Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3254 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

everything that Ms McRae has mentioned. But, if members are not of that view, I am certainly quite happy to indicate to the department that they should prepare a note, listing the points she raised, to be sent out to those bodies to whom this paper has been sent. I do not feel that that is necessary, but I will do that if members are so inclined.

MS TUCKER (4.56): I, too, was disappointed by the language in this discussion paper. I can see also that it could be rectified by saying "parents, carers and guardians", instead of just saying "parents" everywhere. I was alarmed to see that there was not this consciousness in the writing of this discussion paper. Right now, I am reading submissions to the Social Policy Committee's inquiry into children at risk, and there is evidence coming before the committee which is certainly stating concerns about the chronic problem in relation to early school leaving. Those students not completing Year 10 and disadvantaged children, particularly those who spend extended periods in the substitute care system, are seen to suffer large gaps in their education and often have severe learning difficulties.

Early school leavers are a particular at-risk group in our community. The inadequacy of programs or discussion papers such as this, which restrict themselves to traditional family structures, is neglectful of young people who do not live with their parents and, therefore, could be seen to be a contributor to the problem. Those children who do not fit with the ideal model for whom these programs have been developed could experience a form of social closure and become distanced even further from the school system.

It is interesting to note in the comments on page 14 that "the teacher, when programming, needs to be sensitive to the social and cultural backgrounds of the students". How curious it is that the authors recognise the necessity for teachers to take into consideration the social and cultural factors impacting on the child's literacy development, yet they themselves have disregarded this critical aspect in the design and wording of their own publication. I would not argue about whether it has to be a chapter. Ms McRae's motion says that it has to be a chapter, whatever a chapter is. It could be a page or two pages. I think it is important that you acknowledge this oversight in some way. I am happy to support Ms McRae's motion, because I think that within that there is room to do it as you see appropriate, as long as you do acknowledge that it was an oversight.

I actually think that in this publication, the discussion paper, there is room for further discussion about the issues of this particular group of young people in our community. I think there could be benefit in that. I would actually encourage you to do a good job on this and provide something of substance, because I think it is an issue that teachers need to be alerted to more than they are. I am just thinking as I am going along here. I was saying that I did not think it needed to be such a substantial document. I think, actually, it should be, because I know from some of the stories I have been hearing recently about what is happening in schools that there really is not enough consciousness. I am not blaming teachers for this, because I know that they are already extremely stressed and stretched in many ways. But there is something missing sometimes in their understanding of what is actually happening in the home and how it is

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .