The status and future of bilingual education for remote indigenous students in the Northern Territory (original) (raw)
Related papers
Indigenous Kids and Schooling in the Northern Territory (2016) (pdf)
This book is written for non specialist readers interested in the educational outcomes of Indigenous children and young people in the Northern Territory (NT). National tests reveal that NT results are the worst in Australia. The book begins with the historical background to the current situation. Population statistics show how the NT is different from other states and territories. School attendance issues are explored. The fact of community and individual multilingualism in the NT is a central focus throughout. The authors argue that understanding and respecting it is fundamental to in any serious attempt to improve teaching and learning success. Many Indigenous children start school speaking their own languages or dialects, often unfamiliar with the kind of English used at school. In fact, at age four or five, many do not speak or understand any English at all. The tragedy ignored by most Closing the Gap rhetoric is that many Indigenous Australians continue throughout their school years and into adult training situations unable to use the national language with sufficient confidence or competence to make genuine choices about participating in mainstream Australian life. These learners have the same right to specialist English language teaching as is provided routinely to migrant and refugee children in the form of English as an Additional Language or Dialect (EAL/D) instruction. By contrast, focused English language teaching by qualified English language specialists across the curriculum is rarely provided in any routine way to those Indigenous learners who need it to cope confidently with the demands of mainstream education. Indigenous languages and cultures have enormous value, not only for their speakers and practitioners, but for the nation as a whole. Schools often fail to give children and their families the respect they deserve for preserving their precious linguistic and cultural traditions for future generations. Respect is demonstrated when local languages and dialects are honored and used in schools where communities want this to happen. Respect also requires that qualified EAL/D classroom and support teachers be appointed routinely in the early years at least. Modern approaches to English language teaching acknowledge that multilingual learners are already fluent in their own home languages or dialects and bring to school rich resources of knowledge and experience acquired through those languages and dialects. This knowledge deserves as much respect as that gained in mainstream English-speaking homes. In fact, international research confirms that best practice in education uses multilingual children’s existing knowledge and languages to develop school-oriented understandings and skills. If Closing the Gap aspirations are to become reality, the English language learning needs of Indigenous learners must be thoroughly researched and the challenges squarely faced. English language proficiency levels need to be professionally assessed and systematically monitored from the time children start school to determine how their ability to use school English relates to success in each subject area and, importantly, to NAPLAN success. We simply do not know at this time what levels of English language proficiency are required to achieve National Minimum Standards (NMS) on NAPLAN tests. Practical, on-the-ground strategies and research initiatives to improve participation and outcomes are also suggested. Indigenous children in the NT, often labeled the most vulnerable in Australia, deserve the very best evidence based teaching and support that can be provided.
Indigenous Kids and Schooling in the Northern Territory has been written for teachers, principals, teacher educators, government administrators and nongovernment organisations who work with Indigenous people in remote Indigenous communities, whether new to the Northern Territory or more experienced. The general reader will also gain insights into some of the reasons for the current state of remote Indigenous education today. The book offers a historical overview of Indigenous education and provides current demographic information for better understanding this unique context of schooling. The issue of attendance is examined as is the complex and fascinating nature of community and individual multilingualism, in an introductory way, and its relevance to school-based education. Many Indigenous children start school in the Northern Territory unable to speak or understand the kind of English used at school. In fact, at four or five years of age many do not speak or understand any kind of English at all, and many continue throughout their school years, and into adult training situations, unable to use the national language confidently and competently. These children, the authors argue, deserve specialist English language teaching to get them started, as is routinely provided to migrant or refugee children. While both the Australian and the Northern Territory governments have policies that suggest this basic reality is known and accepted, English language teaching by qualified English language specialists is rarely provided to remote Indigenous children in the NT. This book is written with deep respect for Indigenous languages and cultures and their enormous value, not only for their speakers, but also for Australia as a nation. The authors argue that educational practice and policies often acknowledge and assert the value of Indigenous languages and cultures but fail to give children and their