Page 1848 - Week 05 - Thursday, 6 May 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
about indicators of student performance, whether the relevance of socioeconomic status to the achievement of students was well understood within responses to the education system, and how these were being dealt with.
We recognise that, because of the make-up of the ACT population and the school system, with socioeconomic status not necessarily concentrated in particular areas but dispersed throughout the ACT, it is more difficult to address this particular issue. Nonetheless, it is one of the most important issues when we deal with the education system, how students are achieving and whether that is leading to a gap in the education achievement of these students.
I will read out some of the things from the report. The first is this:
The Government’s submission stated clearly that socio-economic status could not be attached to individual schools and highlighted that:
there is no strong evidence or data from national or international measures to suggest there is a significant disparity between schools in the ACT similar to that observed in other jurisdictions. We do know, for example, that while a relationship between socioeconomic status and school performance is evident in other states, the character of the ACT population is different, and there is no evidence available to suggest that socioeconomic profile has a significant between-school influence on performance in the ACT.
I note, though, and this has been identified through the PISA results and other indicators, that, while the ACT is characterised as being a very high-quality school system—I think that is recognised by everyone—it is a low-equity education system. We see that the education achievement is more disparate in that low socioeconomic group.
I will refer to some of the conclusions from the report. Through the evidence from various groups that appeared, and from the evidence we gathered, it was quite clear that socioeconomic status was the leading factor when it came to the achievement gap and negative impacts on educational achievement. It was also clear from the evidence that the particular groups of students that require support to achieve educational outcomes included Indigenous students—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. That was again clear. We see that in a number of areas, but with education it was clear that they were a group that need additional assistance.
They also included students that came from non-English-speaking backgrounds, particularly refugees. We heard from a number of groups—this was a clear factor—that this is a group that is increasing in the education system as more refugees come in. Because they may not have been to school before, and also because of the very difficult circumstances they have been through, this is a group which is requiring additional assistance. This was clear.
It was also interesting that students with unrecognised gifts and talents and students which come from that talented group were a group that required some additional assistance to have that brought out and encouraged. The report says:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video