EduResearch Matters

EduResearch Matters is a blog for educational researchers in Australia to get their work and opinions out to the general public. Please join us here. We would love to get your comments and feedback about our work.

The truth about the pay rise for the oppressed

October 17, 2024Early Childhood, Early childhood education and careAARE blog, Early childhood, Melissa Duffy-Fagan, University of Newcastle

The Federal Government’s “good social and educational policy, and even better political move” of a fully funded pay rise (worker retention payment) for the early childhood education and care (ECEC) sector becomes the latest example of the continued oppressive workload and undervaluing of the ECEC sector in Australia.

The worker retention payment

In August this year the Albanese government announced it would be providing a fully funded 15% increase for the ECEC workforce implemented over two years – and that will function as a grant. Early conditions shared by the government included a fee growth cap of 4.4% to ensure that families did not incur further fee increases to support wage increases.

Other details would come much later.

Guidelines and applications opened last week for a grant payment through the Department of Education (DoE) and Grant Connect.

Here’s what we understand about the grant so far:

The first pay increase of 10% must be passed on to eligible employees. The 10% cannot be manipulated for any employee who is already paid above award.
Eligible employees are those paid under two approved awards – the Children’s Services Award 2010 and the Teachers Award 2020. Trainees paid under other awards are not eligible for this pay increase.
The amount of grant monies each service receives is based on gross labour costs detailed in grant applications. These are then applied to each service’s weekly child care subsidy submission hours. The government are yet to release a fully explained formula for payments.
Each employer must provide a Fair Work approved workplace instrument with their grant application; for example, an Individual Flexibility Arrangement.

Full details of the Worker Retention Payment can be found on the Department of Education website.

Complications of gendered undervaluation

The Fair Work Commission is currently undertaking a gender undervaluation review case with results due mid-2025. Following on from the decision from the review of the Aged Care Award 2010 etc, the Children’s Services Award is currently being considered in this case. The decision from the previous review noted:

The basis upon which the ERO (equal remuneration order) rates were determined closely parallel the work value reasons upon which we are proceeding in this matter: the high female composition of the industry in question, the significance of the work being ‘caring’ work, the disguising of the level of skill and experience required to perform the work, the gender-based undervaluation of the work, and the need to remedy the extent to which assumptions on the basis of gender had inhibited wages growth.

A substantial increase is well overdue

This decision justifies the benchmark rate fixing process for the Aged Care Award and is highly reflective of the gendered composition and undervaluing experienced in the ECEC sector. A substantial increase in wages is well overdue and the latent expertise of the skills and value of the sector need to be heard. However, there are serious financial implications for services that opt in to this grant before the gender undervaluation decision has been made.

If a service has opted in to the grant and the outcome of the gender undervaluation case results in a well-deserved increase in the Children’s Services award – services will not be able to increase fees to cover the wage increase beyond the 4.4% cap.This will place many services, particularly small ones, under great financial strain.

The disconnect

The disconnect between what is being decided should happen for the ECEC sector and the means to which it is being implemented is alarming. Complex industrial relations and financial decisions need to be made by providers. Furthermore, Approved Providers and/or Directors will be responsible for administering grant monies, reporting usage and researching, paying for or writing workplace instruments to meet the conditions of the grant.

State and Federal governments are fully aware of the complex and diverse nature of the ECEC sector. The vast differences in ECEC service budgets, licensed numbers, business structures and contexts within more than 17,000 services in Australia is widely understood. Yet little consideration appears to be given to the continued impact of how partial remedies to gender pay inequity are being implemented.

It is clear that small centres of either private or not for profit nature, will experience heavy burdens associated with the administration, financial, mental, ethical and emotional load of the grant’s implementation.

Posing questions about problems

Can we afford this grant? What other costs will require fees to rise more than the capped fee growth of 4.4% allowed under the grant terms? Will the grant continue beyond the projected two-year timeframe? What will happen if we become ineligible for further payments but have binding workplace instruments to continue paying above award rates? Will we lose our team if we don’t opt in to this grant to offer them higher wages? Will we lose families if we increase fees to cover a self-funded 10% pay rise? How much wage related on costs such as superannuation, workers compensation, leave entitlements, payroll tax will be covered by the grant? How will our budget afford 10-15% above award costs when we are closed for public holidays, two weeks at Christmas and New Year when we cannot submit CCS hours?

Pay rise of the oppressed

These practical and rational questions about a political action ostensibly designed to lift the value and living conditions of the ECEC workforce, asserts further notions of oppression by systems of power over our sector.

As the decision in the Aged Care Award suggests, the skills and experience of care work is disguised based on gender. So too is the overly complicated nature of the grant. It disguises continued mistrust and undervaluing of the ECEC sector by the government. This mistrust and undervaluation reinforces that ours is a sector bereft of true professional autonomy and agency.

Freire’s notion of a critical pedagogy encouraged the oppressed to problem pose about their experiences to transform themselves from oppression. The fact is our sector is truly oppressed by neoliberal ideologies that value education as financial, human capital-based outcomes rather than democratic and ethical ones. As Freire maintains, it is necessary to admit that oppression exists and locate what that oppression is, for liberation to be possible.

Crumbs of progress

The reality of the ECEC sector is that we are so oppressed by these systems that even when the oppressive discourses transform into promises of better conditions with great uncertainty, the oppressive powers condition us to accept, navigate and move on. We lower our expectations and continue to accept higher workloads and bad deals for ourselves. The cycle of oppression goes around and around as we accept crumbs of progress from disingenuous and politically motivated offers. How do we heal from internalised and externalised oppression? How do we do this whilst holding on to our ethical and democratic beliefs that our workforce deserves more than the uncertainty of a temporary fiscal stop gap to hold the crucial ECEC system in place?

Melissa Duffy-Fagan is the owner and approved provider of a ECEC centre in Lambton, Newcastle. She is a sessional academic at the University of Newcastle. Her doctoral studies, completed in 2023, explored the themes of leadership, professional identity and quality policy. Find her on LinkedIn.

A call to action on Indigenous education rights: uphold fundamental human rights now

October 14, 2024Indigenous Curriculum, Indigenous education, Indigenous education policy, Indigenous futures, Indigenous learning, Indigenous researchAARE blog, Griffith University, Indigenous education, Indigenous education policy, Peter Anderson

It’s exactly one year since the referendum on the Voice to Parliament. This is a call to action in a post-referendum Australia to advance Indigenous education rights.

