What are the primary and secondary hypotheses and the objectives?

British Educational Research Journal Vol. 36, No. 5, October 2010, pp. 733–744

ISSN 0141-1926 (print)/ISSN 1469-3518 (online)/10/050733-12 © 2010 British Educational Research Association DOI: 10.1080/01411920903142958

Constructing inclusive education in a neo-liberal context: promoting inclusion of Arab-Australian students in an Australian context Annelies Kamp* and Fethi Mansouri Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia Taylor and FrancisCBER_A_414468.sgm(Received …; revised …; accepted …)10.1080/01411920903142958British Education Research Journal0141-1926 (print)/1469-3518 (online)Original Article2009Taylor & Francis0000000002009AnneliesKampkampa@missionaustralia.com.au

School systems are a major social change agent capable of challenging social inequalities and economic disadvantages. Yet, while schools in Australia are being confronted with increasingly cul- turally diverse populations as well as an increasing focus on student retention, this transformative role is increasingly being played out in a broader educational context that has been found to replicate rather than challenge patterns of social inequality. Successive governments in Australia have re- sponded to this context with a raft of policy initiatives. This paper, based on three-year longitudinal research undertaken in the city of Melbourne, outlines this policy context and introduces the theo- retical approach that underpins its innovative approach to managing cultural diversity in educational institutions. It argues for, and presents, a multidimensional model for managing cultural diversity in schools, one that provides the tools for transformative practices to be undertaken to effect positive change in school environments for the benefit of all students.

Introduction

A distinguishing feature of contemporary political life is thus the insistence that only if those differences which are constitutive of identity—whether differences of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, culture, language and so on—are given full acknowledgement and respect, not merely in law but in a society’s basic institutions, can equal participation for all citizens in a democracy be realised. The most basic social institution of all in this regard is of course a society’s public education system, since it is through education that identity, whether individual or societal, is reflected—validated or discounted—and reconstructed for the future. (Jonathan, 2000, pp. 377–378)

*Corresponding author. Strategy and development manager, Mission Australia, L2, 398 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia. Email: kampa@missionaustralia.com.au

 

 

734 A. Kamp and F. Mansouri

Multicultural education has been defined as ‘an approach to teaching and learning that is based upon democratic values and beliefs and that affirms cultural pluralism within culturally diverse societies in an interdependent world’ (Bennett, 2003, p. 14). There is broad agreement on the objective of multicultural education: ‘it relates to the quality of living in an ethnically and culturally diverse society’ (Leeman, 2003, p. 32).

Although now commonly recognised in education policy discourse of culturally pluralist nations, education practice has often been based on an assumption that a non-mainstream background is an educational liability (Campbell, 2000). In Australia throughout the 1990s the key change in education was the growth in competition at every level: between students; between teachers; between schools and types of schools; and between school districts (Marginson, 2006, p. 209). This curtailed the ability of schools to cooperate in meeting the needs of diverse groups of students given a shift in focus from student need to student performance (Apple, 2001). Devolved governance based on competitive positioning, parental choice and per capita funding created both opportunities and tensions for schools in the context of increased inter-racial tension post-9/11.

In this paper we draw on research funded by the Australian Research Council Linkage Project and conducted from 2003–2006 with three Melbourne secondary schools characterised by high levels of cultural diversity and social disadvantage. Other project partners included a community service agency, Victorian Arabic Social Services and the Scanlon Foundation, a philanthropic trust with an interest in cultural diversity and social cohesion. The project, entitled ‘Diversity: an educational advantage’, had a number of aims: to develop a multi-tiered best practice model that encouraged school communities to better manage their cultural and linguistic diver- sity; to provide teacher and school support resources and professional development; to build strong partnerships between schools and local communities to promote positive relationships and a more inclusive school environment; and to inform and influence the further development of multicultural education policy and practice. These aims were pursued through three approaches: the work of an in-school cultural diversity facilitator; the development of print and on-line resources for teachers and other school staff; and research to inform the development and assess the impact of the other project components.

The research focus was Arab-Australians, a group marked by diversity of religion, nationality, gender, class and, most notably, language. Immigration from the Arabic-speaking countries constituted 8% of the total migration to Australia in 2001, with the population of the various Arabic-speaking communities quadrupling in size between 1976 and 2001 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2001). In 2006, 204,700 people spoke Arabic at home, making it the fourth largest language group other than English in Australia and representing a 37% increase over a decade (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2006). In the schools participating in this study, up to 80% of the student population came from non-English-speaking backgrounds, with the largest language group being Arabic (Victorian Office of Multicultural Affairs, 2003). Data were collected from Arabic and non-Arabic students (n = 264),

 

 

Inclusive education in a neo-liberal context 735

teachers (n = 117) and Arabic parents (n = 78), through surveys, focus groups and interviews and were analysed both longitudinally and comparatively.

The paper proceeds with a discussion of multicultural education and related policy. The theoretical perspective underlying the project is then introduced and the research findings presented. Finally, the paper outlines the resources that have been developed in pursuit of the aim of promoting cultural diversity as an educational advantage.

Multicultural education in context

Multicultural education, both in Australia and internationally, has often resulted in remedial interventions aimed at ethnic groups. Yet the ability to successfully live and interact in a globalized, interdependent world is increasingly being seen as a funda- mental component of the education of all students. Thus, references to ‘multicultural education’ relate to activities on two dimensions: firstly, the educational work of enabling all students to prepare themselves to live in a multicultural world and, secondly, optimising educational opportunities and outcomes for students thereby allowing democratic participation regardless of cultural background (Leeman, 2003).

In Australia, official support for multicultural education has centred on the aims of encouraging civic duty, cultural respect, equity and productive diversity for all Australian students. This intent is clearly outlined in The Adelaide declaration on national goals for schooling in the twenty-first century, an ‘historic’ commitment by all Australian governments that, in addition to outlining the talents and capacities, knowledge and skills that all Australian students should acquire, also outlined a commitment to socially just schooling where:

all students understand and acknowledge the value of cultural and linguistic diversity and possess the knowledge, skills and understanding to contribute to, and benefit from, such diversity in the Australian community and internationally. (Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, 1999, n.p.)

However, such official support for multicultural education ‘mask(s) an uneasy ambivalence’ towards multiculturalism and multicultural education by elites within the Anglo-Celtic ‘core’ of Australia (Hickling-Hudson, 2002, p. 3). In an effort to maintain an ideal of social order and cohesion, systemic disadvantages can go unchallenged within superficial forms of multicultural education that acknowledge diversity on a purely ethnic level (Troyna, 1993). An example of this is occasional activities such as Harmony Day, an Australian government initiative that encour- ages all Australians to contribute to and build upon Australia’s social cohesion through the promotion of Australian values including understanding, tolerance and inclusion. Even though initiatives such as Harmony Day represent unques- tionably positive initiatives that are conducive to social cohesion, they are exam- ples of multicultural education as a ‘superficial “celebration of difference” through “foods and festivals” activities rather than an examination of how “difference” serves to advantage some and disadvantage others’ (Dixson & Rousseau, 2005, p. 16–17).