Introduction
This literature seeks to explore the correlation between class issues and schooling based on an Australian model of study. Most of the authors in this review agree that there is a correlation between class issues and the way schools are perceived and operated. The rise of neoliberalism has led way to an induction of creating a greater divide between the haves and have nots. Australian schools have shifted from the dynamics of the 1970s and 1980’s where the idea of a more balanced school system was part of educational reform. However, as of 2009 this has shifted and the focus is on privatizing and funding schools based upon not only their geographical location but demographic of students. Students from working class families are seeing less and less funding due to classism.
Discussion
Kate Huppatz (2015) has studied the field of socio-economics for quite some time. She believes that schooling has close ties to class identification. Huppatz (2015) also surmises that the issue that exists between inequalities and education are widely recognized. The authors of this literature have sought to inform on this dynamic and how it has had a negative impact on student learning. There is no clear forecast of how the future Australian school system will look, as for now the goal is to inform about the consequences neoliberalism is having on working class families.
The Rowe and Windle (2012) article comprehensively explores the impact of inner city schools on learning environments. The authors introduce the idea of Australia sharing information of school performance on their website. The goal of the article is to “to explore the school choice experience as framed by ‘My School’ website, for participating middle-class families (Connell, 2003). The writers attempt to tackle class issues and how the middle class participate in an academic environment. The “My School” website became an important tool in assessing school performance. The website houses information on 10,000 schools and their progress (“My School, 2012). One criticism that many officials had of the Australian school system was of an overhaul or major reform. Since 1983 officials have complained about the reform or lack thereof. According to the research, “Middle-class participants have been sought due to their theoretically influential role within the educational market, described as ‘significant players’” (Rowe & Windle, 2012, p.138). As of 2006, the Australian middle-class consisted of an income of at least $46,000. The findings of this research reflect this income bracket. Other researchers question the accuracy of the statistics on the website (Deefholts, 2010). Even with the scrutiny, the website is still a vital component of the new reform.
Rowe & Windle (2012) assert that middle-class families are relying on private schooling for their families. This is a new dynamic when it comes to middle-class families. This shift takes their reliance from government funding for children’s education. Instead of the focus being on the government, it has now shifted on individuals and what they believe is best for them. The researchers call this a neoliberal market idea. This is ever more evident in the idea of middle class families and school choice. Rowe & Windle (2012) assert that the education system is in control of status and privilege in contemporary societies. Furthermore, it is believed that members of the middle class depend on an education system for learning and advancement. Yet, when this system fails them it creates a greater wedge between the upper, middle, and lower class citizens.
With the addition of the “My School” website, it indicates a movement towards school choice markets. This is a movement that the working class does not agree with. Social class issues used to be a primary concern in Australia. However, in recent years, the concerns about class has not been as prevalent. According to Connell (2003) social class is no longer an official issue in Australia. The research suggests that not even politicians have mentioned the issue when it comes to policies. The author argues that in rich English-speaking countries, social class is often researched. Experts explore the positives and negatives of class issues. According to Connell (2003) “Class privilege, class exclusion, and other class dynamics shape teaching and learning” (p. 58). This could not have been more evident than the school systems of Australia. The researchers point out that throughout the history of public schools in Australia there has always been a link to class issues.
The “My School” website exposes the dynamics brought upon by class issues. This has complicated working class families because their children are attending schools that are not well-funded and underperforming during tests. The study conducted by Rowe and Windle, demonstrates the attitudes associated with this neoliberalism paradigm that is taking place. Rowe & Windle (2012) conclude that “the website influences significant ideological shifts in school choice for families and holds critical future implications for the Australian education system” (p. 148). The authors do want the audience to know that a causal connection cannot be made definitely based on the data from the study. Huppatz (2015) uses the Bourdieu theory to conceptualize on the theory of capitalism and schooling. She believes that institutionalized capitalism also implies cultural capitalism and this is what is taking place in Australia.
