Brian Devlin

Miscommunication between Aboriginal Students and their Non-Aboriginal Teachers in a Bilingual School

A crucial question in cross-cultural education is how to bridge the cultural and linguistic differences between home and school so that a childs identity can be supported without limiting his or her chances of academic success (Eades, 1991). Various models of bilingual education have been implemented in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory of Australia but the implementation of such programmes is often far from ideal. In the school where this ethnographic study was conducted, miscommunication between Aboriginal students and their non-Aboriginal teachers was found to be commonplace. Even by late primary school, children often did not comprehend classroom instructions in English. In addition, many students attended school irregularly, and many had a history of mild hearing loss due to otitis media (middle ear infection) which is highly prevalent in Australian Aboriginal communities. Cultural differences in communication were not easily differentiated from hearing-related communication problems ...

Consolidation, Power Through Leadership and Pedagogy, and the Rise of Accountability, 1980–1998

This chapter introduces Part 2 of the book: The Consolidation Phase. It details three key themes in this period: consolidation of the centralised Bilingual Education Program; moves towards Aboriginalisation through power sharing and pedagogy; and the increasing importance of educational accountability. One aim was to strengthen school-based bilingual programs by developing the capacity of educators through Remote Area Teacher Education and professional learning in schools. There were calls to challenge existing pedagogy by ensure that local Aboriginal knowledge was respected. New knowledge practices emerged, along with a new professional cohort of bilingual educators and leaders, new local curricula and pedagogy. At the same time, nationally and internationally, new discourses of standardisation and accountability were emerging in public administration and education, effectively limiting the momentum of local and place-based curriculum planning in remote bilingual schools.

Threatened Closure: Resistance and Compromise (1998–2000)

This chapter begins Part 3 of the book by considering the official decision in 1998 to phase out bilingual programs and the vigorous campaigns such as such as the ‘Don’t cut out our tongues’ movement mounted in opposition by program staff, community members and academics. The next move by the Northern Territory government was to commission an independent review of Indigenous education. The Collin’s Report, which emerged from that review, identified weaknesses in the program, but no justification for closing it. Despite this, a number of schools lost their programs in the wake of the official decision. One recommendation from the report, which was taken up, was to adopt the term ‘Two-way education’. Some of the developments and confusions that arose are detailed in the chapter. Many of the themes touched on in Part 3 are mirrored globally by contestations concerning bilingual education and mother tongue instruction programs.

Sources of Evidence on Student Achievement in Northern Territory Bilingual Education Programs

The task of this chapter to consider how academic achievement in bilingual programs has been measured in the Northern Territory (NT). Particular attention is paid to relevant research projects, critical reviews of the relevant literature, external test results and Department of Education accreditation reports. Although some evidence of program effectiveness is available, it is fairly sparse, and not all of it warrants a high strength rating. Even so, it is not justifiable to claim, as some in positions of authority have done in recent years, that such evidence does not exist. There are datasets available to justify the claim that bilingual education programs can achieve better results and attract higher attendance than English-only approaches in similarly remote NT community schools.

Policy Change in 2008: Evidence-Based or a Knee-Jerk Response?

Since the 1970s school attendance and student performance data have been used to determine the status and future of bilingual education programs in remote NT schools. They have primarily been evaluated for educational planning purposes, which is both acceptable and necessary. Regrettably, evidence has also been selectively compiled by Government officials at different times, as in 2008, to serve a particular political purpose. Bilingual education has always been contested since its inception in the NT. It is argued in this chapter that had this educational approach been better understood, there would have been greater official willingness to maintain support, and to continue refining it as a model of schooling appropriate for students in remote areas. Instead, in 2008 and 2009, some decision makers publicly debunked bilingual-biliteracy education, which they poorly understood, thereby diverting schools and communities, and distracting their attention away from the work that needed to be done.

A Thematic History of Bilingual Education in the Northern Territory

In 1950 Robert Menzies, then Prime Minister of Australia, was party to a little known, high-level agreement which acknowledged that in some circumstances a bilingual approach in education might be the best way to reach more traditionally oriented Aboriginal students in remote areas of the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia.

A Glimmer of Possibility

By way of introducing Part 1, ‘Starting Out’, this chapter sketches the evolution of bilingual education policy in the Northern Territory from 1950 to 1975.