Australia/ July 21, 17/ By: Hannah Walmsley/ Source: http://www.abc.net.au
Un nuevo informe que evalúa los resultados del NAPLAN (National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy) en el ACT (Australian Capital Territory) afirma que el estatus socio-económico de los padres de Camberra explica el rendimiento por encima del promedio, no las escuelas.
A new report assessing NAPLAN results in the ACT claims the socio-economic status of Canberra parents explains above-average performance, not the schools.
The territory has almost always achieved NAPLAN scores higher than the national average.
But the Australia Institute said government reporting had previously failed to highlight that the ACT had a significantly higher socio-economic average than the rest of the country.
When we compare our high socio-economic schools with high socio-economic schools in other states, the report said, we are falling behind.
Apples for apples
The report compared the NAPLAN results of 24 high socio-economic public and private primary schools in the ACT between 2008 and 2016.
«These are schools that are very similar in terms of their socio-economic make-up,» report author and ANU professor Andrew Macintosh said.
Education Minister Yvette Berry had previously said other states were simply starting to perform better.
«The ACT Government is proud of its high investment, more than other states and territory, in its school system,» she said.
Professor Macintosh said the ACT Government needed to stop making excuses for underperformance.
«We’re asking the ACT Government to undertake a public enquiry to find out exactly what is going on in our schools,» he told ABC Radio Canberra.
«We think that we’re not currently employing best practice, but we can’t categorically say it’s teaching methods.
«We’re also calling for a voluntary trial to demonstrate that these teaching methods actually work.»
The average proportion of students from the sample ACT Government schools that performed below the national minimum standard was 80 per cent higher than the average from statistically similar schools.
«The data across the board shows quite clearly that there is a significant problem in our schools,» Professor Macintosh said.
«We have a highly educated population, some of the best researchers in the country and almost everything you’d want to see in order to produce the top performing schools.
Oceanía/Australia/Julio del 2017/Noticias/https://theconversation.com/
Employment is the main reason students drop out of online degree courses, our new research shows. This is despite claims that online university programs offer greater flexibility to workers and employers who want to up-skill.
Most online dropouts occur due to students’ changing employment commitments, which affect their ability to complete assessments on time.
However, the assessment policies of many universities offer no concession for work-related challenges, so working students often fail to resume their studies. To tackle the biggest driver of attrition, university policies must offer flexibility around employment and assessment. Only then can universities truly provide the flexible online learning experience that workers and industry require.
What is the problem?
Our research shows the assessment policies of many online courses are no more flexible than their on-campus counterparts. Some vaguely mention that employment and leave extensions are subject to course co-ordinator discretion. Others explicitly state that work is not a valid reason for granting extensions for assignments.
Some universities have merely adopted traditional on-campus policies for their online programs. This approach highlights the disconnect between university policymakers and the needs of online students.
A recent Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency reportstresses that such high attrition represents huge revenue loss and creates reputational issues for governments and institutions.
Since online education serves nontraditional students, it automatically experiences higher attrition compared to traditional on-campus learning. Using completion rates as a benchmark for education quality therefore places institutions with higher proportions of online students at an unfair disadvantage.
What should universities do?
Considerable research and investment has sought to improve the retention of online students by focusing on the design and curriculum of learning websites.
However, this focus alone will not really help retention; it ignores the key driver of online attrition. What we need is fundamental change in the way universities think about online education.
Online students are offered flexibility in terms of study location, separate learning activities, and study progression. But considerable scope exists for improving retention by effectively accommodating the needs of online students in relation to assessment.
Or, at the very least, institutions could better manage student expectations by clearly communicating exactly what – if any – flexibility is offered in relation to employment.
Rather than imposing traditional on-campus student assessment extension policies, online students’ employment commitments should be taken into consideration. This could come in the form of assessments aligned with workplace challenges by offering a choice of assessment options and flexible deadlines.
A more radical move would be to allow online students to drop out and pick up again where they left at a later date.
What is the chance universities will change?
Potential opposition to such suggestions could be anticipated from institutions that want to be seen as fair by treating on-campus and online students equally.
However, this argument is flawed. It merely illustrates universities’ unwillingness to move beyond their comfort zones.
Other potential challenges relate to resource planning. Teaching staff would be required to process assessments and grades over a longer period. Administrators would also find it difficult to apportion revenues and costs to students who study a unit across more than one semester given current management practices.
Regardless of the challenges posed, reviewing online assessment policy in relation to student employment, and offering more flexibility around assessment, is essential. This would not only enhance student satisfaction, but enable universities to overcome – or at least lessen – the biggest driver of online student attrition.
