Anna Clark (2008) History’s Children: History Wars in the Classroom. UNSW Press, Sydney, 178 pages

“History’s Children” stems from Anna Clark’s 2004 postdoctoral research into the ways in which Australian students connect with the past, and aims at bringing some classroom perspectives into the public debates about Australian history education. Although the title makes reference to the “History Wars”, there is little evidence of contestation, engagement, passion or intellectual excitement in Clark’s conclusions about what happens in history classrooms. Rather, Clark’s small focus groups with 182 high school students in 34 high schools around Australia indicate that “it got a bit dismal hearing student after student being so dismissive of Australian history” (p. 143). Apart from some enthusiasm for the study of Australians at war, a sort of resigned boredom seems to characterise what students have to say about learning Australian history, despite their acknowledgement that it is important to “know about” it.

Expression and connection : the integration of the reflective learning process and the writing process into social network sites

A number of instructors have recently adopted social network sites (SNSs) for learning. However, the learning design of SNSs often remains at a preliminary level similar to a personal log book because it does not properly include reflective learning elements such as individual reflection and collaboration. This article looks at the reflective learning process and the public writing process as a way of improving the quality of reflective learning on SNSs. It proposes a reflective learning model on SNSs based on two key pedagogical concepts for social networking: individual expression and collaborative connection. It is expected that the model would be helpful for instructors in designing a reflective learning process on SNSs in an effective and flexible way.

“What’s going on here?” The pedagogy of a data analysis session

Data analysis sessions are a common feature of discourse analytic communities, often involving participants with varying levels of expertise to those with significant expertise. Learning how to do data analysis and working with transcripts, however, are often new experiences for doctoral candidates within the social sciences. While many guides to doctoral education focus on procedures associated with data analysis (Heath, Hindmarsh, & Luff, 2010; McHoul & Rapley, 2001; Silverman, 2011; Wetherall, Taylor, & Yates, 2001), the in situ practices of doing data analysis are relatively undocumented. This chapter has been collaboratively written by members of a special interest research group, the Transcript Analysis Group (TAG), who meet regularly to examine transcripts representing audio- and video-recorded interactional data. Here, we investigate our own actual interactional practices and participation in this group where each member is both analyst and participant. We particularly focus on the pedagogic practices enacted in the group through investigating how members engage in the scholarly practice of data analysis. A key feature of talk within the data sessions is that members work collaboratively to identify and discuss ‘noticings’ from the audio-recorded and transcribed talk being examined, produce candidate analytic observations based on these discussions, and evaluate these observations. Our investigation of how talk constructs social practices in these sessions shows that participants move fluidly between actions that demonstrate pedagogic practices and expertise. Within any one session, members can display their expertise as analysts and, at the same time, display that they have gained an understanding that they did not have before. We take an ethnomethodological position that asks, ‘what’s going on here?’ in the data analysis session. By observing the in situ practices in fine-grained detail, we show how members participate in the data analysis sessions and make sense of a transcript.

Your voice counts : Listening to the voice of high school students with autism spectrum disorder

Supporting students with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) in inclusive settings presents both opportunities and significant challenges to school communities. This study, which explored the lived-experience of nine students with ASD in an inclusive high school in Australia, is based on the belief that by listening to the voices of students, school communities will be in a better position to collaboratively create supportive learning and social environments. The findings of this small-scale study deepen our knowledge from the student perspective of the inclusive educational practices that facilitate and constrain the learning and participation of students with ASD. The students’ perspectives were examined in relation to the characteristics of successful inclusive schools identified by Kluth. Implications for inclusive educational practice that meets the needs of students with ASD are presented.

