Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy in Mathematics 9811986835, 9789811986833

Table of contents :
Foreword
Acknowledgment
Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile Detention
In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia
Unlocking the Learning Potential of Indigenous and Low Socioeconomic Young People
Overview of This Book
References
2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in Australia
Over-Representation of Indigenous Young People in the Justice System
Factors that Contribute to the Over-Representation of Indigenous Youth in Juvenile Justice
Historical Factors and Events
Mental Health Issues
Intellectual Disability
Low Educational Attainment and Employment
Social, Economic and Political Disadvantage
Chapter Summary
References
3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People in Detention: Critical Reality
The Status Quo or That Which is Our Responsibility to Understand
Challenges in Supporting Young People in the Justice System
Diversionary Programs in the Youth Justice System
Towards a Philosophical Understanding of Our Responsibility
Towards an Ontological Understanding of the Historical and Social Complexities of the Incarceration of Indigenous Youth: Drawing upon the Three Levels of the Critical Realist Ontology
Three Levels of Critical Realism
The Critical Realist Concept of Time
Chapter Summary
References
4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention
Causes for Concern: Research Gaps and Misunderstandings
Remembering, Observing and Analysing Maths Teaching Approaches
Instruction-Based Approaches to Teaching Maths
The Challenges of Instruction-Based Approaches
Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches
The Challenges of Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches
Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches
Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches
Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches
Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task (CDAT)
Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches
The Challenges of Assessment and Differentiation (Grouping)
Chapter Summary
References
5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile Detention
CRP: Ways of Life, Seeing the World and Taking Action Against Injustice
CRP and Community Cultural Wealth
CRP and Meaningful Long-Term Sustainable Change
CRP: Privileging Indigenous Voices, Identities and Role Models
Indigenous Voices
Strengthening Indigenous Identity
Positive Indigenous Role Models
CRP: Strength-Based Approach to Professional Development
Strong and Smart
Crossing Cultures: Hidden History Posters
Engoori
CRP: Collaborative Development and Resource Design
Chapter Summary
References
6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles
Conflicting Policy
Continuing Concerns and Way Forward
Conclusion
References
Appendix A Teacher Demographic Survey
Appendix B Teacher Efficacy Survey

Citation preview

Bronwyn Ewing Grace Sarra

Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems Culturally Responsive Pedagogy in Mathematics

Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems

Bronwyn Ewing · Grace Sarra

Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems Culturally Responsive Pedagogy in Mathematics

Bronwyn Ewing Faculty of Creative Industries, Education and Social Justice School of Teacher Education and Leadership Queensland University of Technology Kelvin Grove, QLD, Australia

Grace Sarra Faculty of Creative Industries, Education and Social Justice School of Early Childhood and Inclusive Education Queensland University of Technology Kelvin Grove, QLD, Australia

ISBN 978-981-19-8683-3 ISBN 978-981-19-8684-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Foreword

I consider it a great honour to be invited by Prof. Grace Sarra and Assoc. Prof. Bronwyn Ewing to write the Foreword for their co-authored book titled: Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy in Mathematics. At a time when the development of a more culturally astute interactional framework around the engagement of Australia’s First Nations People is being espoused as a priority by Governments at all levels, this book provides a unique and timely opportunity for a new dialogue to take place. This dialogue is around the development and implementation of social policy, program management and service delivery with regards to the over-incarceration of Indigenous Australians, and most specifically, Indigenous youth. While the authors utilise their cultural and professional experiences to provide the reader with an analysis and articulation of issues that align with the appalling statistics of Indigenous youth in the justice system, its impact on the engagement of Indigenous People within the context of Australian education, justice, child safety, health and human services more broadly cannot be underestimated. From the outset, the authors fill the reader with a sense of enquiry as they astutely adopt both a professional and cultural framework to explore an ideological, epistemological, cultural and theoretical overview of social policy, education and reform as it pertains to the engagement of Indigenous young people within the Australian justice system. The authors provide the reader with a unique overview of matters pertinent to youth justice within Australia’s jurisdictions and challenge the stereotypic meanderings that have been espoused by social and political proponents about the over-incarceration of Indigenous Australians for too long and put paid to the ability of current systems to evidence an ability to effectively meet the needs of Indigenous families, their communities and, most pointedly, Indigenous youth. The authors take the reader on a socio-political and intellectual journey of historical and contemporary confrontation, cultural and systemic impediments and viable pathways to reform. They reveal the inadequacies of a system that for too long has retained a flawed operational framework that has proven to be culturally inapt and v