In the wake of the unsuccessful Voice referendum, Australia finds itself at a critical juncture in its relationship with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. As an Indigenous academic who has long advocated for a rights-based approach to education, this moment calls for a renewed commitment. It also calls for action from all sectors of our education system, particularly non-Indigenous educators and leaders.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Foundation for Rights-Based Education

Before delving into specific actions, it’s crucial to understand the international framework that underpins our rights-based approach. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted by the General Assembly in 2007 and endorsed by Australia in 2009, provides a comprehensive framework for recognising, protecting, and promoting the rights of Indigenous peoples globally.

UNDRIP explicitly addresses education in several articles:

Article 14: asserts indigenous peoples’ right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions, providing education in their own languages and in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning.

Article 15: emphasises the right of indigenous peoples to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories, and aspirations, which should be appropriately reflected in education and public information.

Article 21: states that indigenous peoples have the right to improvement in their economic and social conditions, including in the area of education.

These articles, among others, form the basis of our rights-based approach to education. They shift the paradigm from viewing education for Indigenous peoples as a matter of welfare or closing gaps to recognising it as a fundamental human right. This approach demands our education systems not only provide access to education for Indigenous peoples but also do so in a way that respects and promotes Indigenous cultures, languages, and ways of knowing.

The Imperative of Rights-Based Education

The referendum’s outcome doesn’t change the fundamental rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to quality education that respects our cultures, languages, and traditions. These rights, as outlined in UNDRIP, to which Australia is a signatory, remain intact and urgent. Our education systems, from early childhood through to higher education, have both an opportunity and a responsibility to embed these rights into their practices, policies, and curricula.

This isn’t just about “closing gaps” or hitting targets. It’s about recognising and upholding fundamental human rights and contributing to a more just and inclusive education system for all Australians.

Key Areas for Action

1. Curriculum Reform

We must move beyond tokenistic inclusion of Indigenous content. A rights-based approach calls for deep integration of Indigenous knowledges, histories, and perspectives across all subject areas. This isn’t just for the benefit of Indigenous students; it enriches the education of all Australians and promotes intercultural understanding.

2. Indigenous Leadership in Education

Increased Indigenous representation in educational leadership is crucial. This involves more than just hiring Indigenous teachers, educators, and academics (though that’s important). It means creating pathways for Indigenous education experts to shape policy, develop curricula, and lead institutions.

3. Community Partnerships

Education systems must forge meaningful, reciprocal partnerships with Indigenous communities. This goes beyond consultation to the co-design of educational programs and policies. Respecting Indigenous self-determination means recognising communities as experts and agents of their own educational needs and destinies.

4. Safe Learning Environments

Creating safe learning environments is a key aspect of upholding Indigenous educational rights. This involves comprehensive cultural competency and anti-racism training for all staff, along with policies and practices that respect Indigenous cultural protocols and ways of learning.

5. Language Revitalisation

Indigenous languages are not just communication tools; they are repositories of culture and knowledge. Education systems have a vital role to play in supporting language revitalisation efforts, offering bilingual education where appropriate and recognising the cognitive and cultural benefits of Indigenous language learning.

6. The Critical Role of Non-Indigenous Educators

Improving Indigenous educational outcomes is not solely the responsibility of Indigenous peoples. Non-Indigenous educators and leaders have a social and moral obligation to be at the forefront of this work alongside their Indigenous colleagues.

Here are key actions for non-Indigenous educators and leaders:

1. Educate Yourself: Commit to ongoing learning about Indigenous histories, cultures, and contemporary issues. Engage with Indigenous scholarship and participate in cultural competency training.

2. Amplify Indigenous Voices: Create platforms for Indigenous colleagues to share their expertise and advocate for increased Indigenous representation in decision-making bodies.

3. Critically examine curriculum and pedagogy: Review teaching materials for bias and incorporate Indigenous knowledges across all subject areas. Adopt culturally responsive teaching practices.

4. Build Genuine Partnerships: Reach out to local Indigenous communities to understand their educational priorities and involve them in curriculum development and decision-making processes.

5. Advocate for Systemic Change: Push for policy changes that support Indigenous rights and student success. Challenge practices that undermine Indigenous rights.

6. Support Indigenous Languages: Advocate for Indigenous language programs and support initiatives that integrate Indigenous languages into the broader curriculum..

7. Create Culturally Safe Spaces: Make your classroom or office welcoming for Indigenous students and colleagues. Be proactive in addressing racism and discrimination.

Overcoming Challenges

I recognise that this work comes with challenges. Non-Indigenous educators may feel discomfort or fear of making mistakes. Remember that discomfort is often a sign of growth. You may encounter resistance to change; use your position of privilege to advocate persistently for Indigenous rights. Strive for a balance of proactive engagement and respectful consultation with Indigenous colleagues and communities.

The path forward

The referendum may not have delivered constitutional change. But it has sparked crucial conversations. Now is the time to translate those conversations into meaningful action in our education systems. By embracing a rights-based approach, we can work towards an education system that truly serves all Australians and honours the unique rights, cultures, and contributions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

I call on all educators, policymakers, and community members to commit to concrete actions:

– Advocate for curriculum reform in your local schools and universities

– Support initiatives that amplify Indigenous voices in educational leadership

– Engage with local Indigenous communities to understand their educational priorities

– Push for robust cultural safety training in all educational institutions

– Support and participate in Indigenous language learning programs

The path to fully realising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educational rights will be long. Yet every step matters. As we move forward, let’s remember that this work isn’t about charity—it’s about recognising and upholding fundamental human rights. Together, we can create an education system that not only respects Indigenous rights but also benefits from the rich knowledge and perspectives that Indigenous peoples bring to the table.

Peter Anderson is from the Walpiri and Murinpatha peoples of the Northern Territory and is Professor and Director Indigenous Research Unit at Griffith University. Professor Anderson’s research spans the area of Australian Indigenous education, educational systems, curriculum and pedagogical interventions and the intersecting relationships with indigenous peoples both globally and domestically.

Research impact: What I Learned From Being An ABC Media Expert For Two Weeks

October 10, 2024Research impactAARE blog, ABC, Hugh Gundlach, media impact, Research impact, University of Melbourne

The ABC’s TOP 5 is a unique program where the national broadcaster works with a group of early career researchers across science, humanities and the arts. This year, the University of Melbourne’s Hugh Gundlach was one of the Humanities TOP5. He specialises in education, particularly in teacher retention and teachers’ work.