Unlike other researchers, Connell (2003) does make a casual conclusion in the article, “Working Class Families and the New Secondary Education”. The working class was always connected to the public system. There was a working class need and desire that state government accommodated them. Yet, as the research points out, there was a lot of work to be done. Students of working class parents were exposed to information that was alien to them. They felt isolated in the teachings. Connell (2003 ) argues, “Yet the expansion of schooling meant that masses of working-class children and youth spent their time in institutions whose curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and organizational practices were alien to them” (p. 58). Of course with a working class dynamic, the schools were dealing with a diverse group of students. These were students who in the beginning had to adjust to a different way of learning. Reform had to happen in order for public school systems to align with their demographic of students. Cultural subordination had to take place. Middle-class ideas were part of this transformation. The author makes note that this was not an easy transition.
Reform was always handled by more privileged groups. Connell (2003) points out that these privileged groups sought to make sure the educational system served their interest and not that of working class families. The neoliberal market met that desire. The author briefly provides a historical context on the liberal movement. This market led to a different way of funding. Connell (2003) writes, “In Australian education there was a squeeze on direct funding of universities, a growth in subsidies to private schools and a strong emphasis on consumer 'choice'. Ideologically, the parents of school children are re-'defined as customers rather than citizens” (p. 59). Therefore, education was not treated as an academic institution but a business ran by those with special interests. This trend was later confirmed in 2009 with the launch of the website, “My School”. Other researchers have too discussed the impact of this website. The website was actually launched by neoliberal party. Experts call them the Labor Party government. The result of this launching was interesting. The website published test results by schools across Australia. This was eventually followed by what is called “league tables”. The mass media became enthralled by the information (Connell, 2003).
Connell (2003) points out the 1970’s ruling by private schools was a popular form of funding and education at the time. The neoliberalism government sought to use that same structure for their education system. Interestingly enough the movement does not admit to classism. However, experts believe that it is part of a class issue that has led to special interest groups. Yet, the movement has touted its system on a universal market model. Researchers disagree and states, “The market agenda tends to divide state schools. Schools able to establish links with a middle-class clientele can embrace the market agenda, act entrepreneurially to attract more pupils from whom good exam results can be expected, and tend to shed hard-to-teach groups of pupils” (p. 59). This supports Huppatz (2015) point of how a market agenda does not have education in mind.
While there is a level of scrutiny with this issue it is indeed what is happening in the Australian school system. Connell (2003) decided to complete a study on the impact this system has had on Australian schools. The fear is that schools who do not have a privileged clientele will lose out on needed funded. They will only attract a certain clientele, and cannot compete with meeting state standards for test results. This will indeed lead to the demise of these schools. The bigger question is what will happen to the students impacted by this trend. Whitehead (2007) does not understand why more is not being done on researching this issue. He believes the issue of schooling and economics is one of the most contemporary issues in Australian education at the moment.
The study included four schools two of the schools are urban and two of them are rural and their experience with vocational schooling in Australia. VET schooling is an alternative choice for children of working class parents. This group comes from a lower class demographic. The author says this group is constructed of the most poor and recent immigrant wave of citizens in Australia. The working class parents of these students were diverse. Some of the parents were welders, farmers, bus drivers, and other expected working class occupations (Connell, 2003). The author concludes that this is characteristic of what the working class looks like in Australia. The study included 40 interviews from students, teachers, and parents. The researchers used focus interviews for the study. All of the interviews were recorded and transcribed (Connell, 2003). The results of the study showed a wide range in parent/child relationships. Some of the parents were proactive in making sure their children succeeded in school. Other parents were too busy working and making a living than to help out as much with homework. When it came to decision-making for the best interests of the children some parents left this responsibility to the school. Nonetheless, the study’s family project provided enough information for the researchers to answer their hypothesis.