vi

Foreword

ineffective in its capacity to evidence proactive and measurable remedies to break the cycle of Indigenous disadvantage, impoverishment, youth offending, disengagement and self-harm. While the authors skilfully and sensitively discuss the issue of Indigenous youth engagement in the juvenile justice system as an integral component of the text, they also speak to issues of resilience and determination, culturally inclusive curriculum and pedagogy that builds upon the scholarship of Indigenous knowledge and worldviews enunciating the critical role that these principles play in the development of policies and programs pertinent to Indigenous Australians. The authors’ use of social action research, culturally responsive curriculum and critical discourse has highlighted the need for appropriate standards to be applied, as a measure of successfully addressing the cultural nuances that have continued to impede change as it pertains to the rehabilitation, education and transitioning of youth within the juvenile justice system. The research accomplished by the authors provides a renewed and reinvigorated understanding of systemic and sociocultural issues, human rights and social justice, which, for many advocates, has become a matter of serious public concern. Refreshingly, the authors have provided a review of historical and contemporary sources pertinent to a much-needed process of systemic transformation and change in the development of social policies, programs and services for Indigenous Australians and, most specifically, Indigenous youth. This presents the reader with a comprehensive overview of controversial and sensitive social and political issues that have emerged in the wake of social concerns pertaining to youth justice. In so doing, the authors have highlighted the need for Governments to urgently take proactive and strategic steps, which give life to the commitment to justice reinvestment and reform initiatives as a means of breaking the overwhelming presence of social indicators in the lives of Indigenous Australians and incarcerated youth. In accomplishing this task, the authors have provided a compelling account of a flawed system that has done little to move beyond the historical rhetoric to one that can evidence the practical adoption of measures that give credence to Australia’s commitment to the principles of reinvestment and reform across a wide range of social indicators, as they pertain to both Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth. While a history of Reports has identified many of the substantive issues facing Aboriginal young people in the youth justice system, the authors have expanded this by examining variables deemed to have been pertinent to the failure of successive Governments to successfully implement restorative justice principles and culturally inclusive and respectful education as they apply to the engagement of First Nations young people in the youth justice system. Aptly, the authors have duly profiled socio-political and systemic variables seen to support the ongoing reliance on a “one size fits all” model of program development, service delivery and policy management as the vehicle of choice adopted by Governments in addressing the ongoing over-incarceration and engagement of Indigenous youth in the Australian youth justice system. This is despite the proclamation by Governments of a commitment to restorative justice, systemic transformation and change.

Foreword

vii

Woven throughout the text of this book is a unique and courageous examination of the systemic, political, social and cultural barriers that were deemed to have impeded the ability of successive Governments and service providers to successfully address the appalling statistics pertaining to Indigenous young people in the Australian justice system. Most importantly, the book’s uniqueness rests in the authors’ ability to transcend the inability of many Indigenous Australians to articulate their traumatic experiences within the education and justice systems, and for Governments to re-examine the retention of archaic structures and systems that have been viewed as culturally biased, ineffective and ill-aligned. Uncompromisingly, the authors have provided an account of systemic and structural racism, segregation and isolation, as experienced by Indigenous youth, and afford the reader with a courageous and articulate insight into matters seen as pertinent to the inadequacies of contemporary policies and services in meeting the needs of the youth more effectively, within the justice and education systems. This book provides an easy-to-read enunciation of issues and experiences of young Indigenous people, their families and how their lives have been impacted by colonisation. Although maths is used as a critical mechanism of engagement for the young people involved, the adopted theoretical and epistemological principles have a broader social and systemic application as they take the reader on a cultural and intellectual journey of confrontation, cultural alienation and reform, providing a much-needed challenge to stereotypic meanderings that have for too long supported the imposition of colonial practices and the over-engagement of Indigenous people within the adult and youth justice systems. Whether by design or default, this book will help transcend social, systemic and cultural boundaries by providing the reader with an insight into the plight of Indigenous people in their struggle to overcome the manifestations of colonial influences frequently evident in the lives of Indigenous youth. The authors have provided a concise and articulate analysis of Indigenous engagement in the youth justice system within a framework that articulates the value of the interconnectedness of Western and cultural theoretical provisions and discourse that has emanated from the successful engagement of Indigenous young people themselves, their Elders and communities. This book will prove to be a milestone in the development of a new political, systemic, cultural and ideological dialogue between Governments, service providers and First Nations people, where Western and cultural knowledge can be seen as neither dominant nor subservient to each other in the quest to successfully accomplish the principles of justice reinvestment, Closing the Gap and other policies espoused by all levels of government over the last 50 years, with little, if any, evidence of impact or reform. The authors respectfully profile the variances, intersections and nuances between two distinct theoretical and operational frameworks, treating the reader to an intricate analysis of colonisation from within a cultural lens, affording them an insightful understanding of the contemporary manifestations in the lives of Indigenous young people and their families.