Amplifying your Research Impact through the Media

As academic researchers, we have a responsibility to share our findings beyond just peer-reviewed journals. The public and industry funds much of our work, so we should return that knowledge to its context by providing expert opinion supported by facts and evidence. Apart from helping attract funding and building profiles inside and outside institutions, media exposure allows us to start conversations in society and elevate stories beyond headlines.

I had the opportunity to spend two weeks at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) as part of their Top 5 Media Residency program. During this time, I learned how to retain the integrity of complex research while presenting it to a broader, non-academic media audience. I believe we can all benefit from the insights offered by this program.

Why Engage with the Media?

Media helps set and follow the public interest, but it can also fall prey to sensationalism and PR agendas. Academics can play a key role in elevating stories, providing context, and reducing sensationalism. Most people will never read a peer-reviewed journal, making the media an essential platform for reaching diverse and influential audiences, including policymakers, highly educated audiences, and the general public.

Media also allows academics to incorporate personal stories and case studies, elements typically absent from formal research outputs.

Storytelling is Key

The purpose of news media is to serve the public interest by exposing injustice, informing the population, but also entertaining. The ABC prides itself on sharing good stories, well told, without dumbing them down. They carefully consider who the audience is for each program, repeatedly asking why that audience should care about the content.

Good media coverage is fundamentally about storytelling. The ABC focuses on big issues told through engaging, human-centred stories. Ask yourself:

Does your research connect with any current societal issues?
Can you offer a fresh perspective on something in the news?
What part of your work will make people say, “Wow”?
What’s the one takeaway for the audience?

Use vivid language and imagery to bring your research to life.

Which Media Formats Should I Consider?

Being behind the scenes at the ABC helped me understand the range of media formats. Each requires a different approach:

Online Articles

Online articles offer features, opinion pieces, explainers and analysis. They need to be timely, impactful, locally relevant, surprising, containing conflict/tension, human interest and universal themes.

Articles are around 1,000 words with succinct one sentence paragraphs, lots of subheadings, and engaging images every scroll. Most are read on phones, with an average two minute read time. High performers attract about 20,000 views with an average 4 minute read time.

Focus on making one key point very well. Use impactful quotes from other work, hyperlinking sources after the first three paragraphs to avoid sending readers away initially.

Radio

People listen to radio news and talk programs to gain knowledge, hear stories of shared interest, and get help with their lives. As a guest, be passionate but remember it’s not for you – keep the conversation flowing without drifting off-topic. Find the human interest angle and use sensory details to create a narrative flow for the imagined listener of that program.

You may be brought in as an expert to provide context and perspective behind the headlines on live breakfast, afternoon or drivetime shows. Or you might pre-record an interview for a more specialised subject-based program, where you can tell richer stories and case studies in a friendly, informal environment.

Podcasts

Podcasts are even more niche, with segmented audiences actively seeking out that specific content. Listen to past episodes to understand the particular style – it could be a casual host chat, long-form interview, high production narrative or a daily news-style briefing. Whatever the format, your interviewing ability is key.

Types of Interviews

Interviews are guided conversations aimed at informing, discovering new insights, or holding someone accountable. For researchers, interviews are usually of the first two types.

Before agreeing to an interview, ask the journalist/producer who the audience is, what angle they’re taking, what areas they want to cover and who else they’re speaking to. It’s acceptable to decline interviews if you don’t feel qualified or confident in the treatment of the topic.

The producer will likely pre-interview you to prepare questions for the talent to ask. But the talent may still ask stereotypical questions the public is expecting – remember, the audience should be getting the most out of it.

In an interview, answer the question you’re asked, not the one you’ve prepared for. Keep your language accessible, contextualise any statistics, and maintain a conversational tone. Try to answer questions as a fellow human, not just an academic!

How to Pitch Your Research

Producers are the gatekeepers for most media appearances. When pitching, be specific and personal—show them how your content aligns with their audience. Timing is critical. Reach out before 9 am and avoid Fridays.

Tailoring your pitch to relevant holidays or major events (e.g., ‘Back to school’, Exams, the Olympics, NAPLAN) can improve your chances. Be mindful of when Parliament is not sitting, as those weeks can create more opportunities for academic voices to be heard.

Don’t be discouraged if you don’t hear back immediately—media work often involves getting “bumped” or edited out. The key is to remain persistent, relevant and to make yourself known. Write articles for platforms like EduResearchMatters, The Guardian, or The Conversation, update your profile on your institution’s website, and connect with journalists covering your area of expertise, as well as any media teams within your institution.

Engaging with the media offers a valuable opportunity to share your research with a wider audience. By telling your story clearly and compellingly, you can contribute to important conversations, elevate public discourse, and make a lasting impact beyond academia.

Hugh Gundlach is a lecturer and researcher in the Faculty of Education at The University of Melbourne. He is one of the ABC Top 5 Media Residents (Humanities) for 2024. There are intakes for the ABC Top 5 in the Arts, Humanities and Sciences. Early career researchers are encouraged to apply in 2025.

How research-based news articles (like this one) accelerate research impact

Letter from Adrian Piccoli

October 7, 2024Uncategorized

What should we do now for light sensitive learners?

October 7, 2024children with disability, students with disabilityAARE blog, light sensitive, University of Sydney, Wendy Johnson

A paradigm shift from medical model to social model of disability seems to have occurred – and nowhere is that more apparent than in the many responses to the Royal Commission on Disability. This shift adds impetus to the provision of adjustments for those I describe in my book, Light Sensitive Learners: Unveiling Policy Inaction, Marginalisation and Discrimination. These are “light sensitive learners.”

Under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), students experiencing visual stress and a sensitivity to lighting may be given a coloured overlay (which reduces white paper glare and filters the spectrum); access to natural lighting and/ or a personal lamp.

Teachers have an obligation to provide such adjustments, wrote former NSW Minister for Education Adrian Piccoli in a letter to the MP for Ballina in 2014. However, many teachers don’t know about these obligations, and little, if anything, about light sensitivity and appropriate adjustments.

If lighting causes visual strain, then the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Workplace Guidelines suggests:

Anti-glare filters for computer screens to relieve eye strain, fatigue, headaches and stress. Place blinds on windows. Flicker free lighting. Full spectrum lighting. Light filters for covering fluorescent lighting. Lower wattage overhead lights, task lighting or other alternative lighting. Large print. Coloured Paper.