The study did demonstrate that positive attitudes have been met with disappointment with the school system in Australia for working class families. Due to the neoliberalism and the new market in which schools are being operated, a majority of parents do not trust the system. Connell (2003) writes, “There is still a great deal of goodwill and respect for schooling and some schools make very good use of it. But one cannot say that the educational experience of working-class families in general is supportive and productive” (p. 72). The researchers concluded that the shift of a democratic reform in the 1970s and 80s were headed in a more positive directions. However, the shift into the neoliberalism movement has led to consequences that are ultimately impacting working families in a negative way (Huppatz, 2015). Not having trust in the system is a growing issue among parents. Campbell (2007) states, “By the end of the twentieth century there was a substantial withdrawal of trust from the ordinary or comprehensive government high school” (p. 1).
Saltmarsh (2009) has also been motivated to focus on the changing dynamics of the Australian school system in her research. The study focuses on early education in Greater Western Sydney, Australia. Her hypothesis is a question of economic participation and the impact on school children. For her role in this research Saltmarsh (2009) considers, “how children’s consumption and engagement with popular texts is implicated in the production of economically oriented subjectivities” (p. 48). This interesting dynamic places popular culture in the greater scheme of consumerism and children seeing themselves through the eyes of class in society and popular culture. The writer argues that popular texts play a significant role in social economies of how children view themselves (Saltmarsh, 2009).
Saltmarsh (2009) believes there is a symbolic role between social and economics in the world. The greater argument is that children learn how to become economic subjects as a result of this dynamic. Her analysis of a four year old dressed like Spiderman, sitting out while his classmates are playing brings a perspective to this argument. The four year old was concerned about the tear in his costume. The point is that children’s social behavior has a direct correlation to economic rationalities. The young boys concern with the rip in his costume has an economic implication. Therefore, he was not able to become social with his classmates. He brightened his mood when he found that he had a wallet in his pocket (Saltmarsh, 2009). This is a prime example on how social structure impacts learning.
Conclusion
Overall, there has been a backlash in the way the Australian school system has handled education reform. Kaye (2010) argues that education is not a commodity. It is a public good. He has criticized the new website as well, and look forward to working with others in putting an end to it (Kaye, 2010). Huppatz’s (2015) ideology is reflected throughout this literature review. It is clear that the reform currently used in Australia is putting working class families at a disadvantage. There are questions of solutions to the problem. Future research needs to focus on more solutions. Allen & Rimes (2014) believes that reasonable and accurate program evaluation where the evaluators are objective can lead to a less bias system. If schools who do not have the same fnding of others score low, then there should be a strategy in place to help them reach the level of academic achievement they should be at.
References
Allen, J. M., & Rimes, J. (2014). A review of program evaluations in an australian independent school: Participants' perspectives. Australian Journal of Education, 58(3), 262-277.
Campbell, C. (2007). The middle class and the government high school: Private interests and public institutions in Australian education in the late twentieth century, with reference to the case of Sydney. History of Education Review, 36(2), 1-18. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08198691200700006
Connell, R.W. (2003). Working-Class Families and the New Secondary Education. Australian Journal of Education. 47 (3). 235-250.
Deefholts, T. (2010, Feb 24). My school website is a 'time bomb': Principals. Daily Examiner
Huppatz, K. (2015). Social class and the classroom. In T. Ferfolja, C. Jones-Diaz, & J. Ullman (Eds.), Understanding sociological theory for educational practices (pp. 164-179). Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Kaye, J. (2010, May 31). Education is a public good, not a commodity. Education.
My school website update goes live. (2012, Feb 25). Sunshine Coast Daily
Rowe, E. E. & Windle, J. (2012). The Australian middle class and education: a small-scale study of the school choice experience as framed by ‘My School’ within inner city families. Critical Studies in Education, 53 (2). 137-151.
Saltmarsh, S. (2009). Becoming economic subjects: agency, consumption and popular culture in early childhood. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 30 (1). 47-59.
Whitehead, C. (2007). Challenging the system? A dramatic tale of neoliberal reform in an Australian high school. Education Research and Perspectives, 34(2), 104-106.