Educational change and youth voice: Informing school action on cyberbullying

Change is a regular part of school life. Educational innovations are constantly being implements in order to benefit students, improve outcomes and meet the obligations and accountability demands of governments. Rapid social and technological change has occurred within and around schools during the past 15 or more years, impacting upon curricula and pedagogies. Simultaneously, there has been a trend towards incorporating youth voice, where young people share in the decisions that will impact on their school experiences (Mitra, 2008a, 2004). Most recently, with the advent of the first National Australian Curriculum (McGaw, 2010), there is an imposed curriculum change, which reflects the growing global trend towards centralised control over what students learn in school (Zhao, 2011) and highlights that schools have to respond to change from all levels. Spears (in press) also notes that parents are raising children in an increasingly wireless world which is far removed from the one in which they were raised. Educators are teaching in schools that are vastly different technologically from those they knew as children and adolescents, or even those in which they were teaching a decade ago. Children born in 1995, the year when the Internet was first commercialised, are 16 years old in 2011 and, whilst parents may have embraced technological advances in their own adult working or social lives, they are yet to fathom fully what it means for their children and their relationships: to be educated and to socialise in the midst of mobile social media. Young people have greater access to more information than at any time past and move seamlessly between online and offline environments, often referring to them as ‘the same life’ (Spears, Kofoed, Bartolo, Palermiti and Castabile, in press). Along with these changes has come the transformation of traditional forms of bullying to cyberbullying, amid the public perception that bullying generally is becoming worse in schools.

Exploring Indigenous social attitudes and priorities in Australia

Given significant government attention to, and expenditure on, Indigenous equity in Australia, this article addresses a core problem: the lack of a sound understanding of Indigenous social attitudes and priorities. An account of cultural theory raises the likelihood of difference in outlook between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, including those making and implementing policy. Yet, years of scholarly research and official statistical collections have overlooked potentially critical aspects of Indigineity. Suggestions of difference emerge from reference to the 2007 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (AuSSA). If the attitudes recorded a small sample in this instrument manifest in the Indigenous population at large, policy priorities and directions should be reviewed and possibly revised. Despite inherent methodological difficulties, the article calls for targeted social attitude research among Australia's Indigenous peoples so that future policy can be better oriented and calibrated. The national benefits would outweigh the costs via better directed policy making.

Breaching the standardised assessment boundary : assessment for learning as a field of exchange

The introduction of the Australian curriculum, the use of standardised testing (e.g. NAPLAN) and the My School website are couched in a context of accountability. This circumstance has stimulated and in some cases renewed a range of boundaries in Australian Education. The consequences that arise from standardised testing have accentuated the boundaries produced by social reproduction in education which has led to an increase in the numbers of students disengaging from mainstream education and applying for enrolment at the Edmund Rice Education Australia Flexible Learning Centre Network (EREAFLCN). Boundaries are created for many young people who are denied access to credentials and certification as a result of being excluded from or in some way disengaging from standardised education and testing. Young people who participate at the EREAFLCN arrive with a variety of forms of cultural capital that are not valued in current education and employment fields. This is not to say that these young people’s different forms of cultural capital have no value, but rather that such funds of knowledge, repertoires and cultural capital are not valued by the majority of powerful agents in educational and employment fields. How then can the qualitative value of traditionally unorthodox - yet often intricate, ingenious, and astute - versions of cultural capital evident in the habitus of many young people be made to count, be recognised, be valuated? Can a process of educational assessment be a field of capital exchange and a space which breaches boundaries through a valuating process? This paper reports on the development of an innovative approach to assessment in an alternative education institution designed for the re-engagement of ‘at risk’ youth who have left formal schooling. A case study approach has been used to document the engagement of six young people, with an educational approach described as assessment for learning as a field of exchange across two sites in the EREAFLCN. In order to capture the broad range of students’ cultural and social capital, an electronic portfolio system (EPS) is under trial. The model draws on categories from sociological models of capital and reconceptualises the eportfolio as a sociocultural zone of learning and development. Results from the trial show a general tendency towards engagement with the EPS and potential for the attainment of socially valued cultural capital in the form of school credentials. In this way restrictive boundaries can be breached and a more equitable outcome achieved for many young Australians.