Adjustments for light sensitivity are not new. Teachers in the USA ‘led the charge’ in 1908 because they wanted something done about the dazzle of white paper which made it difficult to read. Thanks to them, a ‘glarimeter’ was developed. School principal A. W. Ray argued in 1938 that artificial lighting was an “educational” problem because it made reading difficult. He worked out that “adequate spectral quality …is essential … for … seeing”.

That was the era when fluorescent lighting was promoted by General Electric and people started complaining about visual stress. By 1929, palliative light spectrum filtering (coloured) lenses had become common in NSW. Then they were forgotten.

Governments did nothing about the spectral qualities of lighting. But, half a century later, entrepreneurs (a school psychologist and a professor of psychology) promoted light spectrum filtering lenses again. Ophthalmologists reacted and claimed light spectrum filters are just a placebo! But visual perception lies within the discipline of psychology and not ophthalmology and the NHMRC is recommending light filters for overhead artificial illumination!

The spectral quality of artificial lighting in schools is still a problem. White paper is whiter because manufacturers have added fluorescent dye as a marketing strategy. Those who prescribe palliative light spectrum filtering (coloured) lenses compete for business. Many people can’t afford light spectrum filtering lenses, even if they know about them.

But teachers can, and ought to, provide adjustments for light sensitive learners. Why? Think about visual perception, a dynamic interactive process between light/eye/brain. Changing lighting changes visual perception. Visual perception impacts on most daily activities, including driving, playing sport and – reading. How could it not? This light sensitivity/visual perceptual problem is not just about reading, but reading is what most teachers, parents and researchers are interested in.

Teachers, along with parents, picked up the baton for light sensitive learners in the late 1980s at Alstonville High School in NSW and developed a policy for them (the only one in the world, to my knowledge and I write about this in my book). Academic results improved. Students told us that light spectrum filters or coloured paper take “the glare away and [take] away the movement [of words] quite a bit”. Some professionals don’t believe them. They say that schools should use evidence, but a student’s experience is not the type of evidence they want so they don’t ask for it.

No one picked up the baton and ran with it throughout Australia. No one ran with it throughout the world. Why not? There are several reasons including – vested interests! What are those vested interests? The lighting industry, the remedial reading industry, and the coloured lens industry.

The lighting industry is not accountable to any government. The Australian Standards authority in conjunction with the New Zealand Standards Authority (AS/NZ) has total control. More lights, more money and– who cares about spectral quality?

Some people in the remedial reading industry disparage coloured lenses. They are not ‘Magic Glasses’– they don’t cure dyslexia or learning disabilities. But, the problem is not dyslexia, and it’s not a problem with learning, it’s a problem with light sensitivity and visual perception. However, if light sensitivity and visual perceptual anomalies were acknowledged, the need for remedial reading might drop and that would reduce profit. So they would say that wouldn’t they?

“The global coloured lens market in 2022 is valued at USD 5403.28 million” and growing. Allegedly, there’s a “surge of eye disorders”. That’s good for ophthalmic professionals but, as Ray discovered back in 1938, artificial lighting was the problem, not his eyes. A significant number of six-year-old children in Sydney, experienced symptoms of “eye strain”, but researchers demonstrated in 2006 that “the vast majority had normal eye examinations”. Is light sensitivity their problem?

If teachers do nothing, the consequences for light sensitive learners include reduced academic results; visual fatigue, headaches, and lowered self esteem. A cumulative effect may be inattention and poor behaviour. Moreover, compliance with the DDA is mandatory.

Begin to shift attitudinal and environmental barriers by asking, “Would you like me to turn the lights off?”

Wendy Johnson PhD negotiated inclusion of the term “learning differently” in the Australian Disability Discrimination Act when working as a secondary school teacher. She has also worked as a tutor and lecturer in the tertiary sector but is now an independent public policy scholar and advocate for light sensitive people.

Palestine: is it possible for teachers to be neutral?

October 3, 2024anti-colonialism, civics and citizenship educationAARE blog, Charles Sturt University, Joel Windle, Palestine, Ryan Al-Natour, Sarah McDonald, UniSA

Interest in Palestine amongst students and the wider public raises an age-old question regarding the teaching profession: can educators be neutral and objective? Is it possible for teachers to discuss what is happening right now across the Gaza Strip in ways that maintain an ‘unbiased’ position?

State governments and conservative commentators have attacked teachers who have shown solidarity with Palestine or have dared to discuss the current genocide in Gaza within schools. The NSW Minister for Education, Pru Carr, has taken issue with teachers who wear Palestinian scarves in schools. She has said, “We rely on them [teachers] to be impartial in the classroom.” Similarly, Victorian Education Minister, Ben Carroll, warned educators about participating in any organised activity in support of Palestine. Carroll stated that ‘teachers in government schools must be unbiased and not have political agendas’.

Students in Australian schools want to talk about Palestine

For over a year, we have seen school students assemble and actively rally in support of school students in Gaza. Not since the student climate protests have we seen such enthusiasm amongst Australian students. In almost every capital city, and some regional areas, students have participated in strikes in solidarity with Palestinians. In the course of mobilising, we are witnessing students become ‘active and informed’ on Palestine. Yet, school students participating in these strikes have been scolded by politicians and conservative commentators. They have told students to stay in class and ‘educate’ themselves.

Take the NSW Premier, Chris Minns. He condemned the student strikes, stating: “If you [students] want to change the world, get an education.” A student protesting in Wollongong responded, ‘Because I am educated I am here, because I am informed I am here at this rally … I would love to be at school, I would love for the children of Gaza to be at school’.

Similarly, hundreds of school students in Melbourne defied the Victorian Education Minister’s condemnation of their strike. The Minister Ben Carroll said students should be in school. A parent of a student protestor responded, “Young people are often presented as being naïve or ignorant and shouldn’t have an opinion when it comes to politics – I disagree.” Another student stated, “They’re not really teaching it in class. So the only way you’re going to find out is if you come to the rallies; educate yourself because you’re not learning any of it at school. It’s not even getting mentioned at school.”

Educators are told to be ‘impartial’ and ‘unbiased’ about Palestine

Similar to students, educators themselves have organised ‘Teachers for Palestine’ groups across NSW and Victoria. These groups have led rallies and held Zoom sessions to discuss incorporating content about Palestine in the curriculum. They have also discussed how to support students currently striking for Palestine. Two major groups include Teachers and School Staff for Palestine – NSW and Teachers/Staff for Palestine in Victoria. In some cases, educators have shown solidarity by openly supporting student strikes and wearing Palestinian Keffiyehs (scarves) or watermelon badges.