viii

Foreword

Whether the reader is a professional or layperson, scholar, Elder, student or Government representative, this book will prove to be an inspirational and innovative source for those committed to addressing inadequacies in current structures charged with the responsibility of developing initiatives to support the psychosocial, cultural and familial development of First Nations youth. The historical and contemporary prominence of this book will be evidenced by its impact as an important educational tool for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people alike, raising awareness of the systemic barriers that can be overcome through the adoption of practices and programs that profile and value the unique scholarship of bi-cultural knowledge, theoretical frameworks and worldviews. In highlighting the historic and contemporary anomalies in Indigenous Affairs, the authors provide a critical framework that will stand as an influential guide for governments and allied professions committed to the development and delivery of more culturally aligned, inclusive and proactive social policies, programs and services for Indigenous young people and their families in youth justice, education, social justice, health and human rights. The imposition and confluence of punitive-driven policies and practices adopted by successive Governments since colonisation have contributed to a protracted history of programs and policies that have failed to effectively address the needs of Indigenous Australians. The current crisis across adult corrections and youth justice has many questioning the capacity of the current systems and structures to successfully address the psychosocial and systemic variables required to rehabilitate young offenders. The authors provide a compelling account of a proactive approach to supporting Indigenous youth in the education and justice system that moves beyond the historical rhetoric, to one that can evidence the practical adoption of a more culturally and systemically inclusive approach to breaking the back of Indigenous youth incarceration. At a point when the Australian Government has committed to working more collegially with Indigenous people to negotiate social and systemic change, this book echoes the sentiments of many Elders and social analysists, who over many years have advocated that a more concise and culturally apt assessment of social policy practices and programs for Indigenous Australians is not only warranted, but urgently required. This book will prove to be a challenging and yet cathartic resource for governments, service providers, industry providers and the broader community committed to addressing the historical and contemporary injustices experienced by Indigenous people, families and communities, and those who seek to advance more proactive ways in which to address social determinants that for too long have been recognised as a critical trajectory to the ongoing over-incarceration of Indigenous people in the adult and youth justice systems. Australia is at an important juncture in its progression as a lead nation that prides itself on embracing humanitarian values and in taking ownership of historical and contemporary injustices that have contributed to the over-incarceration of Indigenous people in the justice system.

Foreword

ix

From a cultural, systemic, social and political perspective, this book will prove to be a powerful vehicle in the development of a more proactive approach for any level of government willing to commit to the transformation required in systems pertinent to the engagement of Indigenous youth in justice, health, education and aligned areas, and as such, it has the promise of becoming a resource of national influence. Prof. Boni Robertson Adjunct, Macquarie University Sydney, Australia

Acknowledgment

The authors acknowledge that the project reported in this book was funded by the Australian Research Council—Indigenous Discovery Project IN150100045: Unlocking the learning potential of incarcerated Indigenous and low SES young people: Mathematics outcomes for future success.

xi

Contents

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile Detention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia . . . . . . . . . Unlocking the Learning Potential of Indigenous and Low Socioeconomic Young People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview of This Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Over-Representation of Indigenous Young People in the Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors that Contribute to the Over-Representation of Indigenous Youth in Juvenile Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Historical Factors and Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mental Health Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intellectual Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low Educational Attainment and Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social, Economic and Political Disadvantage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People in Detention: Critical Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Status Quo or That Which is Our Responsibility to Understand . . . . Challenges in Supporting Young People in the Justice System . . . . . . . . . Diversionary Programs in the Youth Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Towards a Philosophical Understanding of Our Responsibility . . . . . . . . . Towards an Ontological Understanding of the Historical and Social Complexities of the Incarceration of Indigenous Youth: Drawing upon the Three Levels of the Critical Realist Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 3 10 14 17 21 22 23 26 28 30 32 34 35 37 38 43 44 44 45 47

47

xiii

xiv

Contents

Three Levels of Critical Realism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Critical Realist Concept of Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48 49 52 52

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention . . . . . . . . . Causes for Concern: Research Gaps and Misunderstandings . . . . . . . . . . . Remembering, Observing and Analysing Maths Teaching Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instruction-Based Approaches to Teaching Maths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Challenges of Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Challenges of Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task (CDAT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Challenges of Assessment and Differentiation (Grouping) . . . . . . Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57 58

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile Detention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CRP: Ways of Life, Seeing the World and Taking Action Against Injustice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CRP and Community Cultural Wealth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CRP and Meaningful Long-Term Sustainable Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CRP: Privileging Indigenous Voices, Identities and Role Models . . . . . . . Indigenous Voices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Strengthening Indigenous Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Positive Indigenous Role Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CRP: Strength-Based Approach to Professional Development . . . . . . . . . . Strong and Smart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Crossing Cultures: Hidden History Posters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engoori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CRP: Collaborative Development and Resource Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60 63 64 65 66 66 67 74 75 84 85 87 88 93 94 97 98 99 100 104 104 106 106 107 108 109 111 111