Oceanía/Austarlia/Julio del 2017/Noticias/https://theconversation.com/
Most parents view their children’s playing of electronic games as potentially problematic – or even dangerous. Yet many children are engaging with electronic games more frequently than ever.
Concerns about electronic gaming do not stack up against the research. So, how much gaming is too much for young children?
Electronic games (also called computer or digital games) are found in 90% of households in Australia. 65% of households have three or more game devices. Given this prevalence, it’s timely to look more closely at electronic game playing and what it really means for children’s development and learning.
parents reported on their children’s use of electronic games when their children were eight or nine years of age; and
teachers reported two years later on these children’s social and emotional development and academic achievement, when the children were 10 or 11.
How much time do kids spend gaming?
As the table below shows, there was wide variation in the number of hours per week the children spent playing electronic games.
Most children (52%) played electronic games for four or fewer hours per week. But nearly one-year of the children (24%) were reported as playing electronic games for more than seven hours per week.
How much time should kids spend gaming?
Taking into account family background and parental education, the good news is that low-to-moderate use of electronic games (between two and four hours per week) had a positive effect on children’s later academic achievement.
However, over-use of electronic games (more than seven hours per week) had a negative effect on children’s social and emotional development.
Children whose parents reported they played electronic games for two-to-four hours per week were identified by their teachers as showing better literacy and mathematical skills.
Surprisingly, children who were reported as playing electronic games infrequently or not at all (less than two hours per week) did not appear to benefit in terms of literacy or mathematics achievement.
However, children whose parents reported that they played electronic games for more than one hour per day were identified two years later by their teachers as having poor attention span, less ability to stay on task, and displaying more emotional difficulties.
As the graphs below show, moderate game playing was associated with the most benefits both academically and emotionally.
Are some games better than others?
It is likely that the relationship between the use of electronic games and children’s academic and developmental outcomes is far from straightforward. The quality of electronic games and the family context play important roles.
Social interactions are important in supporting children’s engagement in electronic games. A closer examination of children’s experiences at home may be beneficial in understanding the context of gaming in everyday life.
Often viewed as a leisure activity, studies show that when parents and siblings participate in the game playing, they offer opportunities to negotiate with each other, and engage in conversations and literacy practices. All of these potentially contribute to the child’s language, literacy and social development.
It is important to note that while we know the amount of time children spent playing electronic games, we do not know the detail of the kinds of games that were being played, with whom they were being played, or even the device on which they were played.
This contextual information is clearly relevant for consideration in any further research that explores the relationship across children’s electronic game playing, learning, and wellbeing.
Santiago Vargas cuenta su experiencia en Brisbane, Australia, tras decidir emprender nuevos horizontes en términos de educación.
Llegué a Australia en noviembre de 2014. Como muchos de los estudiantes que escogemos Australia como destino, decidí venir a este país por muchas razones, entre ellas, las más importantes fueron mejorar el inglés y trabajar para poder pagar el préstamo que iba a adquirir para llegar a mi destino (pues aquí en Australia se puede trabajar legalmente 20 horas siendo estudiante).
Escogí vivir en Brisbane, porque luego de investigar y recibir asesoría por parte de agencias, llegué a la conclusión de que en esta ciudad podría tener más y mejores oportunidades, pues en ciudades como Melbourne y Sidney ya había mucha gente y al ser tanta la demanda laboral, en general el costo de vida, iba a ser un poco mayor.
Comencé estudiando inglés, pues mi idea era aprender bien el idioma para luego volver a Colombia a conseguir mejores opciones laborales, porque hoy en día ser bilingüe es un factor determinante en muchas empresas para poder ocupar cualquier cargo.
Mi idea inicial era estar durante nueve meses, pero luego de hacer mis cursos de inglés y después de haber explorado un poco más acerca de la ciudad y las oportunidades que se pueden tener, decidí que lo mejor sería extender mi visa un año más con un diplomado Avanzado en Marketing, que servía como complemento de mi profesión y también me ayudaría para aprender un inglés más técnico en mi área.
Y así fue, pasé un año más cumpliendo un nuevo reto, pero en ese punto sentí que podía hacer más para seguir aprendiendo, crteía que todavía mi proceso en esta ciudad no había terminado y luego, estar participando activamente en actividades en el instituto en el cual estaba haciendo el diplomado avanzado, me abrió las puertas para pertenecer a la asociación de alumnos, en la que me desempeñaría como coordinador de eventos.