Teacher unions have supported these initiatives and even passed motions that acknowledge the rights of teachers to discuss the current genocide with their students. For example, the NSW Teachers Federation Vice-President pointed out educators have a long history of publicly supporting anti-war and social justice causes. Similarly, the Australian Education Union sent its members a bulletin about the right to respectfully discuss Palestine in classrooms.

Recently, on the eve of ‘R U Ok Day’, the NSW Teachers for Palestine group posted the following:

Teaching is a political act

A common argument for teacher neutrality is that it avoids students being brainwashed. But the purpose of critical approaches to citizenship education is not to tell students what to think. It is to support them to ask questions. When the questions are curtailed, we all lose as a democracy, and we lose the opportunity to challenge injustice.

A second argument for neutrality, or more precisely, silence, is that there is no room for politics in the curriculum. However the Australian Curriculum encourages engagement with the world and with the interests that students bring across multiple subject areas. Recognising what students bring with them to school should include recognising that they are developing an understanding of conflict and politics before they enter the classroom door. There is no point pretending that politics does not exist.

All education is political

We commonly engage initial teacher education students with theories of critical pedagogies. For example, Paulo Freire argued in his landmark book The Pedagogy of the Oppressed that ‘all education is political; teaching is never a neutral act’. Similar words were echoed by bell hooks, who wrote in Teaching to Transgress that ‘no education is politically neutral’. More recently, a pioneer of critical pedagogy Henry Giroux wrote: “Those arguing that education should be neutral are really arguing for a version of education in which no one is accountable.”

Teachers are citizens and workers. They have political opinions and many are members of labour organisations. They are also responsible for helping their students to become informed, questioning and critical citizens. Pressure from educational authorities for teachers to hide their beliefs and opinions is damaging for both students and teachers.

Governments are keen to avoid political or politicised topics. Their eyes are more firmly on negative media attention than on ethical considerations. A slippery standard is therefore applied. Almost any topic can become politicised or attract media attention, which makes schools increasingly timid. And attempts to silence discussion are applied unevenly even with similar issues. The wars in Ukraine and Gaza have been treated very differently by governments and inside schools, despite the fact that both have similarities in raising sensitive issues of conflict and trauma.

The teaching profession cannot be neutral, unbiased nor objective

As citizens, teachers and students take on multiple roles. They constantly give off signals about their beliefs, even if in subtle or unrecognised ways. As long as these support the status quo, they are unquestioned. But when they go against the status quo, there is a need to make claims on the rights that all students and teachers have to express themselves. A long tradition in critical scholarship shows that ‘apolitical education’ is a myth. What is often framed as ‘neutrality’ and ‘objectivity’ within education systems stems from Eurocentric white supremacy.

Palestine presents us with a reminder that education can never be neutral. As outlined previously, many teachers and students wish to engage in discussions about Palestine. The Australian curriculum presents many opportunities despite the condemnation that various Education Ministers have offered. It is this contradiction that affirms how neutrality in the context of an on-going genocide, live streamed to the social media devices of our students can be one that supports it, as Paulo Freire himself once said, ‘Washing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral’.

From left to right: Ryan Al-Natour works as a lecturer in teacher education at Charles Sturt University on Wiradjuri Country. He is written widely about antiracist teaching, social justice pedagogies and Indigenous education. Joel Windle is an associate professor of education at the University of South Australia. He has undertaken research on educational inequalities and community activism in Australia and Brazil. Sarah McDonald is a lecturer based at the Centre for Research in Education & Social Inclusion at the University of South Australia where she conducts research in the areas of gendered subjectivities, social mobility, social barriers, and inequalities in education.

Inclusive education: it’s not getting better. What should we do next?

September 30, 2024Inclusive EducationAARE blog, Christopher Boyle, inclusive education, Joanna Anderson, Tom Porta, University of Adelaide

For decades, debates around inclusive education have persisted, with systems globally striving to make schools more inclusive. Yet, how much progress has truly been made? Despite years of reform and substantial financial investment, increasing numbers of students are being excluded or removed from schools. In Australia, no state or territory government has fully committed to inclusive schooling. That leaves the responsibility for inclusion largely on individual schools. In the ongoing debate, the founding principles of inclusion have been overshadowed, despite our classrooms being more diverse than ever.

Interpretations vary

Interpretations of inclusive education vary. In its purest form, inclusion means that all students are educated at their local school. However, this is far more complex in practice. Many schools that claim to be fully inclusive are, in reality, operating under models resembling the integration strategies of the 1980s and 1990s rather than true inclusion. To be “included” implies being part of or brought into something. Yet we rarely ask whether what we are including students into is actually worthwhile. While inclusive education offers clear benefits, there is an urgent need to shift our focus away from the notion of inclusion to providing a good education for all.

Reflecting on the current state of education, it is evident that the vision of inclusion has fallen short. It has also become narrowly associated with accommodating students with disabilities. The current model of inclusive education is not just limited, it is flawed. School leaders and teachers are under immense pressure. In many cases they are expected to meet the needs of all students without adequate knowledge or support. Many schools attempt to implement inclusive education using an outdated integration model, rather than working to establish inclusion as the usual way of doing things. This can leave teachers working in isolation to navigate the complexities of making lessons more inclusive, manage challenging classroom behaviours, whilst also improving academic outcomes. This balancing act is unsustainable, and often leads to burnout, frustration, and negative attitudes among educators. At its worst, it leads to attrition.

Is inclusive education attainable?

A huge burden has been placed at the feet of school leaders and teachers. Schools are expected to meet the needs of all students with an education system premised on structures not all that far removed from what they were many decades ago. School leaders and teachers want students to succeed. But they are struggling to figure out how to meet the increasingly diverse needs of students within a system that expects continuous improvement in academic outcomes while providing limited resources.

Evidence suggests that increasing student engagement is key to improving outcomes for all students. Yet, school leaders and teachers are faced with ever increasing rates of scrutiny, standardisation and accountability. This is a result of systems operating within a neoliberal paradigm that often seems more focused on metrics than on the provision of good education. Headlines frequently highlight the failures of schools and apportion blame to poor leadership and teaching.