Contents

6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conflicting Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Continuing Concerns and Way Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

xv

115 116 119 123 124

Appendix A: Teacher Demographic Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Appendix B: Teacher Efficacy Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1

Fig. 1.2 Fig. 1.3 Fig. 4.1 Fig. 4.2 Fig. 4.3 Fig. 4.4 Fig. 4.5 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 5.2

Fig. 5.3 Fig. 5.4

Fig. 5.5 Fig. 5.6

Number of young people in detention on an average night in Queensland, June quarter of 2020 (AIHW 2020a) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Example of network interview analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Network sociogram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Guiding Reading 2 Learn framework for teachers (Rose 2016) (Reproduced with permission of the author) . . . . . . . . . . . . Place value chart (Reproduced with permission of the author) . . . Place value explanation (Reproduced with permission of the author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task: Number 2A (Baturo and Cooper 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Answers and objectives for Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task: Number 2A (Baturo and Cooper 2008) . . . . . . . Culturally responsive pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RAMR cycle (Matthews 2009) (Reproduced with permission of the author who identified the recent change of name from RAMR Cycle to Goompi Model) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Salty plums (CRP poster developed through the project by Ewing and Sarra) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jonathon Thurston positive role model (CRP poster developed through the project by Ewing and Sarra. Images of Jonathon Thurston reproduced with his permission) . . . . . . . . . Engoori cycle (Gorringe and Spillman 2008) (Reproduced with the authors’ permission) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Turtle tagging (CRP poster developed through the project by Ewing and Sarra) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6 13 13 71 72 73 77 78 94

100 102

105 108 110

xvii

List of Tables

Table 1.1

Table 1.2

Table 1.3

Table 2.1

Table 2.2

Table 4.1

Young people under supervision on an average day(a) by sex and Indigenous status, Queensland, 2020–21 (AIHW 2022) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Young people aged 10–17 under supervision on an average day by socioeconomic position of usual residence, states and territories, 2018–19 (AIHW 2020b) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Young people aged 10–17 under supervision on an average day by socioeconomic position of usual residence, Indigenous and non-Indigenous 2018–19 (AIHW 2020b) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) . . . . . . . . . . . Young people by Indigenous status and number of community-based supervised orders, 2020–21 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2022. Youth justice in Australia 2020–21) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Young people under supervision during the year by Indigenous status, sex and remoteness of usual residence, Australia, 2020–21 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2022. Youth justice in Australia 2020–21) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview of Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task: Number 2A—results administered at the centre (30 students, 43 questions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5

7

8

24

25

79

xix

Chapter 1

The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile Detention

Abstract This introductory chapter focuses on children and young people who have been placed in juvenile detention in Queensland, Australia. Research has documented that these children and young people, particularly those from low socioeconomic backgrounds and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, have experienced education failure and disadvantage. We discuss why the laws that prosecute children are imprecise tools for deterring juvenile crime because they do not consider holistically the natural development differences of children. The chapter draws on Rule 11a of the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (1990) to explain the terms used to describe children, establishing the foundation for presenting an overview of data on children and young people under supervision—community-based or detention. Critical discussion about the need to consider socioeconomic and policy development when looking at the crimes that these children commit is provided. We explain the provision of education for detained children and young people and in doing so, propose a culturally responsive approach to supporting them in their mathematics learning while detained. The chapter also overviews our project’s purpose, research design and excerpts from the data gathered.

Josiah, a fifteen-year-old Indigenous student, was in maths class one morning at the youth detention centre. Sitting across from him were four other students about the same age. A discussion about what strategies might be used to solve a specific mathematics task—finding the mean of Jonathon Thurston’s total tries for the 2017 National Rugby League season— ensued. Josiah did not engage in this discussion. With a dark shaded pair of sunglasses covering his eyes and his red cap resting just above his glasses, he sat looking out through the classroom window. He barely moved for the duration of the lesson, about 30 minutes. Instead, he was transfixed, almost in a hypnotic state. He did not speak. The other students continued with the maths task. When the lesson was finished all the students left the room under the guidance and security of Security Welfare staff. I didn’t see Josiah again, but I was left thinking, what has happened in this young person’s life that he has ended up in a youth detention centre. (Bronwyn)

We had read about the nexus between children and young people progressing deeper into the juvenile justice system and the likelihood of them experiencing abuse, neglect, mental health challenges and intellectual disability (Cashmore 2011; Feld 2019; Humes 2015). We had also read that the younger a child is when first having contact with juvenile justice, then the more likely it is the child will become © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0_1