En medio de todo este proceso y habiendo pasado todo tipo de situaciones durante año y medio, trabajaba limpiando oficinas, universidades y en restaurantes, lo cual siendo honesto nunca ha sido fácil, y no por el tipo de trabajo, sino por el idioma, las largas jornadas y el hecho de hacer cosas que uno no está acostumbrado. Creo que todo hace parte de la experiencia y aunque han sido jornadas largas, siempre me ha mantenido fuerte la idea de seguir adelante con mis sueños y metas.
Volviendo un poco atrás y continuando con mi proceso en estos casi tres años, el instituto me abrió las puertas en la asociación y obtuve una beca de estudio por otros dos años para seguir mejorando mi conocimiento y creciendo como profesional y como persona. Ahora, mientras estudio ya no solo trabajo en un restaurante y en la asociación de alumnos, sino quetambién estoy haciendo una practica laboral y soy embajador estudiantil internacional de Brisbane, representando a Colombia y mostrando todo lo que he vivido en este tiempo.
Me gusta la idea de poder contar mi historia y mostrar que sí se puede mirar más allá. En mi caso creo que el proceso aquí aún no termina y considero que todo el mundo debería luchar por lo que quiere, sin importar qué sea, y definitivamente, si se trata de estudiar y tener una experiencia en otro país, creo que Australia y especialmente Brisbane sería el mejor lugar.
Oceanía/Australia/02 Julio 2017/Fuente: ecocosas/Autor: Raul Mannise
Continuando la tendencia de otros países, Australia abre su primer supermercado con productos rechazados por los supermercados, restaurantes y por los propios clientes. El supermercado esta a cargo de OzHarvest, ONG creada para luchar contra el despilfarro de alimentos.
En este nuevo mercado las viejas zanahorias y alimentos enlatados con fecha de caducidad próxima son tratados con respeto y dignidad. tomates maduros, que se tiran a la basura en otros establecimientos, aquí se apilan con orgullo.
El supermercado, ubicado en Sidney, va más allá de carteles de publicidad para hacer frente a los residuos de alimentos y su impacto en el medio ambiente y para combatir el hambre. En este super todo es gratis para aquellos que no pueden pagar por ello.
Las existencias del almacén abarcan una gran gama de productos, incluyendo frutas y verduras frescas, panes, conservas, comidas congeladas, bebidas, elementos de cuidado personal y productos de limpieza. Los estantes son modificados casi a diario, dependiendo de los alimentos que se recuperan. También lo clientes pueden donar alimentos e incluso intercambiar los alimentos que no quieren por otros que tenga el mercado.
El desperdicio de alimentos en Australia cuesta alrededor de $ 20 mil millones de dolares al año. Los consumidores australianos gastan un veinte por ciento de sus ingresos en alimentos y tiran a la basura una de cada cinco cestas de la compra cada año. Cuatro millones de toneladas de alimentos acaban en los vertederos, donde se descomponen y terminan emitiendo metano, un potente gas de invernadero
La empresaria australiana detrás del OzHarvest, Ronni Kahn cree que este supermercado es un paso en la dirección correcta. “Cada vez que se ahorra en comida, ayudamos al planeta. Cada vez que utilizamos esta comida para alimentar a personas con hambre, nos ocupamos de los problemas sociales “, dice Kahn en una entrevista.
La ONG OzHarvest trabaja con más de 2.500 donantes de alimentos. “Rescatamos alimentos que no pueden ser vendidos por los supermercados y los minoristas de alimentos por su fecha de caducidad, pero todavía están en perfecto estado para el consumo”, dice Kahn. “Si algo ha expirado, es decir no hay razón para tirarlo a la basura.”
“Sólo rescatamos alimentos que son absolutamente comestibles.” “Todos nuestros conductores están capacitados en el manejo de alimentos, y no aceptarán cualquier producto, que ellos mismos no puedan comer.”
La mayoría de los productos son productos que se consideran “defectuosos”, tales como latas abolladas, o frutas con magulladuras y verduras algo pochas que terminan en la basura. “Todo lo que hacemos no se trata de ganancias, es con un propósito”, dice Kahn.
“La gente va a venir y a decir, ‘Wow, esto es exactamente lo que me gustaría comprar en cualquier lugar, y ahora sólo puedo tomarlo, usarlo, o dárselo a alguien.”
Khan dice que OzHarvest tiene previsto abrir otros puntos de venta, tanto en Sydney como en todo el país. “Creemos plenamente que este será un catalizador para otros proyectos y locales. Tenemos la capacidad para llevarlo a cabo en todo el país. Este es un modelo replicable “.