Like integration in the 1980s, the notion of inclusion as it stands now carries with it baggage attached to years of heated debate and very public failures. We argue that inclusive education, within the current educational zeitgeist, is an illusion. Today, more students are being suspended and excluded than ever before. Homeschooling numbers are rising. Teachers are leaving the profession in droves. And school leaders are experiencing harmful levels of stress. Now is the time to move beyond inclusion.

Illuminating good education

It is time to shift our focus to what truly matters – providing a good education to all students. Rather than clinging to the illusion of inclusion, let’s take this opportunity to rethink our education system. A broader, more responsive and flexible approach is needed, one that genuinely serves the diversity of all students. This requires rethinking policies, providing better support for teachers, and ensuring that schools are adequately resourced.

The notion of a good education prompts us to consider the very purpose of education. What do we hope to achieve with compulsory education? How can we ensure that every student benefits from their schooling experience? At its core, the purpose of education is to prepare students for life beyond the classroom. Education should aim to foster a love of learning, encourage curiosity, and help students develop the skills they need to navigate an ever-changing world.

Moving forward

We need a shift in mindset and we need to stop thinking about inclusive education as something to be implemented or attained. We need to stop framing it as one policy agenda that is often in conflict with other educational reforms. Repositioning the debate to one centred on good education asks us to step back and see the bigger picture. It forces us to bring together the various components of education that are too often managed in silos and view it as a single construct.

Governments around the world need to rethink the way they ‘do’ schooling. This means overhauling outdated structures, processes and models of practice. It requires a change at every level, from school design to curriculum development to assessment requirements. Funding models need to be restructured to ensure all students have access to the resources they need. Governments need to work with universities as both research partners and teacher education providers. Voices of communities are fundamental to this conversation, allowing for dialogue to co-create powerful educational policies that can drive sustainable change.

The next challenge

The challenge to move from a debate around inclusive education to one that centres on a good education is significant. But so is the opportunity. Leaders and teachers require policies, resources, and supports necessary to respond to the needs of all students in an equitable way. Prioritising a good education for every child and young person can ensure each student is given an opportunity to thrive. This notion can no longer be positioned as an illusion. With changes to the structures of schooling, it becomes a realistic and achievable goal. Perhaps more importantly, it becomes a moral imperative.

From left to right: Christopher Boyle is Professor of Inclusion and Educational Psychology and the Associate Head (Research) in the School of Education at the University of Adelaide. Joanna Anderson is an associate professor in inclusive education and educational leadership and Associate Head (Learning and Teaching) in the School of Education at the University of Adelaide. Tom Porta is a lecturer and Master of Education Program Director at the University of Adelaide.

Are we now gaslighting teacher expertise?

September 27, 2024Curriculum review, teacher expertiseAARE blog, curriculum review, Phillip Poulton, RMIT University, teacher expertise

Curriculum reform is underway in NSW, including the development and implementation of new syllabuses from kindergarten to year 12. Recent media coverage presents this reform as a ‘silver bullet’ for improving teaching and student outcomes. But there is a troubling undertone regarding teachers’ curriculum work in general – a subtle gaslighting of teachers’ curricular expertise and professionalism.

This builds on what Nicole Mockler describes, as a gaslighting of the teaching profession as a whole, in her forthcoming discussion paper “On Gaslighting, Moral Purpose, and Trust: Some Reflections on the Future of Teaching” Monash University Inquiry into the Future of the Teaching Profession.

Here’s what I’ve discovered from my own research engaging with early career teachers. They want to be curriculum-makers, not just curriculum deliverers.

Misunderstanding teachers’ curriculum work

Syllabuses are important materials in teachers’ day-to-day experiences in schools. Ensuring these official materials are clear and detailed for teachers is important and necessary. But we must also recognise teacher’s engagement with curriculum is a complex social practice.

It goes further than just listing content and outcomes in a document and believing that ‘delivery’ of these with ‘fidelity’ will resolve issues regarding teaching quality. Teachers are more than just passive conduits of curriculum.

Their curriculum work is a dynamic interpretative process. The quality of educative experiences in a classroom is dependent on teacher capabilities and opportunities that support them in transforming content into meaningful learning experiences.

Recent media coverage is largely and notably silent on this vital aspect of teachers’ curriculum work. The focus has been on the troubled nature of past NSW syllabuses being “more open to interpretation”. These comments reveal a misunderstanding by some regarding the importance and value of teachers’ curricular interpretation in ensuring a classroom curriculum that is local, contextually relevant, and responsive to student needs and lived experiences. The silence surrounding teacher expertise and interpretation of curriculum points to a broader issue – the outsourcing of teachers’ curriculum knowledge and expertise in the name of a ‘teacher proof’ curriculum.

Gaslighting teachers’ curricular expertise

Underpinning current commentary on the new NSW syllabuses is a troublesome devaluing of teachers’ professional judgement and expertise with curriculum. This is apparent in recent conversations suggesting that teachers need access to externally vetted curriculum materials, and “directions on which lesson plans to use”.

Here, mistrust in teachers’ knowledge and professional judgement is rife, disguised among seemingly innocent concerns for lessening the curriculum ‘burden’ on teachers’ workloads.

This is nothing more than gaslighting; an attempt to convince teachers that they lack the required capacity to make such decisions or are too busy for curriculum matters and therefore it is ok for this important work to be outsourced to others. In reality, teachers value this curriculum work highly. They want more time for collaborative planning with their colleagues – not less, not outsourced.

Don’t get me wrong – all teachers need supporting materials and shared resources, but they also need time and space to build their curricular expertise. This is about strengthening their understanding of the curriculum and the adjustments and transformations needed in ensuring best fit with their students and chosen pedagogical strategies (not just explicit teaching!). Time is of the essence here in how we respond to this gaslighting, raising awareness that attempts for further prescription and outsourcing of teachers’ curriculum and pedagogical work does little more than deskill our profession.

What are we wanting? Teacher as deliverer or curriculum-maker?

While the NSW Curriculum reform proposes greater clarity and guidance for teachers, the implementation of these new syllabuses should offer us pause for thought.

What kind of role do teachers want with the curriculum? What do they need to maintain strong curriculum identities? My own research with early career teachers points to their strong motivations and aspirations to be more than just curriculum deliverers, but curriculum-makers who are trusted and respected to make necessary and responsive curriculum choices within their local context.

My research also suggests that the same goes too for our preservice teachers entering the profession. Critical dialogue is crucial, then, within this current reform context. School leaders, teacher educators, and the concerned public should respect the curricular aspirations of our teachers. This requires us to push back against concerning trends for ‘cookie cutter’ approaches to teaching, and with that, an outsourcing of teachers’ curriculum expertise to others as an attempt for greater ‘fidelity’ between schools and classrooms.