1

2

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

entrenched in the justice system (Cunneen et al. 2013; Drinan 2018). We were acutely aware that most young people who have come into contact with the youth justice system, either through community-based supervision or detention, are from lower socioeconomic areas. All of this caused us to wonder: Was Josiah incarcerated because of neglect and poverty or for committing a criminal offence? Was he incarcerated because he had become entrenched in the juvenile justice system? How was juvenile detention education going to single-handedly eradicate discrimination, segregation, homelessness, access to further education, unemployment and concentrated poverty? The intersection of these factors makes Indigenous and low socioeconomic children and young people a target for the school to juvenile detention centre pipeline. Troubling questions like these drive the research and pedagogical intervention presented in this book. Through our work with Indigenous and non-Indigenous children and young people and their teachers, we seek to address the evident inadequacy and inequity of educational provision within Australia’s juvenile detention system. In particular, we focus on the plight of Indigenous detainees like Josiah who are significantly over-represented within the Australian criminal justice system. We explore the evidence around this disparity, and its apparent association with the social and economic disadvantage they face through the enduring impacts of colonialism. This book outlines the findings and outcomes of our recent Australian Research Council Indigenous Discovery project: Unlocking the learning potential of Indigenous and low socio-economic young people’s learning potential: Mathematics for future success (IN150100045). It documents the depth of challenges that children and young people present when placed in juvenile detention in Queensland, Australia. It is about children who make wrong decisions or choose violence and crime to get what they want. It is also about children and young people who have been marginalised and/or excluded from the education system—a system that is frequently touted as both the problem and the solution to young people’s involvement with juvenile justice (Pytash and Kosko 2020). Low academic achievement is linked to higher rates of recidivism (Clancey et al. 2020; Drinan 2018; Flores 2016). Thus, the project reported here is the product of our efforts to understand children and young people and the efficacy of laws and education enacted to address their delinquency and criminal behaviour. Based on the findings of this project and our extensive experience as educators, we describe a culturally responsive and constructive education for juvenile detention centres as a model of education for children and young people who are detained This model—Culturally Responsive Pedagogy—responds to the lived experiences of children and young people and the realities they face in the third decade of the twentyfirst century (Gay 2018; Sarra and Ewing 2021). In addition to being evidence-based, this model is framed theoretically by Critical Realism (Bhaskar 2008; Mackie 2020) and the notion of community cultural wealth (Love 2019; Yosso 2005) for teaching maths and numeracy to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and low socioeconomic children and young people in juvenile detention.

In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia

3

In discussing this project, we acknowledge the social complexities inherent in the experience of young Indigenous people, and the urgent need for alternative educational approaches that are based on deep cultural understandings: Inscribed in the small plaques that lined a garden in the youth detention centre were the names of children who spent time in the centre but had since died. The simplicity of the arrangement of the plaques belied its complexities. As a visiting researcher and former classroom teacher, how could I logically and justly equate a child’s education and life experiences in a mainstream school with that of a child in a juvenile detention centre school—equating a child’s behaviour and life experiences with that of education? (Bronwyn)

In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia Educating children as children who have made wrong decisions or who have chosen violence and crime, instead of simply as a child, is not just. Laws that prosecute children are not merely imprecise tools designed to deter juvenile crime; they are largely ineffective because they do not recognise the natural developmental differences of children (Corriero 2006; Cunneen et al. 2013; Drinan 2018; Feld 2019; Humes 2015; Scott 2000). To penalise children for not exercising the degree of judgement that is expected of adults is flawed reasoning (Corriero 2006; Feld 2019). From a moral standpoint, it is misguided to equate the failings of a child with those of an adult because there are greater possibilities for a child’s behaviour to be reformed. From our experiences of raising teenagers, we are reminded of the powerful pull of peer pressure, yet children and young people in Australia are essentially penalised for not resisting negative peer pressure through the application of standards of culpability that would be expected to apply to adults. That is not to say that a 14-year-old cannot know right from wrong, but how can they be held accountable for not exercising a level of maturity that they are not physically, emotionally or intellectually expected to possess? The terms child, minor, juvenile, young person, youth and children are used in this book to include persons under the age of 18 (United Nations 1990, Rule 11a). Australia is a signatory to all significant treaties that impact children’s rights (Law Library of Congress 2007). The rights and protection of children are governed by federal, state and territory law. Under Australian law, the age of majority is 18. In many areas of law, however, a person under the age of 18 may make decisions or be deemed old enough to be legally responsible for their actions (Law Library of Congress 2007). In relation to the criminal justice system in Australia, the starting point is children aged 10 and above (10 is the age of criminal responsibility). The Convention on the Rights of the Child, re-draft of General Comment 10, General Comment 24 (United Nations 2007a) recommends that all countries increase the minimum age of responsibility to at least 14 years of age. The Australian government has rejected this call (Human Rights Law Centre 2021). Australia’s National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 16/21* (Australian Government 2020) states that:

