Indigenous-Education-Review_DRAFT
Indigenous-Education-Review_DRAFT
Indigenous-Education-Review_DRAFT
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Review</strong> of <strong>Indigenous</strong> <strong>Education</strong> in the Northern Territory<br />
Bruce Wilson<br />
Chapter Four: Two systems<br />
One of the striking outcomes of the review’s analysis is the understanding that Government<br />
schooling in the Northern Territory consists in effect of two education systems. One of these<br />
systems is concentrated in the towns (Darwin, Palmerston, Alice Springs, Katherine,<br />
Nhulunbuy and Tennant Creek). The other is concentrated in other remote and very remote<br />
communities. A list of schools notionally distributed across the two categories is at Appendix<br />
6. The argument for two systems is based on dramatically different patterns of enrolment,<br />
attendance and achievement across the two groups of schools, matched by patterns of<br />
socio‐economic disadvantage. In this chapter and throughout the report, the largely urban<br />
system is described as ‘town’ and the largely remote and very remote system is described as<br />
‘bush’. The term ‘bush schools’ may not be considered appropriate, but no alternative term<br />
has yet been identified.<br />
Terminology used in the report<br />
Although the categories ‘town’ and ‘bush’ cut across geolocations, much of the discussion in<br />
this chapter is based on geolocations. This is because key data are collected by geolocation,<br />
and there is considerable overlap between the very remote geolocation and bush schools.<br />
The review report uses several different forms of terminology to refer to schools and those<br />
who work and learn in them:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Schools<br />
where the report concerns data collected by geolocation, it uses the language of<br />
geolocation: ‘provincial’, ‘remote’ and ‘very remote’;<br />
where the discussion concerns analysis or recommendations for the two ‘systems’,<br />
the terms ‘bush’ and ‘town’ are used to define them. The basis for allocation of<br />
schools to these categories is outlined in this chapter; and<br />
where the report makes general points about schools in relatively isolated locations<br />
(ie all remote and very remote schools), it sometimes uses the term ‘remote’ as a<br />
generic descriptor. Where ‘remote’ is used alone, it is always used in this broad,<br />
generic sense (and not to refer specifically to the remote geolocation).<br />
<strong>DRAFT</strong><br />
Northern Territory schools are classified by geolocation. Leaving aside distance education<br />
providers there are 151 schools, of which 43 are provincial (all in Darwin and Palmerston),<br />
28 remote and 80 very remote. This review uses the characteristics discussed in this chapter<br />
to allocate these schools to the two categories, town schools and bush schools. Schools<br />
demonstrating the characteristics associated with greater remoteness (lower enrolment,<br />
attendance and achievement and higher socio‐economic disadvantage) are classed as bush<br />
schools.<br />
The report identifies 86 bush schools, consisting of 76 of the 80 very remote schools (the<br />
four schools in Nhulunbuy and Tennant Creek are categorised as town schools) along with<br />
10 remote schools. It also identifies 65 town schools. As explained in Appendix 6, there are<br />
some schools that sit on the cusp between these two classifications. The three distance<br />
education providers are unclassified.<br />
30