families the respect they deserve for maintaining their precious linguistic and cultural traditions. That respect is demonstrated when local languages are honoured and used in schools where communities want this to happen. Respect can also be shown when principled English language teaching is provided across the curriculum by qualified specialist teachers. Such teaching acknowledges that Indigenous children and young people are already fluent in other languages or dialects and that they come to school, as do their migrant or refugee counterparts, with rich resources of knowledge and experience acquired through home languages or dialects. This knowledge deserves as much respect as knowledge and experience gained in mainstream English-speaking homes. If Closing the Gap aspirations are to become reality, the English language learning needs of so many of the Indigenous learners in the Northern Territory (and to some degree throughout Australia) must be brought into the light and the challenges squarely faced. The authors make the case that educational progress will be made when Indigenous children’s English language proficiency levels are systematically determined and then addressed with specialist teaching, including how they change over time and how this may, or may not, be impacting on their learning. The book recommends eight practical, on-the-ground research areas for immediate attention if government policies and goals are to have impact at the classroom level. Front and centre is the urgent question of the degree to which principled English as an Additional Language or Dialect classroom instruction delivered by fully qualified EAL/D specialists can make the same difference to Indigenous students as is so often demonstrated for immigrant and refugee students. We simply do not know the answer to this question at this time. Indigenous children in the NT, currently labeled as the most vulnerable in Australia, deserve the very best evidence based teaching support that can be provided.
Bilingual Education vs English-only Approach at Australia’s Northern Territory Schools
REiLA : Journal of Research and Innovation in Language
The present library research highlights the “English-only” approach used in the Aboriginal classrooms in Northern Territory (NT) schools, Australia. This library study collects its data from five decades (1968-2018) of research and theorisation on the implementation of English instruction at Indigenous classrooms in Australia by referring to the changes of approaches from bilingual instruction policy to the current “English-only” approach. The writer then reports the problems occurred in the implementation of this approach in the specific classroom interaction. Factors like socio-cultural gap and dysfunctional discourse were found to be influencing the ineffective English-only classroom in the NT schools. What alternatives may have been tried in the Northern territory schools and to what degree of success?
History of Bilingual Education in the Northern Territory
Language policy, 2017
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
Bilingual Education in Australia
Springer eBooks, 2017
The Australian experience of bilingual education is composed of three separate audiences: Indigenous groups and their languages, immigrant groups and their languages (both of these groups seeking language maintenance and intergenerational vitality), and mainstream English speakers seeking additive language study. All these interests share a common aim of lobbying for more serious and substantial language education programs, but differ significantly in the purposes and context of their promotion of bilingual education. This chapter provides an overview of historical, political and educational influences on forms of bilingual education that have emerged, in the context of state and national language policy and practices, to meet the needs of Indigenous Australians, migrant communities, and Anglophones.
This research investigated the effects on two remote Indigenous communities of a Northern Territory (NT) of Australia education language policy, Compulsory Teaching in English for the First Four Hours of each School Day (FFHP). Although the policy was introduced in 2008, it continues to have profound effects on the policy landscape of the NT which has never re-established the bilingual policy platform. The investigation involved a critical analysis of the FFHP and an ethnographic study of its effects. The research reported here follows two qualitative lines of study – the policy text (the process and content of the policy) and policy discourse (the discourse around the policy) in addition to its effects on those it was targeting. The data gathering methods entailed collecting key texts from critical moments of the FFHP implementation - the policy itself and operational guidelines in addition to media texts and a Hansard record. The field data collection comprised interviews with both Indigenous and non-Indigenous language education experts, two community case studies (one of which retained its bilingual program at the school and one which did not as a result of the FFHP) and critical ethnographical research. The latter used purposively selected adult and child participants for group and individual interviews (a total of 53). Given the Indigenous context of the field research and the desire to accurately depict remote Indigenous perspectives, Indigenous methodologies and participatory research approaches were employed. This entailed culturally appropriate consultation with participants, checking the accuracy and interpretation of interview data and Indigenous led participant selection. The analysis of the policy and key community interviews