4

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile … State and territory governments recognise the importance of maintaining separate places of detention for children and adults, ensuring this separation in the vast majority of circumstances. In all Australian jurisdictions, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is currently 10 years. There is a rebuttable presumption that a child aged between 10 and 14 is not criminally responsible, meaning the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the child knew their conduct was wrong (called doli incapax). Noting that each jurisdiction is responsible for its own legislated minimum age of criminal responsibility, the Council of Attorneys-General established a cross-jurisdictional working group in November 2018 to consider whether the age should be raised. On 27 July 2020, the Council of Attorney-s General noted the need for further work before a decision on any change to the age is made, including provision of adequate processes and services for children who exhibit offending behaviour. The Northern Territory has separately committed to raising the age of criminal responsibility to 12 years.

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) (Attorney-General’s Department 2021) takes place every five years and involves a United Nations Human Rights Council peer-reviewed process of the human rights record of each United Nations Member State. In 2021, over 30 Member States recommended that Australia raise the age of criminal responsibility “so that children as young as ten are not prosecuted and jailed”. Yet Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are over-represented in Australian juvenile detention centres (Human Rights Law Centre 2021): Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children between the ages of 10 and 14 make up almost two thirds of the children in that age group locked away behind bars. The expert United Nations Child Rights Committee has previously stated that 14 is the minimum age at which children should be held legally responsible.

On an average day in Queensland during 2020–2021, there were 1,609.5 children and young people aged 10–17 under supervision (community-based or detention). This represents 34% of the Australian total of 4,694.8 for an average day (AIHW 2020–21) (see Table 1.1). 948.5 or 59.9% were Indigenous children and young people, while for non-Indigenous the figure was 647.9 or 39.7%. Of the male children and young people under supervision in Queensland, 718.4 or 57% were Indigenous, and 523.9 or 41.7% were non-Indigenous. Of the female children and young people, 230.1 or 64% were Indigenous, and 124 or 9.8% were non-Indigenous. For those not identified as Indigenous or non-Indigenous, 11.1 or 0.9% were male and 2 or 0.15% were female. In Queensland, 52.3% of the total Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population is under 25 years (ABS 2022b). Those aged 10–17 were about 16 times as likely as non-Indigenous children and young people to be under supervision (AIHW 2022), almost 16 times as likely to be under community-based supervision, and about 18 times as likely to be in detention. These vulnerable children and young people experience some type of trauma and as upsetting as this sounds, medical and health experts now know that this trauma is intergenerational and emerges from the injustices of racial, colonial and genocidal policies such as the white Australia assimilation policy (Australian Human Rights Commission 1997; Wenitong 2021). We need to change the way we do things to improve their life outcomes.

In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia Table 1.1 Young people under supervision on an average day(a) by sex and Indigenous status, Queensland, 2020–21 (AIHW 2022) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare)

5

Sex

Indigenous status

Male

Indigenous

718.4

1,686.5

Non-indigenous

523.9

2,066.5

Not stated

11.1

59.8 3,812.8

Indigenous

230.1

453.2

Non-indigenous

124.0

415.3

Not stated Total

Australia

1,253.4

Total Female

Qld

2.0

12.5

Total

356.1

881.1

Indigenous

948.5

2,140.7

Non-indigenous

647.9

2,481.8

13.1

72.3

1,609.5

4,694.8

Not stated Total

(a) Number of young people on an average day may not sum to total due to rounding. – represents zero or rounded to zero Source AIHW Youth Justice National Minimum Dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2020–21

Figure 1.1 provides an overview of the number of young people in detention on an average night in June 2020 in Queensland. A breakdown of this number is provided showing the proportion by legal status, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and female and male. There is increasing evidence that juvenile detention is not an appropriate environment for younger children (AIHW 2021; Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory 2017). The Australian Human Rights Commission (2020) and the Human Rights Law Centre (2021) strongly recommended that all Australian Governments raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility to at least 14 years. The consensus is that developments and neuroscientific evidence show that adolescent brains continue to mature beyond teenage years, and therefore countries should have a higher minimum age, for instance 15 or 16 years. Irrespective of age, recent work has focused on developmental factors or risk factors associated with offending, and protective factors that are likely to prevent such behaviour. Both risk and protective factors are viewed within the categories of the child, family, school context, life events, community and cultural factors (Australian Human Rights Commission 2020; Cunneen et al. 2013; Homel et al. 2015). For example, children and young people engaging, participating and achieving in school are less likely to commit offences, and those disengaged from school and underachieving are more likely to offend. Young people who have high levels of educational achievement and success and high employment aspirations are less likely to commit offences. Young people strongly attached to their parents and who have a strong

