Former Education Minister Adrian Piccoli says he is not surprised by the results of a community consultation process into the future of secondary schooling in the city, but warned it was only one of many factors being considered as the department moves toward a final decision.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The comments come following the release of the results of a consultation with the city’s numerous stakeholders on Wednesday, which found while 21 per cent of respondents supported option one, only 29 per cent supported option two.
Proposed option one offered $45 million in funding from the state government to merge the city’s high schools, while option two offered $10 million to upgrade existing sites.
The Area News has summarised the feedback given by various stakeholder groups below.
Business and Employer Stakeholders
30 members of the business and employer community gave their opinion with the majority favouring option one on the basis of experience with students not being job ready and needed further guidance.
The group felt the first option would “unite the community and maximise benefits of different cultures learning together as well as removing any ‘us and them’ stigma.”
The potential for more collaboration with the city’s businesses and for students to experience technical specialisation was also raised.
“Good public system could help lift the game across the board, challenge other schools to improve and do better,” one respondent said.
Community and childcare providers
There were 32 participants who took part from this sector, with the six who attended a community workshop quite strongly in favour of option two which was seen as being less disruptive, giving parents a choice and overcoming problems presented by having one school in a multicultural community.
However, the report noted when other input from interviews with community groups, community members and service providers was considered “there was considerably more support for change and Option 1 [sic].”
Those who supported this option cited more subject choices, increased opportunities for students and staff and building community relationships to overcome divides as considerations.
“One school – create more of a community – remove ‘us and them’ – good for wider community,” one respondent said.
“Future jobs will be so different and we need modern learning spaces to facilitate learning,” another said.
The difficulties faced by both schools in attracting and retaining teachers was an issue raised by this group with one respondent quoted as saying “no fault of the school, but my daughter had seven science teachers by July.”
Disability and special needs
Seven community members stepped up from this sector to weigh in on the debate with issues surrounding integration, inclusion, accessibility and support all raised.
Importantly this group noted a transition plan as the schools merged would be critical “as the smallest amount of disruption to students with special needs can have a detrimental impact on their learning and well-being.”
The report found on the balance there “appeared to be a preference for Option 1 [sic] because of perceived potential for greater inclusion, broadening of subject choice and better access for students of all abilities to improved facilities and resources.”
However, the report notes the presence of two opponents to option one in this group who raised concerns a larger school would be too overwhelming for special needs students.
Indigenous community
10 respondents from the Indigenous community weighed in on the options available with the want to see high expectations of Aboriginal students and more Aboriginal students graduating year 12 with the HSC raised.
The report found no strong preference for either option emerged from the group, though they appeared to lean towards option one, seeing its potential benefits, but had questions and needed more information before they could make a clear decision.
A number of issues were flagged to ensure Aboriginal students would benefit from a larger school, should it go ahead, including ensuring adequate support so they don’t get left behind, better integration of traineeships to transition to sustainable jobs and support for students who don’t have family support.
“Education system there, getting funding, but role of parent in preparing kids still very important,” one respondent said.
NESB community
“Vision for school to be a safe place from social stigmas that may exist in wider community and supports them to be who they are, to be individuals.”
Eight members from the non-English speaking background section of the community put forth their opinions on the options presented with the report judging there to be more support for option one.
This was judged on the basis that a larger school is able to attract more funding for specialist services, could address the ‘us and them’ stigma and would allow for more varied learning opportunities.
The group registered as concerned their children were not receiving a high enough standard of education, with many seeking to move to private schools while concerns literacy and numeracy levels entering year 7 were not high enough with students falling behind as a result.
The group highlighted risks with option two including how far funding would go and locations presenting a barrier to greater cooperation.
This group also put forth an opinion there may also be a case for refreshing staff and executive in order to bring new ideas to the table.
Primary student parents
131 people who identified as part of this group took part in the consultation process in some way, with option two found to be preferred by the majority in the absence of information as to how option one would address current issues and improve educational outcomes.
“Whole town already a good educational precinct, close to lots of facilities – Option 2 [sic] still encompasses that,” one respondent said.
The parents raised concerns on the current system, including years their belief years 7-10 don’t have stability in teachers, students suffer a lack of engagement due to subject choice and queries over how important retention rates actually are.
Primary school staff
24 staff from primary schools in the area presented their views and recorded seeing strong benefits to option one, but concerns there wasn’t enough information for decisions to be made.
A need to address the logistics, access, transport and scope for future growth was highlighted by this group as was the reality that option two would still involve disruptions to students as they travelled between high schools.
Staff said both high schools currently suffered from a lack of qualified staff teaching in their trained subjects and highlighted that smaller class sizes for specialized subjects restricted students from collaboration and competition.
Secondary school parents
127 parents of high school students registered some sort of opinion in the consultation process.
While mixed views were recorded on the balance the report found a preference for option two in one workshop due to school choice being retained, maintaining a smaller student population and with the expectation the schools would work more closely together in the future – while the other workshop failed to reach a consensus,.
Themes identified by authors of the report included a mixed view amongst respondents over whether Griffith’s NAPLAN results were worrying, dated facilities, a need for more students to be job ready and concerns over negative perceptions of violence and behaviour standards at both schools.
Secondary school teachers
There were 121 teachers and former teachers who expressed a view on this issue – while there report stated it was not possible to record an overall preference it says it appeared a majority leaned towards option two.
Teachers raised concerns about students not having sufficient vocational training opportunities, concerns over job security, the prohibitive cost of VET courses and a general feeling year 12 retention rates were not an issue.
RELATED
