importance of the family group declines (but doesn’t disappear) as they seek their place in a range of different peer groups in both the face-to-face and virtual worlds they inhabit. Learning who we are in these groups is often a function of how the group reacts to us, and children need a secure base of caring relationships. This supports them to manage the turbulent emotions that come with learning that not everyone in the world will like them or want to be with them.

Regarding identity

In regards to identity, toddlers are realising they are separate to their primary caregiver, and teenagers are forging their identity as a young person separate from their parents. At both ages, egos are very fragile, so it is important parents provide a place where they can feel safe and secure within their own home, away from the hurdy gurdy of friendships. Ideally, the family environment creates a safe basis from which children can reach out into the world and develop their own identities within their own groups. If there is not a safe environment at home, other spaces might help provide some support, such as libraries, extra-curricular groups and clubs. 

Teenagers are now old enough to realise what people say and what they mean can be different. This new skill means they often believe people are thinking the worst of them, despite the reality that people are not thinking about them at all. It is important to point out to teenagers that it is a time where they are more likely to be self-conscious, but the reality is most people are not thinking about anything but themselves or the task at hand.

For both age groups, having time alone at home is important as this time gives them the space to process their experiences and reinforce for themselves just who they are. For teens, this means times where they are not on social media. They might complain, but it is good for them to relax and not always be socially available. Time in the family unit is also important as it reinforces the relationships that make home a safe place.

Looking after yourself

Overall, it is challenging educating and parenting these age groups, so finding another trusted and experienced educator or parent to chat to is vital for your own wellbeing. It is normal for educators and parents of toddlers and teenagers to feel exhausted, challenged and exasperated at times. It is essential to recognise your own limits. It is not selfish to desire time alone to recharge batteries to enable you to cope with the next challenge thrown your way. Nor is it selfish to reach out for help when those difficulties feel overwhelming. Looking after yourself is vital for the long haul.

Marg Rogers is a senior lecturer in early childhood education. She researches marginalised voices within families and education especially in regional, rural and remote communities. Marg is a postdoctoral fellow within the Commonwealth Funded Manna Institute.

Margaret Sims is a professor in early childhood education and care and has worked in the areas of family support and disabilities for many years. She researches in the areas of professionalism in early childhood and higher education, families, disabilities, social justice and families from CaLD backgrounds. She is an honorary professor at Macquarie University.

diverse group of new teachers

Scholarships for teaching students are great – but will they really diversify the profession now?

teacher workforce, , , , , , , ,

Australia is in the midst of a teacher shortage, and with 35% of teachers considering leaving the workforce before they reach retirement age, the problem may get worse before it gets better. This means we need to increase the number of teachers graduating from university teaching degrees. The full set of data for 2024 university applicants isn’t available yet, but UAC data suggests that applications to study teaching degrees at universities are trending downwards. 

One of the strategies to address the teacher shortage is the new Federal Government scholarships to encourage more people to undertake teaching degrees. While hoping to attract more people to teaching overall, the scholarships target groups under-represented in the profession, with scholarships available for First Nations peoples, people for whom English is an additional language/dialect, people with disabilities, people from regional, rural or remote locations, and people from low socio-economic backgrounds. Currently, the level of diversity in the student population in Australian schools far exceeds the diversity of the teachers, with the majority of teachers being from monolingual, White-Anglo and middle-class backgrounds, and more likely to be born in Australia than the general population.

Benefits of a diverse teacher workforce

Research also tells us that a diverse teaching population has a positive impact on student learning outcomes and engagement in schooling. Students perceive schools as more inclusive and welcoming environments when they see teachers who have similar racial and ethnic backgrounds. Based on teachers’ own experiences as culturally and linguistically diverse students, they can better understand their students’ cultural practices and beliefs and how they grow as learners. As insiders to the experiences of racism, they are valuable in the fight for educational and social justice. They make significant contributions to their school communities, due to their distinct experiences and their ability to offer students a different worldview, as well as becoming cross-cultural mentors for their mainstream colleagues.