6

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

Fig. 1.1 Number of young people in detention on an average night in Queensland, June quarter of 2020 (AIHW 2020a) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare)

sense of belonging are less likely to offend. Young people who have friendships with criminals are more likely to commit crimes (Cunneen et al. 2013). Although there are dangers with making generalisations about children, young people and juvenile justice, these factors have been found to be associated with those brought into the juvenile justice system (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2020). Their involvement is also affected by the intersectionality of policy developments in areas such as child protection, accommodation and housing assistance services, education, employment, family and community services and health. Children from areas of greatest socioeconomic disadvantage were ten times more likely than those living in areas of least disadvantage to be under supervision (140 per 100,000 compared with 14 per 100,000) (AIHW 2020d). Table 1.2 details children and young people aged 10–17 who are under supervision on an average day by socioeconomic position (1 being the lowest and 5 the highest). This position is a

In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia

7

Table 1.2 Young people aged 10–17 under supervision on an average day by socioeconomic position of usual residence, states and territories, 2018–19 (AIHW 2020b) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) SES

NSW

Vic

WA

SA

Tas

ACT

1 (low)

398

229

694

158

135

101

2

42

1,758

2

358

114

518

255

30

15

–

12

1,303

3

179

154

296

172

18

10

1

54

885

4

113

65

119

99

15

4

27

16

458

5 (high) Total US

Qld

NT

Australia

116

50

44

41

4

1

32

7

294

1,284

667

1,675

725

207

131

66

158

4,914

1. Some young people excluded due to missing or invalid postcodes or because the postcode was not listed in the SEIFA file 2. The ACT has highly diverse suburbs with advantaged households in close proximity to disadvantaged households. It has a high proportion of the most relatively disadvantaged persons residing in areas classified by SEIFA as being less disadvantaged. In this respect, the ACT is unique and comparisons with other jurisdictions should be made with caution 3. SEIFA quintiles are calculated based on postcodes across the whole of Australia, and therefore some socioeconomic areas are not found in all states and territories Source AIHW Youth Justice National Minimum Dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2018–19

measure of how ‘well off’ a person, group or area is (AIHW 2018). Youth Justice National Minimum Dataset reporting uses the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), developed by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), to analyse the socioeconomic position of the usual residence of children and young people under supervision. Of the children and young people in Queensland (1,675), 1,212 or 72% are in the lower SES positions (1 and 2) and make up 25% of Australian children and young people under supervision. Risk factors associated with the socioeconomic position, such as inadequate housing or homelessness, poor health, education failures and life events render these children and young people highly vulnerable and more likely to be involved in the juvenile justice system (Australian Human Rights Commission 2020; Cunneen et al. 2013; Homel et al. 2015). Their vulnerability increases if they are Indigenous, as shown in Table 1.3. Of the total population of children and young people under supervision in Australia, on an average day by sex, Indigenous status and lower socioeconomic positions (1 and 2), 1,532 were Indigenous males and 1,268 were non-Indigenous males. There were 370 Indigenous females and 287 non-Indigenous females. Across all socioeconomic positions, 47% were Indigenous and 52% were non-Indigenous. In Queensland Juvenile Detention Centres, 175 children and young people are on remand (84% are boys and 16% are girls), and 70% are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Department Children Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs 2018). The average remand duration is 36 days. Of the children and young people in detention, 36 are sentenced, and 78% are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (92% are males and 8% are females). The average sentence duration is 72 days.

8

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

Table 1.3 Young people aged 10–17 under supervision on an average day by socioeconomic position of usual residence, Indigenous and non-Indigenous 2018–19 (AIHW 2020b) (Source Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) Sex

Socioeconomic areas

Male

1 (lowest)

880

758

15

1,653

2

652

510

12

1,174

Female

Non-Indigenous

Not stated

Total

3

343

505

3

852

4

123

284

2

408

5 (highest)

65

190

2

257

1 (lowest)

193

169

4

367

2

177

118

3

298

3

95

109

2

205

4

50

74

–

124

5 (highest)

19

61

–

80

2

829

628

15

1,472

3

439

614

5

1,058

4

173

358

2

532

5 (highest) Total US

Indigenous

84

251

2,695

2,938

2 61

337 5,694

(a) Number of young people on an average day may not sum to total due to rounding Note Some young people excluded due to missing or invalid postcodes or because the postcode was not listed in the SEIFA file Source AIHW Youth Justice National Minimum Dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2018–19

