Overview of Phase 1

Phase 1 of the research project investigated the access young people across Australia have to flexible learning programs. The starting point was provided by the database developed by Dusseldorp Skills Forum (DSF) in 2011 (see Holdsworth, 2011; Te Riele, 2012a). DSF invited responses from “those programs/ schools that cater for young people at risk of not completing their education” (Te Riele, 2012a, p.5) to an online survey distributed through its networks. The resulting database included more than 400 individual entries. For the current project, this database was cleaned (for example, removing inappropriate entries) and some additional questions were added (such as a question requesting a paragraph of text describing the program and its purpose). (See Appendix III for a screen shot of all current questions on the Dusseldorp Forum website). Criteria for inclusion of programs were established to match the focus of this project, namely that the program:

• Aims to adapt the approach to schooling to support young people to (re-)engage. • Enables young people to gain recognised secondary school-level credentials.

• Mainly serves young people who are disadvantaged or disenfranchised (in education and/or society).

• Focuses on learning, although this will often go hand-in-hand with attention to well-being. • Can be attended by choice.

These criteria capture most of the landscape and footprint of alternative education provision (see Chapter 1.1). Nevertheless, there are some explicit and deliberate exclusions. First, behaviour schools (also called suspension centres or positive learning centres) that can only be attended through referral, with the enrolment being compulsory for the young person, are not included. Second, schools that based on a particular alternative philosophy (such as Steiner) were excluded because they primarily cater for parents’ or students’ personal preference rather than serving disadvantaged young people. Third, programs that work at primary school level, with young people under age 11 were not able to be included for reasons of feasibility. Finally, programs that offer support (such as mentoring or homework advice) but are not centrally

PROVISION OF FLEXIBLE

LEARNING PROGRAMS

IN AUSTRALIA

Putting the jigsaw together July 2014

34

focussed on leading to secondary school credentials were also excluded. These exclusions do not deny that many of these schools and programs do valuable work with and for young people, and neither do they suggest that the distinctions between programs are always sharply drawn. Nevertheless, the criteria above proved to be useful both to serve the focus of the project and its feasibility.

“The criteria for inclusion in Phase 1 capture most of the

landscape and footprint of alternative education provision.”

During 2012, Phase 1 started with using the selection criteria above to add to the revised DSF database. A range of directories was consulted, including local service directories (such as those prepared by Partnership Brokers), state and territory based lists (compiled by state departments as well as youth organisations, for example, the Queensland re-engagement map produced by the Youth Affairs Network Queensland), national online directories (such as australianschoolsdirectory.com.au, ourcommunity.com. au, and education.net.au), and lists provided by umbrella organisations such as the Beacon Foundation, Big Picture Education Australia, Clontarf Foundation, Edmund Rice Education Australia Youth+ and Hands on Learning Australia.

In addition, the project undertook online searches (using Google) for websites of flexible learning programs, online searches of TAFE colleges and Community Colleges for relevant course offerings, and publications by and about programs (for example, see the documentation listed in Te Riele, 2012a). When no additional programs could be located, lists of programs (nationally, or only those in a specific jurisdiction or

organisation) were sent to stakeholders across all states and territories in Australia requesting advice on whether any programs were missing or any listed programs should be excluded (for example, because they no longer existed).

In February 2013, the final database of over 800 sites was provided to Dusseldorp Skills Forum (DSF) and, in collaboration, translated into a user-friendly, searchable map and list through DSF’s ‘Learning Choices’ website. An option was provided for people to add a program through this website (moderated by the DSF web designer with support from this project’s lead researcher) so that by June 2014 the number of sites had grown to over 900. Following the re-design of the website by the (re-named) Dusseldorp Forum in May 2014, the database can be accessed at: http://dusseldorp.org.au/priorities/alternative-learning/program- database/

The material on this website serves two main purposes:

• For young people (and their parents, youth workers and teachers) to find a program that suits them. • For flexible learning programs to learn about and from each other.

Through the database a wide range of material about each program is provided, for example, information about student population and curriculum, as well as location and contact details. The database can be searched by zooming in on a particular location on the map, and/or by applying filters such as age group and program duration. It is also possible to search an alphabetical listing of the programs. Figure 3.1 displays a screenshot of part of the main page for accessing the program database through the ‘map view’. As the map in Figure 3.1 demonstrates, the location of programs largely reflects the concentration of the Australian population along coastal areas and in capital cities.

Putting the jigsaw together July 2014

35

Putting the jigsaw together July 2014

36