was achieved with critical discourse analysis (CDA). The particular approach to CDA employed was that developed by Reisigl and Wodak (2001) called Historical Discourse Approach (HDA) which emphasises the historical situatedness of discourse and the political dimensions and contexts at work in political texts. CDA is also frequently paired with ethnographic data collection. All community interviews were subjected to content analysis (CA) in order to deduce the major patterns and themes that arose in relation to the effects of the FFHP. This study revealed a language and cultural hierarchy operating with the adoption of the FFHP that entails a postcolonial construction of Indigenous people as ‘invisible’ and deficient. Although not as blatant as the texts associated with the separately occurring Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER), there are distinctly covert negative representations that similarly allude to Indigenous abnormality and failure and imply criminality. In addition, the ideologies, presuppositions and assumptions of neo-liberalism and symbolism of the nation-state operating in the policy, construe, if only covertly, Indigenous languages (ILs), culture and people as in need of mainstreaming to achieve higher socio-economic status, well-being and national ‘belonging’. This is despite evidence that categorically demonstrates attachment to language and culture enhances well-being and socio-economic status. The effects of the policy on the two communities were surprisingly similar. Both communities complained of erosion in community participation and employment at the local schools that undermined the economic independence, self-determination and governance of the local population. Community participants were critical of the erratic policy creation and implementation and marginalisation of community members. The community with suspended bilingual programs complained of greater negative academic, well-being, behaviour and cognitive effects on children and a deterioration in resilience, all of which were difficult, if not impossible, to address given the oppressive political climate ‘out bush’. Such policy failure is common throughout the Indigenous policy landscape in Australia. As a consequence of the lack of legislative protection offered to Indigenous people and abuse of international human rights entailed in the FFHP, this study highlights the need for future policy creation and evaluation to be conducted from an Indigenous perspective and governance.
Indigenous Languages Programs in Australian Schools-A Way Forward
2008
Generally speaking, we have used the term 'Indigenous' to apply to both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. However, we have used the term 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander' when referring to original documents that used this term; in some instances we have used the term to emphasise the distinct identities of these two broad groups of people. Currency of information This report is based on information collected in 2006 and 2007. Updated information provided by jurisdictions is indicated in footnotes.
Indigenous Languages Programmes in Australian Schools-A Way Forward
Generally speaking, we have used the term 'Indigenous' to apply to both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. However, we have used the term 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander' when referring to original documents that used this term; in some instances we have used the term to emphasise the distinct identities of these two broad groups of people. Currency of information This report is based on information collected in 2006 and 2007. Updated information provided by jurisdictions is indicated in footnotes.
The evaluation of bilingual programs in the Northern Territory, Australia, 1973–1993
International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 1995
This paper provides the first published account of how bilingual programs in Aboriginal Community schools have been evaluated in the Northern Territory of Australia from their inception in 1973 to the present day. It comprises five main sections: (1) an introductory review of the literature on the evaluation of bilingual education; (2) a brief account of the first phase of evaluation in the NT, 1973 to 1978, when advice from technical experts was actively sought; (3) a report on the second phase, the accreditation of programs by central-office staff, 1979 to 1987, when groups of students from selected schools were comparatively assessed; (4) an analysis of the third phase, community-based appraisal, which commenced in 1988, and (5) some reflections and a conclusion. It is noted that this three-phase shift over the last two decades-from centralized decisionmaking reliant on outside technical advice, to an ambitious assessment and accreditation model, to community-based school appraisal-is in line with trends reported elsewhere by Fitzpatrick (1988) and Sanders (1988). 1. The evaluation of bilingual programs: a brief review of the literature The literature on the evaluation of bilingual programs is large and diverse. Although it would be inappropriate in this article to attempt any comprehensive or searching review, a brief sketch might be of value in framing the present study and thereby complementing some of the findings presented here. One of the most striking features of the available research literature is that, despite the quantity of evaluation reports on bilingual programs, much of it is of dubious quality. With respect to the United States, for example, Lam (1992: 198) has drawn attention to "serious methodological flaws in bilingual education evaluation and research reports," despite