rise conference 2015 - flinders university conference... · rise conference 2015. research in...

Australian educators’ understanding and implementation of the Australian Curriculum in

planning for and teaching students with disabilities

RISE Conference 2015Research In Special Education (RISE): David

Armstrong, Kerry Bissaker, Karyn Carson, Jane Jarvis, Julie McMillan, Anna Noble,

Carolyn Palmer, & Peter Walker

An Australian CurriculumOur starting point, the research question:What has the introduction of the Australian Curriculum meant for special educators?

1. How do educators in special school/ disability unit settings engage with the Australian Curriculum framework in developing learning objectives, planning learning experiences, selecting resources, assessing learning, and reporting outcomes for students with disabilities?2. How do educators in special school/ disability unit settings supplement the Australian Curriculum framework with additional frameworks, programs and/or resources?3. What supports and experiences do educators in special school/ disability unit settings identify as being particularly helpful in assisting them to understand and implement the Australian Curriculum framework for students with disabilities?

Research objectives

Research benefitsContributing to the literature – addressing a clear gap.

The identification of areas for future pre-service teaching and professional learning opportunities for current teachers.

Better curriculum development, programming and teaching practices.

Better learning opportunities for students with special needs.

share

Research scope

Exploratory, not exhaustive.Special schools/units across all states and territories – public, Catholic and independent.

A brief survey of literature 1. Australian National Curriculum – 1st for Australia no historical precedents for research to draw upon but international examples: …UK National Curriculum, 1988 - has been subject to constant change & review, see ‘life in a pressure cooker’: (Perryman et al 2011) educators and Ball, S. J. (2013)

2. Limited research it appears, on effects of the Australian National Curriculum on educator practices in settings per se since its introduction in 2013 (delay/time-lag between research & publication)But discussion with colleagues at other universities in SA and beyond suggests small wave of others, across Australia, investigating how educators are responding to the demands of the Australian National Curriculum post-2013.

3. Concerns: An emerging strand of literature has highlighted concerns, on several levels, about the negative implication of The Australian National Curriculum for the education & welfare of children with a disability (Armstrong, 2016; Cumming and Dixon, 2013; Dempsey and Davis, 2013; Garner and Forbes, 2013).

Observation: 1, 2 and 3 above support the need for the project outlined in this presentation & practitioner voices

Further observations

There is, however, little parallel exploration of teacher educators’ work addressing school curriculum change per se and how they prepare the next generation of teachers for new curricula yet to be operationalized. This is despite the context of rolling reforms, growing public scrutiny of their work and increased accountability for producing highly qualified and competent teachers (p. 55).

Briant and May (2012) report relative lack of research about how teacher ed. students are prepared to respond to new curricula or major shifts in policy related to curriculum:

Perry and Southwell (2014), in their Australian-based sociological study of how different secondary settings used academic curriculum content, suggest that in marketized systems like Australia (and US) the application of formal subject content of any National Curriculum will significantly differ between settings. Thus no ‘standard’ application in settings.

Preliminary findings: Gerrard et al (2013)

1. unexpectedly high levels of commonality among primary and secondary educators, teachers across states, and between mathematics and English educators, in the use of formal curriculum and commercial materials for teachers’ planning’ (p. 70)

2. (in contrast) unexpectedly dramatic differences in the extent to which curriculum planning is currently embedded within school processes (p.) which they suggest are ‘accompanied by clear differences in the planning currently undertaken at the school level in anticipation of the AC (p.70).

3. Gerrard et al (2013) add ‘Our early observations suggest that some schools are experiencing high levels of ‘change fatigue’, resulting in volatile internal relationships that, in turn, affect their capacity to plan for, and anticipate, the AC reform’ (p. 70).

Ambitious study by Gerrard et al (2013) used focus groups, semi-structured interviews and document analysis methods within a case study methodology to capture the enactment phase of the Australian National Curriculum (p.70). Three preliminary findings reported:

The Australian National Curriculum poses dilemmas and/or is unclear about how it can be applied in an inclusive manner and as part of an emphasis on educational inclusion (Briant and Doherty, 2011; Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, 2015)

Data gathering & high-stakes assessment• Assessment of student learning and reporting of curriculum-referenced student

progress pinpointed as particularly problematic for educators in their application and interpretation of the National Curriculum & for children with disabilities (Armstrong, 2016; Dempsey and Davis, 2013; Cumming and Dickson, 2013).

‘Australian educational authorities involved in national achievement testing have yet to fully embrace inclusive assessment.’ (Dempsey and Davis 2013, p. 5).

‘equitable inclusion of students with disability in current Australian educational accountability testing is not occurring from a social perspective and is not in principle compliant with law.’ (Cumming and Dixon, p. 222).

See also Armstrong (2016) (forthcoming)

A national study

77 Public10 Independent4 Catholic






0 Public (declined)1 Independent0 Catholic


Ethical considerations• Ethics applications (24!) required across Flinders University (1), each Catholic

Diocese (4 in Victoria, 5 in Queensland), Catholic bodies in other state/territories (6) and each public schooling system (8). Independent schools approached individually.