Re-frame conversations

We need to re-frame conversations between teachers, school leaders, policymakers, and the broader public, moving beyond assumptions that changes to official curriculum materials offer the best and only solution. We need to listen more carefully to teachers’ voices and what they want to achieve in their curricular practice:

If I could just spend my time how I wanted to, I would obviously work hard, but if I could just spend my time planning lessons that I thought were really awesome, were really good for my learners and great for the content I was teaching, and then I could evaluate them properly, then I think I would feel like ‘ok I am benefiting society and doing the big picture thinking and fostering a love of learning in these students’ and these are the things that you go into teaching for. (First year teacher, public school in Sydney)

Creating conditions that enable this kind of work remain largely absent in conversations surrounding the implementation of the new NSW syllabuses.

Teachers need time

Teachers need time, space, and support (not prescription or centralised materials), to help them sustain curriculum as a recognisable tenet of their professionalism. The implications of enabling school-level conditions to do this are immense, not only in promoting greater trust and regard for teachers, but importantly, for student learning and equity. A curriculum made by teachers, not others, shapes the quality of students’ access to knowledge and new ways of thinking for their future.

Phillip Poulton is a lecturer in education (primary) at the RMIT University, Melbourne. He completed his PhD studies focusing on primary teachers’ classroom curriculum-making experiences and is published in a number of Australian and international research journals. Prior to working in initial teacher education, he worked as a primary classroom teacher and as a head of curriculum in a large public school in Australia. He is on Twitter @PhillipPoulton

Here are five ways the government could demolish barriers to early learning

September 24, 2024Early Childhood, Early childhood education and careAARE blog, Early childhood, early learning, Marg Rogers, University of New England

The Final Report from the Productivity Commission (PC) into Early Childhood Education and Care was released last week. This is the second in our two-part series unpacking the Commission’s proposed road map for universal access to early learning.

Yesterday: Early learning – Every child deserves access now. Here’s how we can make that happen

Today, we look at the barriers.

To implement Productivity Commission recommendations for early learning, the Government needs to attract, support, and retain educators to ensure the workability of these reforms. In this article, I outline the barriers facing educators, including poor job design, the high cost of higher education, low status and wages, and the burden of regulatory requirements as shown in the figure below.

Figure 1: Barriers to opportunity for early learning in Australia

For each of these barriers, I provide information from reports, government departments,
agencies, and organisations. To illustrate this, I also provide either data from our mixed
methods online survey study involving 82 Australian educators or, where indicated, publicly
available data. A summary of what the PC said is in the final column.

Barriers to early learning	Information	Data	Productivity Commission Recommendation
Poor job design	It is puzzling to understand why schools in Australia are equipped with administrative officers, grounds people and cleaners, but early learning services are not. Educators study child development, philosophies of learning, ways to support children’s learning, curriculum assessment, planning and evaluation and how to best support families. Then they enter the workforce and are expected to spend inordinate amounts of time cleaning and filling in forms. It is a waste of their time and talents. Additionally, the time allocated to filling out all the forms would be adequate if they were in a private office rather than while they are educating a room full of children. The amount of time doesn’t take into consideration if they are short staffed.	“Washing and folding laundry is NOT something you learn in an education qualification … educators spend a lot of time (and constantly hounded by management) to do tasks that in other workplaces would require [a] cleaner”. (Educator) “Most adults would struggle to fill in legal paperwork while also supervising children attempting risky climbing, playing games, drinking a bottle, putting small parts in their mouth.” (Educator)	The PC states further award increases must improve their pay and conditions to align with school teachers.
High cost of higher education	Gaining the qualifications required to be an early childhood educator takes a toll on educators’ time, energy, and budget. While the Government is now funding practicums, and some state and territory governments are offering fee-free places, the educator must provide the time and energy to study. This can mean fewer days working or sacrifices to their health, social life, and relationships.	“Educators are being rushed through traineeships to meet DoE requirements, so are ECT[s]!” (Educator) “I would love to do more but don’t have the hours in the day. I exercise each morning at 6am before I start work.” (Educator)	The PC asks for more support for student educators in general terms.
Low status	Due to their links to motherhood, another underappreciated role, early childhood educators are less respected than school teachers in Australian society, even though they may be just as qualified. Those teaching younger age groups can be more affected. Studies link low status with educator burnout.	“I was in a centre where staff weren’t valued. Relationships were for show”. (Educator) “Cleaners can earn more than I do, and yet I studied for 2 years for a diploma to earn just $32hr. We are sacrificed so that other women can go to work and earn a high wage.” (Educator)	The PC recommends standardising school teacher and early childhood educator registration to improve recognition.
Low wages	Low wages mean educators struggle to pay their bills and enjoy a reasonable quality of life. This impacts their health and wellbeing and their feelings of burnout. The increase of 15% helps, but does not mean their pay is in line with school teacher salaries for early childhood teachers with the same qualifications.	“I earn $30 per hour as a qualified ECT with a degree – my 17-year- old daughter is in high school and gets the same amount of money, as a swimming instructor”. (Educator)	The PC states further award increases must improve their pay to align with school teachers.
Burdensome regulatory requirements	Educators spend much of their day filling in forms to prove they are providing high quality education and care. Administrative overload was one of the three reasons given by educators who reported they wanted to leave the sector early.	“Yes, we need paperwork but we also need to be there for the children, staff get overwhelmed with all the paperwork required and training that needs to be done during a work day and there is never enough time to do everything so a lot of staff do things at home”. (Educator)	The PC calls for reducing the administrative burden for applying for inclusion support funding but disappointingly, not for other aspects of their work.

What governments must do

The Government will need to consider the PC’s recommendations carefully and it could also heed the advice of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP). Professor Nitin Kapur, President of the RACP’s Paediatric and Child Health Division, said the RACP was pleased to see the PC recognise the importance of access to high-quality learning and care in the early years of a child’s life.

“As experts in children’s health and wellbeing, we have long advocated for universal access to early childhood education and care because we recognise the profound positive impact it can have on children’s lives.

“Access to high-quality learning and care in the early years can help boost health, social andcognitive development outcomes for children, and ensure that they start school ready.

To stem the flow of educators out of the sector, entice educators back, and attract more, they need a range of measures to improve educators’ working conditions. Our educators deserve much better.