But will these scholarships work to diversify the teaching profession?

There is no doubt that these scholarships will be attractive for some promising teacher candidates who would otherwise face greater challenges juggling study with their work, health needs and caring responsibilities. There is potential for the pool of students studying teaching to be widened because of the availability of such scholarships,  which would be a positive outcome.

However, financial support during their studies isn’t going to provide everything these students need to have a successful career in teaching. For example, our research has found that teachers from culturally, linguistically and racially diverse backgrounds (we use the acronym CLRD) experience higher levels of isolation, exclusion and racism in their workplaces. CLRD teachers can experience discrimination on the basis of skin colour, accent, dress and even food. Teachers have told us:

“At times, my faculty  would have lunch together in the staff room. It would have been nice to be told about this, even just to be polite, but it did make me feel very left out.”

“Teachers from Anglo background speak to you in a condescending way, belittle you, question your knowledge and qualifications, and there’s definitely a hierarchy where they consider themselves better than you.”

Forced to conceal their true identity

While there isn’t explicit evidence to connect these experiences to racism, every CLRD teacher who participated in our research shared a story like this. Teachers from CLRD backgrounds often feel forced to conceal their true identity to try and fit in, and it means that they’re less likely to stay in the profession and thrive in their careers.

In addition, most CLRD teachers described additional labour they were expected to undertake because of their race, language or cultural background. Some teachers were happy to do this work to help their students, but many commented that this was labour they did not see their white counterparts being asked to do.

Further, when it comes to scholarships, it’s vital that recipients successfully complete their ITE programs. Some teacher candidates from equity groups may require additional academic support from their university, and may not complete their programs without that help. Some universities do a great job of providing this support, but it takes extra resources. How students will be supported needs to be a part of the discussion.

So will these scholarships keep new teachers from leaving the profession?

The financial support may help teacher candidates from equity groups to take the leap into university studies, but it’s not a single solution to teacher retention.  Teachers on these scholarships are required to teach in public schools for a period equal to the length of their studies – two or four years. But to create a sustainable pipeline of teachers, we need them to stay longer than that, and based on our research there are other barriers that need to be addressed. Support from school leadership teams is essential, as is a united front on the part of the school, to reject racism and discrimination. Schools and leadership teams must genuinely see cultural and linguistic diversity as a positive attribute, rather than a deficit. Cash incentives during their studies isn’t going to be enough of a drawcard to stay in a harmful work environment.

From left to right: Dr Rachael Dwyer (she/her) is a Lecturer in Curriculum and Pedagogy at the University of the Sunshine Coast. Her scholarship is focused on creating social change, through decolonizing, arts-based approaches to teaching, advocacy and research, and sharing her scholarship in ways that impact policy and practice. Dr Rachael Jacobs (she/her) is a Senior Lecturer in Creative Arts Education at Western Sydney University and a former secondary school teacher. Her research interests include assessment in the arts, language acquisition through the arts and decolonised approaches to embodied learning. Professor Catherine Manathunga (she/her) is an historian who draws together expertise in historical, sociological and cultural studies research to bring an innovative perspective to educational research, particularly focusing on the higher education sector. She has worked for over 32 years in universities throughout Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. Professor Daniel Harris (they/them) is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow in the School of Education, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia, and Co-Director of Creative Agency research lab: www.creativeresearchhub.com. They are an international expert in creativity studies, creative methods, affect theory and autoethnography. They are committed to the power of collaborative creative practice and social justice research to inform social change.  Dr Jing Qi (she/her) is Manager of Community Languages Teacher Education Program in the School of Global, Urban and Social Sciences at RMIT. Jing draws together experiences in multilingual, transcultural, and technological studies in her current educational research projects in the areas of teacher education, international education and teacher education. 

research security

Why isn’t Australia securing its critical research?

Australian Research Council, research funding in Australia, research security, research work, ,

Just before Christmas last year, the National Science Foundation (NSF) of the United States announced aims to establish a network which would enable the funders of university research to share information about applications, applicants and programs of national security concern. 