• Some systems placed requirements upon us which were agree to in order for the study to be inclusive – despite likelihood that less respondents would result.

• Some inflexibility around making requested changes from states/sectors. Technically, a change from one of the applications would mean going back to the other 23 applications and requesting approval of alterations.

• Protection of identity of respondents – no collection of names or schools. No cross-sector comparisons.

Survey Design

Quantitative and Qualitative• 37 questions

– Multiple choicePlease identify the diagnosed disabilities of students in your current teaching context (please check the boxes that apply).

Intellectual disability / Global Developmental Delay Multiple disabilities

Autism Spectrum Disorder Learning disabilities

Vision impairment Speech and/or language impairment(s)

Hearing impairment ADHD

Physical disability Dual sensory impairment (deaf/blind)

Emotional/Behavioural Disorder (EBD) Other (please specify)

Survey Design• Likert scale

Survey Design• Text-based an open ended questions• Q32. Please provide an example of how you

use the Australian Curriculum to plan learning experiences for your students.

• Q50 Is there anything further you would like to share in relation to your engagement with the Australian Curriculum in supporting your role as an educator of students with disabilities?

Survey Design

4 Sections:1.Participant background 2.Use of Australian Curriculum for students with disabilities3.Supplementing the Australian Curriculum4.Professional Learning and Support

Survey Design• Use of Australian Curriculum

– Learning areas, general capabilities, cross curriculum priorities

– Frequency and confidence– Learning objectives– Assessment

• Supplementing the AC– Additional resources and/or curricula

• Professional Learning with AC– Types, value, effectiveness

Responses by Australian localities:- Victoria: n = 26- South Australia: n = 30- Queensland: n = 5- Western Australia: n = 29- New South Wales: n = 20

Populations respondents primary work with:Over 83% of respondents work primarily with children who have an intellectual disability/global developmental delay and children on the Autism Spectrum.

Respondents’ educational environments:• 40% Middle school/secondary school environment• 35% Foundation year• 25% Primary school environment

Analysis of Survey Responses(n = 110 as of 2.11.15)

26

3020

529

0

0

0


Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Duration

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Percentage of survey completed

Qualitative versus Quantitative Questions


Examples of Qualitative Questions:Is there anything further you would like to share in relation to your engagement with the Australian Curriculum in supporting your role as an educator of students with disabilities?

Please provide an example of how you use the Australian curriculum to plan learning experiences for your students.

Please provide an example of how you use the Australian Curriculum to develop learning objectives for your students

Please provide an example of how you use the Australian Curriculum to assess and report on outcomes.

Please provide an example of how you supplement, and/or replace the Australian Curriculum for students with disabilities.

ConclusionThe survey is still OPEN! Please check your email and consider responding.

Alternatively, you can visit the RISE page from the Flinders University website. The link to the survey and supporting documents can be found there.

Thanks to the Australian Association of Special Education (AASE) National for their funding of this project through the AASE Award. A full presentation will be made at the 2016 AASE Conference in Melbourne (8th-10th June).

Any questions?

ReferencesArmstrong, D. (2015) [forthcoming] Am I just stupid? high-stakes testing of children with dyslexia. In: Bella-Viffa, P. and Xerri, D. (eds) (2015) High-Stakes Testing and Children with Language Difficulties. London: Elsevier.

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2015). Australian curriculum. Available at: http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/studentdiversity/students-with-disability (Last accessed at 28/10/2015).

Ball, S. J. (2013). The education debate. Policy Press.

Briant, E., & Doherty, C. (2012). Teacher educators mediating curricular reform: anticipating the Australian curriculum. Teaching Education, 23(1), 51-69.Cumming, J. J., & Dickson, E. (2013). Educational accountability tests, social and legal inclusion approaches to discrimination for students with disability: a national case study from Australia. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(2), 221-239. Dempsey, I., & Davies, M. (2013). National test performance of young Australian children with additional educational needs. Australian Journal of Education, 57(1), 5-18.Ditchburn, G. (2012). A national Australian curriculum: in whose interests? Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(3), 259-269. Garner, P., & Forbes, F. (2013). An ‘at-risk’curriculum for ‘at-risk’students? Special educational needs and disability in the new Australian Curriculum. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs.Gerrard, J., Albright, J., Clarke, D. J., Clarke, D. M., Farrell, L., Freebody, P., & Sullivan, P. (2013). Researching the creation of a national curriculum from systems to classrooms. Australian Journal of Education, 57(1), 60-73.Perry, L. B., & Southwell, L. (2014). Access to academic curriculum in Australian secondary schools: A case study of a highly marketised education system. Journal of Education Policy, 29(4), 467-485.Perryman, J., Ball, S., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2011). Life in the pressure cooker–School league tables and English and mathematics teachers’ responses to accountability in a results-driven era. British Journal of Educational Studies, 59(2), 179-195.Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Abingdon: Routledge. Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (2015). The Victorian Curriculum F-10. Available at: http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/ (Accessed on 28/10/2015).

http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/studentdiversity/students-with-disability

http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/

rise conference 2015 - flinders university conference... · rise conference 2015. research in...

Documents