Fuente de la noticia: https://ecocosas.com/eco-ideas/australia-abre-supermercado-gratuito-productos-descartados-otros-supermercados/
Fuente de la imagen: https://ecocosas.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/GIVE_IF_YOU_CAN.jp
Oceanía/Australia/Junio del 2017/Noticias/https://theconversation.com/
When we think of a “good society” – one that is fair and just – a defining characteristic is likely to be that all people have the opportunity to realise their potential, irrespective of the circumstances into which they are born.
There is growing evidence that investment in universal early childhood education is a prerequisite to providing opportunity and achievement throughout the formative years.
New research from the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre report, Educate Australia Fair? Education Inequality in Australia, shows we are falling short on providing equal opportunity to our young people on several important dimensions. But it is also important to acknowledge substantial policy reforms over the last ten years, many involving Commonwealth-state co-operation, that are now delivering positive returns.
The National Partnership Agreement has led to a marked increase in the proportion of children accessing pre-school education for at least 15 hours per week.
Primary and secondary school participation rates continue to climb. The retention rate to Year 12 is 84.3% nationally. Far more young people continue through high school as a result of the National Youth Participation Requirement.
University enrolments are at an all-time high. And there has been an increase in social mobility in Australia: children born to low-educated parents are now much more likely to gain a university qualification than was the case in the 1950s.
Further benefits can be expected to flow from these reforms, particularly the greater investment in early childhood education in coming years.
But we have a long way to go. Many of today’s children will not receive a “fair go” in educational opportunities for no other reason than family background, demographic characteristics, and geography.
BCEC’s new report identifies some stark contrasts between the most and least disadvantaged in society.
A child from a low socioeconomic background is up to three times more likely to be developmentally vulnerable by the time they start primary school.
An Indigenous child is 40% less likely to finish high school, and 60% less likely to go to university, than a non-Indigenous child.
A child born in remote Australia is only one-third as likely to go to university as a child born in a major city.
The report dissects these gaps in opportunity by looking at where inequalities emerge from early childhood to higher education across key characteristics of the population.
Key junctions in education are important for disadvantaged groups such as Indigenous Australians, and those from regional and remote areas and low socioeconomic backgrounds. One of the most concerning findings is the degree to which school attendance rates and participation in NAPLAN testing drop off among these groups as they transition from primary to secondary school.
Gaps in school attendance exist in primary school but are smaller and remain constant, averaging around 8% from years 1 to 6. However, this changes significantly once young people enter secondary schooling.
The gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous student attendance rates reaches 15% by Year 10, with lower retention to Year 12 and lower enrolments in tertiary education.
Student attendance rates, Years 1 to 10, by Indigenous status, 2016
Our report launches the BCEC Educational Disadvantage Index, which maps areas of relative advantage and disadvantage based on key indicators such as access, engagement and outcomes. The index is used to profile areas of high and low disadvantage, and to assess the key drivers of educational disadvantage.
BCEC Educational Disadvantage Index.Supplied by authors
The divide between the most and least disadvantaged areas across Australia is a sobering reminder of the level of inequality that exists in our community. Worse than this, it shows the inequality that exists for a “service” that is intended to play a role in bridging this gap – education.
The most disadvantaged areas are all located in remote regions of Australia, spanning the Northern Territory, South Australia and Western Australia. Pockets of disadvantage are also evident on the fringes of our state capital cities.
Children living in the most disadvantaged areas will average half the NAPLAN scores in reading, writing and numeracy tests than those living in the least disadvantaged areas. Children in these areas are also only half as likely to be enrolled in pre-school at age four, half as likely to attend pre-school for 15 hours or more, and seven times as likely to be vulnerable on two or more developmental domains in their first year of schooling.
Remarkably, the most disadvantaged 10% of children in the ACT are on par with the most advantaged 10% living in the NT.
Resources do vary according to educational disadvantage. Gross school income per student is 50% higher on average in areas of greatest need. But this weighs against multiple challenges.
This report’s findings demonstrate the need for education policies to go beyond funding reform and tackle the complex barriers that exist in delivering education to our most vulnerable children.
But it also presents an opportunity for policy interventions to make a real difference to the educational outcomes for these young people.
Oceanía/Australia/Junio del 2017/Noticias/https://theconversation.com/
Indigenous students remain vastly underrepresented in higher education in Australia. According to Universities Australia, Indigenous people comprise 2.7% of Australia’s working age population but only 1.6% of university domestic student enrolments.
