Here is some of the material from Lecture 6
Non-English Speaking Background
One of the factors relating to student retention and
achievement in Australian schools is family background, especially non-English
speaking background.
Bernstein’s theory of ‘language codes’ (Giddens, 1989) can be
applied to students from non-English speaking backgrounds. Different cultural
and linguistic upbringings result in different communication styles.
Most students from non-English speaking backgrounds are
bilingual and bicultural. Cultural and linguistic backgrounds influence one’s
values, attitudes, beliefs and expectations. How the school responds to these
variations will influence their achievement as well as affecting the students’
feeling of comfort and confidence, and willingness to participate (Burke, 1993).
Burke also noted that there are many other factors that
influence a student’s ability to participate in the curriculum and general
school life: family expectations of caring for siblings; supporting the family
financially; mediating between family and outside agencies; high mobility
resulting in frequent changing of schools; prior learning experiences.
The Australian school system is adapting to improve retention
and achievement of students from non-English speaking backgrounds
by incorporating multiculturalism into policies such as the
Cultural and Language Diversity Policy which ‘focuses on addressing inequalities
through the reshaping of the curriculum in responding
to the educational needs of culturally and linguistically
diverse groups and deciding upon cultural learning for all students’ (Education
Queensland, 1999, p. 3).
(References added here)
(212 words)
Thread Two
There are many factors that influence the retention and
achievement levels in Australian schools. The foods children consume at home and
at school have been found to be most influential.
Hyperactivity and inattentive behaviour are becoming an
increasing problem and there have been a number of explanations voiced, but in
recent years the food eaten has been found to greatly influence a large
percentage of school aged children (Lichi, 2003).
Each year many students are labelled ADHD (Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder) for they are unable to concentrate, sit still, behaviour
in the accepted manner etc. It has now been found (Dengate, 1998) that 15% of
the children labelled ADHD are wrongly diagnosed for once the diet of these
children is changed, their whole behaviour pattern alters. They come more
understanding towards others and they begin to fit into the norms of school and
the society as a whole.
What has this to do with achievement and retention? These
students usually are labelled as disruptive, hopeless, hope I (the teacher) do
not have that child next year etc. They become further and further behind with
their work and as a result of these and many other problems, these children
underachieve and leave school as soon as they can in the hope of finding
something better.
An English programme has been established in a number of
schools where fizzy drinks and snack foods are band and dietary studies have
been introduced into the curriculum for the whole school.
Although Australian schools are yet to implement any such
plan, some schools have made changes to their canteen foods and have held
workshops with parents in Years one and two. Strategies such as these and those
conducted overseas will make children’s diet less an influence, and help to
improve achievement and retention.
(References were added here)
(252 words)
Thread three – non-example
Student retention within the education system is continuing
to prove a problem for a vast majority of schools nationwide. Particularly when
factors such as SES, gender, lack of male teachers and race are taken into
consideration. It can be easily seen why students either decide to or are
forced to terminate their studies.
All of these factors influence retention and achievement and
as Browne (2002) said ‘the rich get richer’ and the ‘poor get poorer’. Poverty
may be better understood in terms of a community with a minimum standard of
living. In this framework poverty is about the inability to buy or do things
that other Australian take for granted? Poverty seems to affect some school more
then others for there are schools in bad areas and schools in good areas and
these schools attract experienced or inexperienced teachers. Teachers have a lot
to do with the retention and achievement of students while they are at school.
To sum up, poverty and other factors still play large roles
in forcing students to leave school. But the education system is slowing up so
as to help stop this large problem of poverty effecting the youth of today and
are trying to eliminate as many financial burdens experienced when education
students from families of poverty.
Thread four
It is hard to discuss
all the intricate influential factors related to student retention and
achievement in 300 words. One factor, disabilities supported by quality of
teaching, comes to mind.
For some reason the issue of disabilities has not been touched on much in this
Forum. Perhaps because most of the statistics available on student retention and
achievement focus largely on broad factors such as ethnicity, gender etc, and
how they affect Australian schooling in general.
I guess it all depends on the way you view the Forum
question. Do you view the question in terms of sheer demographics, or do you
look at it from a more ‘put yourself in their shoes’ point of view.
Would you go through schooling with the issue of gender affecting your
achievement as much as, say…if you had a significant learning difficulty,
downs-syndrome, or ASD? I can’t think of many factors more obvious that would
affect an individual’s achievement/retention. Moreover, the very fact that a lot
of schools have ‘special needs facilities’ buildings to improve the
achievement/retention these students indicates how seriously the issue is taken.
As an example, Australian schools are adapting by introducing “…special
education programs and services to students with disabilities whose educational
support needs are additional to, or different from, those of non-disabled
students” (Education Queensland, 2002).
What do the readings have to say about this issue?
Rowe (2002, p. 1) asks the question: “What really matters - the pimple or the
pumpkin?” claiming that gender differences are the ‘pimple’, and “pale into
relative insignificance compared with teacher effects (the pumpkin).”
I guess what ‘really matters’ to the individual student depends on what kind of
‘pimple’ you are. If you are mentally disabled in any way (small or great), I
still feel that (as I have read, so do a lot of you) “…quality teaching
supported by strategic teacher professional development are what really matter!”
(Rowe 2002, p. 1; Jones, 2001).
I feel that catering for the individual needs of each student falls under the
banner of ‘quality teaching’, and the application of this (special needs or not)
will have the ultimate effect on the student’s retention and achievement.
PS. Maybe the term ‘special needs’ applies to all students.
Response One
Thank you Chris for your thread. I wish to add another issue
to your argument, the family.
The influence of the family and its socio-economic status
(SES) has a major impact on the development of its children.
Whilst it can be said that those children from the higher SES
families often have access to more affluent resources such as toys, books, and
other educational tools, it does not guarantee them more, or better, love and
attention from their families (Smith, 1995). Nor does it guarantee advantages in
education, but, never, the less it is often true (Banks, 1993 cited in Townsend,
2000).
Today, education systems are endeavouring to bridge the gaps,
but all to often perpetuate the distances.
(98 words)
Response Two
Henry has raised the issue that parents pressure their
children to academically succeed. In addition to this, it could be said that
peers can place opposing pressures of negative work ethics.
Miller (1996) stated that school-age children have a powerful
urge to belong to a peer group. This often involves conforming to certain
negative behaviours towards academic success. Rowe (2002) supports this argument
by stating that some students underachieve due to peer pressures such as
bullying. This bullying arises from the notion that students who succeed are
labelled ‘nerds’ or ‘geeks’.
Both the school and the teachers must minimise harmful
incidents of peer pressure and encourage positive images of study through school
programmes such as ‘Working together to succeed’ (Education Queensland, 2001).
(References added here)
(112 words)
Response Non-example
Yours ideas are o’k but you have missed the main point.
A positive home life is so important. I know I learnt so much
when I was at home.
Children from low SES homes are disadvantaged because their
home life is not as good as upper SES homes.
Also the parents are not educated and the schools are in the
bad areas so the students will underachieve and will want to leave school as
soon as possible to earn money and enjoy themselves because school life has not
been to their liking.
(Non references given)
(91 words)