8/9/2019 121329

1/2

EDUCATION POLICY'1 2 1 3 2 9

By VIN FAULKNER

A national educationpolicy? Not likely_. - --- --- ----:----...,....--,

educational groups which otherwise maynot have had the opportunity to expresstheir hopes and their desires. Its modusoperandiwas certainly consultative.The possibility of formulating a national

education policy existed then, hu t theopportunity may not exist any more. Whydid a possibility exist back then? There areseveral reasons.In the mid-Eighties, the CSC formulated

a national policy on the education of girls. I trequired the formal consent of everyDirector-General of a state EducationDepartment, every Director of CatholicEducation and all the independent schools.It also required every education sector state, Catholic and independent - to reporteach year on what it had achieved withrespect to girls' education - something of aHerculean task some might suggest!However, all sectors were in agreement

and the first national education policy wasborn. It is still in operation today,though ina revised format.Other educational bodies havebeen estab

lished over the years to try to introduce someuniformity, or at least aspects of uniformity,to the various education systems. from 1975to 1987,a National Curriculum Centre - theCurriculum Corporation, controlled by acouncil appointed by the Commonwealthgovernment - was established by Commonwealth legislation. I t was looselyconnected to

successful in drivinga national a P J ' r o . ~ c h .It has policy formulation rights ' ingovernment schools andseeks tJ.te viewsof Catholic and independent schools, bu tquite significant structural change would Ibe required for it to fashion policies for Iall sectors of schooling. To implement inational education policy, what would ineed to happen? For starters, Faulknersays, it would be necessary to create. anorganisation,such asMCEETYA, thatwasinclusive of non-government schools,that received funding and that operatedwith clear accountabilityprovisions.

I f there was ever going to be a nationaleducation policy, it seems the time mayhave now passed. Before and since thedays of Federation, the states and territorieshave been keen to pursue their own policyobjectives in respect to education,health andthe othermajor government portfolio areas.Toascertain whether a national education

policy is at all feasible - from the Catholicsector's point of view - there needs to be anunderstanding of recent past history. Theopportunity to develop a national educationpolicy was probably greatest between 1974and 1987when the Commonwealth SchoolsCommission (CSC) was in operation. It wasresponsible for the Commonwealth government's policies and programs for schools, inaccordance with the Schools CommissionAct (1974).Representatives from various groups and

organisations made up the CSC, includingthe then Commonwealth Department ofEducation and Training, state EducationDepartments, Catholic Education Commissions, independent schools, teacher unionsand state school parent associations. Anindependent chairman, who was in chargeof a staff of around 200 educators, headedthe csc,As is often the case with similar groups,there was much serious discussion, some

positive, some negative. The CSC, however,gave voice on a national scale to many

Vin Faulkner argues that, so long as thestates and terri tories remain keen topursue the ir own policy objectives, anational approach to education policyremains unlikely. In fact, the days whensuch an approach looked like a possibilityin the Seventies and Eighties may havenow passed. In the absence of nationalbodies like the Commonwealth SchoolsCommission or the National CurriculumCentre at a national level, efforts toimplement basic national uniformity arei verydifficuit. There's some hope,\ Faulkner says, that ~ C E E T Y A may proveL - ~ ~ ._ ,__

44 EDUCARE NEWS SEPTEMBER 2002

8/9/2019 121329

2/2

the CSCat various times during its thirteenyear history, and since 1987it has continuedas a self-funding body. The CurriculumCorporation is run by a council representative of all the education sectors.

During the period, 1988-1992,there werestrong efforts to formulate a nationalcurriculum through a body called Curass(Curriculum and Assessment). Again, itincluded representatives from all the education sectors - Catholic, independent andstate, from all the states and territories.

A national curriculum that was educationally quite acceptablewasdevised, thoughsome states were critical - and proceeded toformulate their ownversions. InVictoria, theCurriculum and Standards Frameworkevolved from the Curass documents. Onlytwoyears ago,the Curriculum and StandardsFramework 11 was introduced.

The absence of organisations like theNational Curriculum Centre and Commonwealth Schools Commission at a nationallevel presently makes efforts to implementbasic national uniformity very difficult.Even with the states in agreement,consensus is often difficult because ofongoing Commonwealth and state rivalries.. That is not to say consensus is impos

sible. There are many examples of the statesand the Commonwealth coming to agreement on aspects of education, be itconcerning curriculum, student well-beingor teacher professional development.

Education ministers, meeting asMCEETYA (the Minister ia l Council ofEducation, Employment, Training andYouthAffairs) in Hobart in the late Eighties,formulated and agreed to the NationalGoals for Schooling in Australia.

The various Catholic EducationCommissions and the independent schoolsgavegeneral consent to these national goals,although they expressed concern at theabsence of goals to do with young people.

In the years since the Hobart meeting, theten National Goals havebeen revised, but inthe main they have been accepted by alleducation systems, and generally, they havebeen implemented.

The Nat ional Goals for Schooling inAustralia represented a major step forwardin the process of the formulation of nationaleducation policy.While the difficulties that exist amongthe states and territories and between theCommonwealth and the states and territo-

EDUCARE NEWS SEPTEMBER 2002

EDUCATION POLICY

ries are well documented, it must also beremembered that, aside from the variousstate and independent education bodies,there are twenty-eight dioceses within theCatholic Education system in Australia.

Individual Catholic schools are groupedby diocese, with the Bishop as the authoritypresiding over each diocese. In each state orterritory, the government is responsible forstate schools while Catholic schools aregrouped under the various CatholicEducation Commissions and other Catholicauthorities, like religious congregations.

These Commissions, however, areconsensus-making bodies on state- or territory-wide issues, policies and on the distribution of funding. The National CatholicEducation Commission (NCEC) attemptsto get policy consensus on a local issue andrepresents Catholic schools at a Commonwealth level.

National Catholic Education policy canonly be formulated by NCEC consensus.Many pitfalls exist in the formulation andimplementat ion of nat ional educationpolicies in Catholic education, despite a basiccommon philosophy of Catholic education.In essence, National Education Policy ismore feasiblewithin the Catholic sector butthere are still considerable difficulties.

As with the state Education Commissions, the states and terr itories have hadsome loose association, in one form oranother, with the Commonwealth government. MCEETYA has been in existence forsome years and before that the AustralianEducation Council (AEC).Again, this bodyonly has the powers granted to it by thestates and territories.

MCEETYA does formulate educationalpolicies, such as the policy on vocationaleducation, for example, but they are only aseffective as the Education Ministers andtheir various administrations want them tobe. It must also be remembered that thesepolicy formulations have limited input fromthe non-government sector, and, therefore,have loose affiliation with a large section ofthe school community, bearing in mind thataround thirty-five per cent of schoolstudents Australia-wide attend non-government schools.

MCEETYA in its present form has policyformulation rights in government.schoolsonly. It's t rue to say it seeks the views ofCatholic and independent schools, but it isnot bound to do this. Qui te significantstructural changewould be required for it tofashion policies for all sectors of schooling.

To implement national education policywhat would need to happen? It would, in thefirst instance, be necessary to create anorganisation, such as MCEETYA, inclusiveof non-government schools. Policies couldbe formulated that all members agree to,subscribe to and implement. This in itselfwould be very difficult. It may even benecessary, secondly, to attach a degree offunding to the successful implementation ofthese policies and, thirdly, to requireaccountability for that funding.

Without some process of funding andaccountability, any hope of implementing atruly national education policy remainsquestionable.Vin Paulkner is an Education Consultantwith the Catholic Education Office,Melbourne.

45