In the past decade, there have been renewed efforts to increase the participation of underrepresented groups in higher education, including Indigenous people. However, most policies have focused on raising the aspirations of students from low socioeconomic (SES) backgrounds. The particular aspirations of Indigenous students have been largely overlooked.
To address this, we put the spotlight on the aspirations of Indigenous students in a recent large-scale longitudinal study. Our research has made two quite significant discoveries.
Indigenous children have the same career aspirations as non-Indigenous children
The study revealed that from an early age, Indigenous children share the same aspirations as non-Indigenous children. This includes the desire to become doctors, teachers, vets and artists.
This finding busts the myth that we need to “raise” aspirations. As we see it, the focus of equity programs for Indigenous children should shift to nurturing the strong aspirations children already have in primary school.
No doubt many Indigenous children will change their minds as they grow up. However, our research suggests that waiting until senior secondary school to talk to them about their career aspirations is far too late. (The same is true for non-Indigenous children.)
High-achieving Indigenous children are less likely to want to go to university
Perhaps more startling, our research found that high-achieving Indigenous students were significantly less likely to want to go to university than their high-achieving non-Indigenous peers.
While 72% of non-Indigenous students in the top NAPLAN quartile aspired to go to university, only 43% of Indigenous students in the same quartile said they wanted to go.
From understanding university pathways to managing the costs, there are myriad issues that influence the decision to go to university.
However, for Indigenous students, aspiring to university is likely to require negotiation of race, class, economic, and cultural divides in ways that are not shared by non-Indigenous students.
1) Cultural and geographic reasons
The majority of Indigenous children live in major cities and regional areas. But compared with non-Indigenous children, a larger proportion of Indigenous children live in remote and very remote parts of Australia. Across these geographic areas, bonds and commitment to country, community, and family are deeply felt.
It is also likely high-achieving Indigenous children will carry significant financial obligations in these familial relationships. They can be reluctant to relocate for university because of these ties.
2) Social and racial isolation
While universities connect with Indigenous school students through campus visits and mentoring programs, the lack of a sizeable cohort of Indigenous university students is likely to make the prospect of choosing university even more daunting.
More broadly, the lack of a sizeable Indigenous middle class means that socially mobile Indigenous people “may become stranded in a racially bound social capital wasteland” with gains in economic capital not necessarily leading to the kinds of social and cultural capital that traditionally benefit non-Indigenous people.
Further, Indigenous students may not want to expose themselves to racism and the racial divide apparent in the university, town or city where available universities are situated.
3. First -in-family
Many high-achieving Indigenous students would be the first in their families to attend university. First-in-family students face unique challenges because, by definition, they tend not to have the family or community experience to guide them. Moreover, many Indigenous students are the first in their families to complete secondary school, so university education might be a more alien concept.
4. Pathways, costs and financial support
Negotiating the fees and support available to Indigenous students can be difficult. There is a plethora of programs, scholarships, courses and accommodation choices, which can be overwhelming for a new student (especially with the other factors outlined above). This is something to take into account in the transition to university for Indigenous students.
5. No obvious benefit
High-achieving Indigenous students can “weigh up” the benefits of a university education and decide it is not “worth it” economically or socially. The risks and challenges they will face by leaving country, community and family might be seen as too high a price to pay. If study at TAFE or paid work is available locally these might be more desirable.
6. Distrust of government institutions
Indigenous students may have a deep (and justified) distrust of universities, given the past treatment of Indigenous people by government and non-Indigenous institutions.
No matter how welcoming or how strong the Indigenous support centres on campuses, some Indigenous families will struggle to see university as a place for them or their children.
Breaking down the barriers
Higher education does not exist in a vacuum. There are things that can be done to address these issues.
One step is to pay more attention to the aspirations of Indigenous students in the early years and how those aspirations are formed in relation to existing social, cultural, economic, and racial divides.
Another step is for universities to reconceptualise their outreach strategies targeting Indigenous students. There should be more consideration paid to the factors outlined above.
Fundamentally, it is not just about making higher education possible, but rather, making university a place where Indigenous young people will want to pursue and attain their occupational aspirations.
OtrasVocesenEducacion.org existe gracias al esfuerzo voluntario e independiente de un pequeño grupo de docentes que decidimos soñar con un espacio abierto de intercambio y debate.
¡Ayúdanos a mantener abiertas las puertas de esta aula!
Users Today : 45
Total Users : 35416022
Views Today : 61
Total views : 3349291