That same news story mentioned that the NSF had already established a dialogue with the main funding body for the United Kingdom (UK), Research and Innovation, as well as Canada’s Ministry of Innovation, Science and Economic Development and the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council. Talks have also been planned with The Netherlands government, home of the National Contact Point for Knowledge Security. 

What was interesting – and somewhat chilling – about the announcement was the obvious omission of Australia and its principal funding body, the Australian Research Council (ARC). 

This apparent lack of engagement with Australia over securing research seems a little at-odds with the United States’ other foreign policy measures, such as the AUKUS Agreement under which Australia will become just the seventh country with nuclear-powered submarines. And submarines are just the tip of the AUKUS iceberg. Australia, its universities, and academics will be responsible for leading research into defence-aligned fields under AUKUS like cybersecurity, robotics, advanced hypersonics, and teaching the next generations of experts in those fields. 

So why has Australia been left out in the cold?

Well, one possible reason is that Australia has one of the weakest research security frameworks in the developed world. We don’t even recognize the term “research security” or the closely aligned “knowledge security” – the former term focuses on securing the products and outcomes of academic research, the latter on the actual researchers and research process itself.

The Commonwealth Government doesn’t have an articulated public policy position on research security, beyond their Guidelines to counter foreign interference in the Australian university sector (which haven’t been updated since 2021). The ARC – which administers around 30% of Government investment in university research through the National Competitive Grants Program –  also doesn’t articulate a research security strategy. Their Countering Foreign Interference Framework leaves most of the heavy lifting in monitoring national security risk to individual universities.

Of course, the ARC Framework also only applies when universities seek funding from the ARC, so it doesn’t cover research which universities fund themselves. Up to 70% of university research is self-funded – which in turn is tied directly to international student enrolments – meaning that funding took a massive hit as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This lack of a proper research funding base in Australia was called out as a “national security risk” by ANU Vice-Chancellor Brian Schmidt.

Our university research system is also subject to hugely fluctuating externalities, like tying promotions and advancement to “research impact” (a measure of how widely published materials like journal articles are being read or cited). Yet our ability to recognize, respect, and reward the hard work of research academics and staff in Australia is so bad it led Chief Scientist Cathy Foley to recently label the system “not fit for purpose”.

And the threats faced by our researchers aren’t ephemeral – in October at the Five Eyes intelligence summit in Palo Alto, ASIO’s Director-General Mike Burgess detailed a plot involving a Chinese professor who had been recruited by the Ministry of State Security. That professor was given “money and a shopping list of intelligence requirements” before he was intercepted by ASIO and removed from the country. The Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) has also highlighted AUKUS technologies as a specific target for hacking and cyberespionage groups from China, Iran and North Korea.

So, what can Australia do about this deplorable situation?

Firstly, the Commonwealth Government needs to articulate a position on research and knowledge security in Australia. It would be auspicious timing to do so. The Universities Accord – the body established to “drive a visionary plan for Australia’s universities and higher education sector” – handed its final report to Education Minister Jason Clare on 28 December. The Government could use that report as the catalyst to establish a national policy on research and knowledge security.

Secondly, the Government needs to get itself on the same page as its AUKUS partners on the matter of research security. Given Australian cybersecurity has already been called the “weakest link” in the AUKUS triad, we have our work cut out for us. But the dangers of not doing so – including potential proliferation of nuclear materials to rogue states – is too terrifying to contemplate.

Thirdly, the Government – including intelligence agencies ASIO and ASD – and our universities need to find a way to work more closely and harmoniously. At Senate Estimates in May 2023, Burgess acknowledged that ASIO officers were “embedded in the AUKUS team in Defence that actually help Defence with their security posture”. 

Yet there hasn’t been a rush to embed ASIO officials inside universities – quite the opposite. In February 2023, ASIO rejected a recommendation by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security to publish their activities involving higher education institutions. Then ASIO quietly published a resource for universities who at times seemed to be struggling with their security obligations: the “Collaborate with Care: Protect Your Research” booklet. Whilst that resource is helpful, it doesn’t go nearly far enough to uplifting the security awareness and maturity of academics in Australia.