Marg Rogers is a senior lecturer in early childhood education at UNE and a postdoctoral fellow at the Manna Institute.

Early learning: Every child deserves access now. Here’s how we can make that happen

September 23, 2024Early Childhood, Early childhood education and careAARE blog, early learning, Marg Rogers, Productivity Commission, universal access, University of New England

The Final Report from the Productivity Commission (PC) into Early Childhood Education
and Care was released last week. This two-part series unpacks the Commission’s proposed road map that involves many stages over the next 12 years to achieve universal access to early learning.

This is where all children can attend three days a week, regardless of location, ethnicity,
special educational needs, family income, or parent’s work or study schedules.
Universal access is critical because research shows access to early learning improves
children’s chances of a good start to school and increases their ability to flourish into
adulthood.

The PC said the recent improvements in wages through the Fair Work Commission will assist
with the attraction and retention of educators. The Commission states these recent rises are
only one step and that future awards need to consider the 20 per cent pay difference and poorer
conditions between the school and early learning sectors, even for educators with the same
qualifications. It also recommends registration be the same to improve status for early
childhood educators.

These are all excellent recommendations, but many educators continue to leave a sector in
crisis before the recommendations are implemented.

Why is the sector in crisis?

At its heart, the early childhood education and care sector is supposed to provide
opportunities for early learning. This is one of the key components of the internationally
accepted Nurturing Care Framework by the World Health Organisation, World Bank Group, and UNICEF. This framework is designed to show how children’s health and wellbeing is best supported to ensure children reach their potential.

Figure 1: Nurturing Care Framework

In Australia, children and their families face many barriers to these opportunities, as shown in
the table below. These include affordability, high levels of privatisation, a lack of services and educators, complex funding and access to funding, extra challenges in regional, rural and remote (RRR) communities, and access to inclusion support.

In the table below, I provide information from reports, government departments, agencies,
and organisations on these eight barriers. To illustrate this, I also provide either data from
our mixed-methods online survey study involving 82 Australian educators or, where
indicated, publicly available data. In the final column, I summarise what the PC states or
recommends the Government to do.

Barriers to early learning and how to overcome them

Barriers to early learning	Information	Data	Productivity Commission (PC) responses
1. Affordability	Australia is second only to Switzerland in its high costs of early childhood education and care fees.	“It’s very sad and hard for me to share this story. We have no support and can’t afford daycare for my 11- month-old boy. I work casually and I’m 8 weeks pregnant. We have to get an abortion because we don’t get any support.” (The Parenthood, p. 33).	The PC recommends free services for low- income families, with fees rising for those with higher incomes.
2. High levels of privatisation	Australia has some of the highest levels of privatisation of early learning services in the world. In 2020, 49% of providers were private for- profit, and about a third of these were large providers with 25 or more services.	Early childhood education and care (ECEC) is big business. The sector turns over $14 billion annually across 16,000 centres providing long day care (LDC), preschool and out of school care. The importance of giving young Australians the best start in life and encouraging workforce participation is recognised in the public funding that sustains the sector, currently around $11 billion per annum. This is distributed to providers ranging from council-run kindergartens to stock market-listed early learning chains. Among The PC recommends incentives for local parent, community groups and councils to start services. LDC provision, where the bulk of government subsidies flow, private for-profit (PFP) providers dominate.” (United Workers Union, p. 3).	The PC recommends incentives for local parent, community groups and councils to start services.
3. Lack of services	Due to the market supply model, all regional, rural, remote, and low-income metropolitan suburbs are part of a ‘childcare desert’.	“Childcare shouldn’t be a postcode lottery. Improving the affordability and accessibility of childcare is once in a generation economic policy.” (Former NSW Treasurer, Matt Kean)	The PC says Government stewardship is needed to ensure universal access.
4.Lack of educators	In 2024, vacancies for educators reached 8000 setting a new record. This impacts staff fatigue and morale, the quality of education and care, and the amount of support available for families. PC says the ‘workforce is fundamental to reform’ and calls for ‘improve measures to support the ECEC workforce’ from 2025.	“Management [were] very stressed about assessment and rating and low staff numbers, so took it out on the employees”. (Educator) Q: What does quality ECEC mean to you? “Having more than enough staff to ensure educators are consistent for children in care and to ensure quality care can occur even when educators are sick and require a day off to recover”. (Educator)
5. Complex funding model	‘The ECEC system is complex and continues to evolve in response to the changing needs of children, families and society. … a range of current system challenges and opportunities have been identified.’ (The Front Project, p. 6)	The PC recommends a new national agreement to simplify roles and funding.	The PC recommends a new national agreement to simplify roles and funding.
6. Complex access to funding	Accessing subsidies is a complex process for parents to navigate. Strict rules about eligibility and long wait times for processing claims can add to family stress during a cost-of-living crisis.	“I’m struggling to navigate the website to figure out if we qualify and if so how much. I get that there’s a bunch of circumstances, but maybe someone will know if it’s worth trying to navigate the multiple questions and pages that require lots of effort from me, to have it say ‘no go away’ at the end.” (Reddit forum).	The PC roadmap includes a recommendation for welfare and tax reform for parents and reduce the complexity of the CCS and abolish the activity test.
7. Choiceless in regional, rural and remote communities	While a lack of choice and availability affects those who live in metropolitan areas, for those in many regional, rural and remote locations, there are no services close by. This means families are choiceless.	“When the kids are on the farm you can question whether you’re exposing them to things you shouldn’t necessarily expose them to. Should they be on a sprayer? Maybe not. But you’ve got to do what you’ve got to do.” (The Parenthood. p. 91)	PC recommends grants and low interest loans to encourage services to start in these locations.
8. Lack of access for inclusion support	Children with special educational needs can have difficulty accessing early learning or finding the level of support they need. Many have to wait until school to engage in education services.	‘Children with disability are often woefully under supported in early childcare settings. My complex kid can’t access childcare.’ ( Sourcekids )	The PC recommends major reforms to ensure all children have access to early education.

Tomorrow:

In the second article, I explore some of the challenges facing educators and what the PC
recommends the Government does to improve the sector.

The Government will need to consider the PC’s recommendations carefully. Families are
struggling to access early learning for their children, which has enormous consequences for
their future and their ability to work. Our families and children deserve much better.

Marg Rogers is a senior lecturer in early childhood education at UNE and a postdoctoral fellow at the Manna Institute.