Managing distraction in 21st century learning environments

First year students attend face-to-face classes armed with an arsenal of internet enabled digital devices. The conundrum is that while these devices offer scope for enhancing opportunities for engagement in face-to-face learning, they may simultaneously distract students away from learning and compound isolation issues. This paper considers how to best to use these devices for maximum engagement in first year face-to-face learning so as to assist students in connecting with other learners and instructors within the learning environment

Curriculum, assessment teaching and learning for all

This chapter explores how the culture of classrooms and schools can acknowledge diversity and meet all learning needs. Classroom and school culture can and should enhance the belonging and learning of all students. Understanding of learning, curriculum, pedagogy and assessment influences the ways teachers consider their expectations of student achievement and participation in school. We revisit the theory of social constructionism to emphasise the development of shared and valued curriculum, which meets all learner needs. Decisions about what to teach, how to teach and assess, and what supports student needs are important considerations discussed in this chapter. Key messages drawn from the Australian and New Zealand curriculum reinforce the need to ensure education responds to the diversity of students in classrooms. A range of models of pedagogy that have influenced education in Australia and New Zealand are presented, with a particular focus on meeting the needs of students who have disabilities. In addition, the issues related to student and teacher identity, the importance of respectful partnerships that acknowledge family knowledge, and respectful collaboration are discussed. Belonging to a community of learners is made possible through teachers forming authentic relationships with students and their families. In turn, these relationships support teachers to understand how the students in their classrooms learn, and to know their students’ strengths and interests.

Self-regulation and mastery motivation in individuals with developmental disabilities : barriers, supports, and strategies

The development of the capacity for self-regulation represents an important achievement of childhood and is associated with social, behavioral, and academic competence (Bronson, 2001; Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004). Self-regulation evolves as individuals mature, with its final form integrating emotional, cognitive, and behavioral elements working together to achieve self-selected goals. This evolution is closely intertwined with the innate press to master the environment, labeled mastery motivation (Morgan, Harmon, & Maslin-Cole, 1990), as competence is the aim that underpins mastery motivation.

Detaining the usual suspects : charting the use of segregated settings in New South Wales government schools, Australia

In this paper, we examine the increase in segregated placements in the New South Wales government school sector. Using disaggregated enrolment data, we point to the growing over-representation of boys in special schools and classes; particularly those of a certain age in certain support categories. In the discussion that follows, we question the role of special education in the development of new and additional forms of being “at risk.” In effect, we invert the traditional concept by asking: Who is at risk of what? In focusing on the containment of risk, are modern practices of diagnosis and segregation perpetuating risks that already disproportionately affect certain groups of individuals? Do these perceptions of and responses to risk in local schools now place these students at greater personal risk of school failure and a future marked by social exclusion? And, finally, is that risk worth the cost?

Child rearing Inc : On the perils of political paralysis Down Under

In his 2007 PESA keynote address, Paul Smeyers discussed the increasing regulation of child-rearing through government intervention and the generation of “experts,” citing particular examples from Europe where cases of childhood obesity and parental neglect have stirred public opinion and political debate. In his paper (this issue), Smeyers touches on a number of tensions before concluding that child rearing qualifies as a practice in which liberal governments should be reluctant to intervene. In response, I draw on recent experiences in Australia and argue that certain tragic events of late are the result of an ethical, moral and social vacuum in which these tensions coalesce. While I agree with Smeyers that governments should be reluctant to “intervene” in the private domain of the family, I argue that there is a difference between intervention and support. In concluding, I maintain that if certain Western liberal democracies did a more comprehensive job of supporting children and their families through active social investment in primary school education, then both families and schools would be better equipped to deal with the challenges they now face.

An illusory interiority : interrogating the discourse/s of inclusion

It is generally accepted that the notion of inclusion derived or evolved from the practices of mainstreaming or integrating students with disabilities into regular schools. Halting the practice of segregating children with disabilities was a progressive social movement. The value of this achievement is not in dispute. However, our charter as scholars and cultural vigilantes (Slee & Allan, 2001) is to always look for how we can improve things; to avoid stasis and complacency we must continue to ask, how can we do it better? Thus, we must ask ourselves uncomfortable questions and develop a critical perspective that Foucault characterised as an ‘ethic of discomfort’ (Rabinow & Rose, 2003, p. xxvi) by following the Nietzscheian principle where one acts “counter to our time and thereby on our time… for the benefit of a time to come” (Nietzsche, 1874, p. 60 in Rabinow & Rose, 2003, p. xxvi). This paper begins with a fundamental question for those participating in inclusive education research and scholarship – when we talk of including, into what do we seek to include?