Faculty of Education - Theses
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2
-
ItemProblematising the present: the historical contribution of consultancy to early childhood education in Australia: 1960-1985( 2017)Consultative approaches in Victorian state funded kindergartens operate presently as the Preschool Field Officer (PSFO) program. Described as a service delivery model (DET, 2015a), the PSFO program is designed to ‘ensure that early childhood teachers and educators continually improve their capacity to provide young children who have additional needs with the experiences and opportunities that promote their learning and development, and enable then to participate meaningfully in the program’ (DET, 2015a, p. 8). Contemporary documents detailing the PSFO program have been recently revised within the context of shifts and reforms to early childhood education in Australia. The provision of early childhood education has arguably changed since the Council of Australian Governments (COAG, 2009) endorsed ‘Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia’ (EYLF), the first national framework in Australia. Providing guidance to all practitioners working in early childhood education, including PSFOs, principles, practices and outcomes are framed within a model of collaboration with children, families and educators. Significantly, the EYLF advocates for practitioners to view children as competent learners (DEEWR, 2009). Currently, Victorian early childhood programs operate under both the national EYLF and the Victorian Early Years Learning Development Framework (VEYLDF), the Victorian State Government document introduced in 2009. This document guides early childhood professionals to work with children from birth to eight years through a focus on outcomes, practice principles and transitions. Positioned within these curriculum documents, early childhood educators’ practices thread between early years’ programs and also the school-based Victorian Curriculum and transition to school frameworks. Underpinned by Foucault's genealogical approach (1977) and ethnography, this study critically examines written and visual documents, by examining and rendering visible complex processes and discursive shifts from the 1960 – 1985 timeframe. Texts selected for examination included contemporary and past Victorian State Government documents and visual images authorised by the National Union of Australian University Students (Roper, 1971). By interpreting the complex processes and changes over this timeframe, an opportunity presents to understand by attempting to make meaning of what might be now known about contemporary consultative services operating in Victorian kindergartens. The findings in this study indicate that in contemporary times discourses of governmentality dominate consultative practices, compelling PSFOs to enact ‘techniques and procedures for directing human behaviour’ (Foucault, 1997, p. 81), in a myriad of complex and contradictory manners. Juxtaposed with practices in the past, I argue that (inter)relating multiple discourses have historically dominated early childhood education. Discourses include: health with supervision, additional needs education with developmentalism, and community organisations with welfare and arguably remain deeply embedded in contemporary consultative practices, forming part of current governing agendas. What may be missing is that children and families are often swept up in the governmentality of consultancy, both historically and currently. Under the guise of collaborative partnerships and capacity building, where children and families are viewed as capable and listened to, it may be argued that consultative practices appear inclusive of the voice of children and families. However, while it appears that this is a shift away from a deficit-based approach, it emerged through the analysis of the data that a lack of transparency and authenticity pervades in these relations. In contemporary times the PSFO program as a consultative body, has come to be an authoritative entity in preschools. Revealing discourses is one means to problematise what may be (un)known about claims which prevail as truth and the authority accorded to circulating privileged agendas and productive moments, but also points to times which are rendered silent. Examining power-knowledge relations producing dominant discourses can rupture certain truth claims and open possibilities to reconstruct new ways to conceive consultative practices in kindergartens and also for a reconceptualisation of ‘understanding of how to do things differently’ (Ailwood, 2004, p. 30).
-
ItemRethinking indigenous educational disadvantage: a critical analysis of race and whiteness in Australian education policy( 2011)This thesis examines Indigenous school education in Australia, through analysing themes of difference, race and whiteness in contemporary education policy. The study asks why educational inequality and disadvantage continue to be experienced by Indigenous school students, despite concerted policy attention towards redressing these issues. It seeks to better understand how Indigenous education is represented in policy and scholarly debates and what implications this has for Indigenous educational achievement. I argue that in order to succeed Indigenous school students are often expected to assimilate into an education system that judges success according to values and expectations influenced by an invisible ‘whiteness’. The investigation of these issues is framed by insights and approaches drawn from three theoretical frameworks. Michel Foucault’s concepts of ‘discourse’, ‘disciplinary power’, ‘regimes of truth’ and ‘normalisation’, and Iris Marion Young’s work with issues of difference, ‘cultural imperialism’, oppression and justice are brought into critical dialogue with critical race theory (CRT). In particular, CRT is engaged as an attempt to bring some new perspectives to understandings of race and difference in Australian education policy. This combination of theories informs an examination of policy (and policy related texts) guided by Foucauldian discourse analysis and critical policy research methods. Through my analysis I develop a number of arguments. First, that the combined theoretical approach I engage is useful for uncovering some of the silences and assumptions that have typically influenced attempts to achieve educational justice for Indigenous Australians. Second, in the documents I analyse, the ways in which Indigenous students are described commonly positions them as deficient and suggests that these deficiencies are to be remedied through exhibiting more of the behaviours and attitudes of non-Indigenous students. Third, that the commitment to ‘inclusion’ within the policies analysed is important, but typically maintains a relationship in which a powerful and central white ‘norm’ remains invisible and dictates how and when the ‘Other’ is included. Fourth, that in seeking to understand equity issues for Indigenous students it is important to look also at the broader education system and its dominant values and goals. Through analysis of policies related to education for ‘all students’, I suggest that educational success is commonly identified and assessed according to ‘white’ norms, within schools that are expected to improve and be accountable within a neo-liberal agenda, which is largely supportive of standardisation and sameness, and not readily accommodating of ‘difference’. Overall, this study has attempted to bring some important conceptual approaches to analysis of current education policy in Australia in order to build greater understanding of Indigenous educational disadvantage. It has sought to open possibilities for addressing issues of race and justice that are characterised by listening, support of difference and responsibility, and commitment to disruption and discomfort.