Lastly, as a society Australia needs a more open dialogue about what the research we need to protect, and what we don’t. Revelations of anti-Semitism in US universities has already claimed the jobs of two Ivy League presidents, following claims that those universities were sheltering and even encouraging extremist opinions. Closer to home, last year a professor at RMIT was allegedly sacked for exercising his academic freedom when he pointed out “what he believed was a sex-based double standard” on Twitter. Given the highly polemic and politicized debate around the AUKUS Agreement and our universities, we need to be abundantly clear about how we intend to protect national security, not prevent our academics from contributing to healthy and crucial public debate.

Dr Brendan Walker-Munro is a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Queensland’s Law School. His research focus is on aspects of national security law, particularly on the implications of national security risks on higher education research and teaching. He may be contacted on LinkedIn at Dr Brendan Walker-Munro | LinkedIn or via the UQ website: Dr Brendan Walker-Munro – UQ Researchers

What you should know about our 2023 top ten

21st century teaching, Artificial Intelligence in schools, Teacher Education Expert Panel (TEEP)

Hello and happy new year. We are back for 2024 and looking forward to your contributions. Here’s what you need to know about writing posts for EduResearch Matters.

We publish an annual list of our top ten most read blogs – and this year, there was one post which recorded huge interest from the outset. It reflected the zeitgeist – the national concern about what’s happening in our schools. Research on why teachers were leaving the profession by Alyson Simpson, Ellen Larsen, Jason Clare, Richard Sallis, Robyn Brandenburg struck a chord.

Number one: Teachers now – why I left and where I’ve gone

Trauma in all our classrooms: Here’s how to respond

Number two: Judith Howard on the growing movement in trauma-aware education in Australia and her new book, “Trauma-aware education: Essential information and guidance for educators, education sites and education systems”.

If not now, then when is the right time to re-envisage what schools could be?

Number three: Pasi Sahlberg and Sharon Goldfeld on what schools could be: “We believe a whole-child and whole-school approach optimises the opportunities for all children to grow up as the individuals they want to become.”

The way teachers work must change now. The Scott report doesn’t even try to fix the real challenge

Number four: Donna Pendergast on what was wrong with the Report of the Teacher Education Expert Panel.

How this oppressive test is killing the magic of childhood

Number five: Pauline Roberts on NAPLAN taking the fun out of early childhood learning.

What we want to say right now to Sahlberg and Goldfeld

Number six: Nathaniel Swain, Pamela Snow, Tanya Serry, Tessa Weadman and Eamon Charles respond to Pasi Sahlberg and Sharon Goldfeld on what schools could be.

A new sheriff is coming to the wild ChatGPT west

Number seven: Teachers continue to be bombarded with a dazzling array of possibilities, seemingly without limit – the great plains and prairies of the AI “wild west”! One estimate recently made the claim “that around 2000 new AI tools were launched in March” alone! Paul Kidson, Sarah Jefferson and Leon Furze have some advice.

It’s a No-Brainer: Beginning Teachers Should Learn About the Brain

Number eight: Andrew Martin on why teaching about the brain matters: “When they understand and teach to the human memory system, gone is the false dichotomy of positivism (e.g., explicit instruction) and constructivism (e.g., discovery learning) that has plagued initial teacher education for decades: as far as the human memory system is concerned, the success of one instructional approach is inextricably tied to the success of the other.” 

Screen panic: how much time is too much?

Number nine: John Fischetti, Simon Vaughan and Kylie Shaw on why we “can’t ‘ban’ our way to the future as smart tools get smarter; we should trust that our young people, with our informed guidance, will make good choices. The importance of vigilance in using smart tools is crucial, but most of our participants are doing fine in their juggling act in and out of cyberspace.” 

Proactive and preventative: Why this new fix could save reading (and more)

Number ten: Kate de Bruin, Eugénie Kestel, Mariko Francis, Helen Forgasz and Rachelle Fries on how to get the classroom right.