Socioeconomic and policy developments need to be considered when looking at the offences of children and young people. Australia and its youth deserve a system of justice that not only holds them accountable but also protects and nurtures those who can learn from their mistakes in ways that are borne out of policy developments. The challenge is to discover children and young people’s potential and destiny and then nurture them, so that they achieve their possibilities. The juvenile justice process can play an important role in socialising children and young people, by viewing their transgressions as an opportunity to socialise and educate. This, in turn, presupposes that juvenile justice systems have a fair opportunity to provide an education that exposes children and young people to acceptable standards of inspirational teaching. While these children and young people are seeking to recover from missed years of schooling, their desire can be quickly quashed by uninspired teaching, discipline and a curriculum driven by photocopied work booklets and worksheets. Education of children is compulsory in most countries including Australia. Children of compulsory school age in juvenile detention have the right to education that prepares her or him for returning to society and where appropriate provides vocational education training that prepares her or him for future employment. In line with Article 14 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

In Search of Social Justice for Juvenile Detainees in Australia

9

(2007a), every Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child has “the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination”: States shall, in conjunction with Indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for Indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language. (United Nations 2007a; see also United Nations 2007b)

The age between which children must be educated varies internationally and nationally across jurisdictions but is generally between the ages of five to sixteen. The United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (United Nations 1990, 2007b) state that such education should be provided external to the detention facility in community schools wherever possible and, in any case, by qualified teachers through programs integrated with the education system of the country so that after release juveniles may transition back into their education without difficulty. Education and vocational training programs are provided in Queensland juvenile detention centres. All detained children and young people must participate (Department of Youth Justice 1992). When viewed as school students, children and young people in detention have traits that are commonly associated with special education needs (Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory 2017). Therefore, juvenile detention centres are required to provide specialist support and attention to juveniles of foreign origin or with particular cultural or ethnic needs. Juveniles who are illiterate or have cognitive or learning difficulties have the right to special education. Research into juvenile detention has established that children and young people in juvenile detention have not had successful schooling experiences and require special education programs. Many children and young people in juvenile detention have poor levels of literacy and numeracy (Drinan 2018; Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory 2017). Despite the equitable intentions and goals of public education, schooling can reinforce inequalities among poor and disadvantaged students and students from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds. Negative relationships with schools and teachers contribute to further disengagement in school and classroom instruction, which are indicators of poorer academic outcomes (Cashmore 2011; Sarra 2011a). This relationship might also contribute to the lack of effectiveness of many traditional instructional approaches used in juvenile detention centres (Jacobi 2008). Yet policymakers and educators continue to identify education as vital to reducing recidivism. One answer is to re-think how teaching and learning activities are defined, planned and implemented. This book focuses on enhancing maths and numeracy learning activities. Alternative maths and numeracy opportunities invite a different set of motivations, expectations and achievements. An alternative approach may engage children and young people who associate conventional schooling with failure and disappointment by offering them creative and innovative ways to unlock their learning potential in

10

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

maths and numeracy that are culturally responsive and interconnect with community cultural wealth (Yosso 2005).

Unlocking the Learning Potential of Indigenous and Low Socioeconomic Young People In 2016, we embarked on our Indigenous Discovery project (ARC IN150100045) with the aim to develop new knowledge and understandings that explain the efficacy of mathematics instruction at one juvenile detention centre in Queensland, Australia; and to enhance engagement in learning that built on the young people’s funds of knowledge and experiences. More specifically, the project explored Indigenous children and young people’s existing maths knowledge with respect to their culture and integrated this with maths and numeracy learning required for understanding, academic progression, future employment and life opportunities. With this project’s aim, it was critical to find out how children and young people’s maths and numeracy knowledge could be used as an enabling feature to unlock their learning potential in maths, related to the actions of their teacher. We sought insight into how teachers taught maths to improve the learning experiences of the children and young people. From investigating these interactions, the project identified a pedagogical approach for teaching maths and numeracy to children and young people in juvenile detention centres—Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP) (Gay 2018; Sarra and Ewing 2021). To create a new theoretical framework, the study drew on two frameworks of understanding: Boyd’s (2007) Teaching and Learning Coaching Initiative used in studies to improve the teaching and learning of maths; and Sarra’s Strong and Smart— Towards a Pedagogy for Emancipation (2011a, 2012). Boyd’s framework, used with individual teachers in classrooms, was useful for improving teachers’ pedagogy, and identifying their learning needs and how to meet those needs. It had not been used previously to study teachers teaching maths in juvenile justice centre schools. In this framework, teachers are considered leaders and enablers who support one another through the process of change to unlock the learning potential of young people such as those in this project. For Boyd (2007, p. 13): … the development of a professional culture in schools where classroom observations, conversations and reflection on what makes good learning and teaching become a regular and valued part of a school day. Such steps work towards the creation of a collaborative work-culture and learning community across the whole school.

Chris Sarra’s approach provided a structure for examining the negative perceptions of being Aboriginal, incarcerated and a poor learner. It enabled the young people and their teachers to reflect and use positive discourses about what it means to be Aboriginal (2011b). Sarra’s (2011a, 2012) framework, which is used in leadership programs across Australia to transform education, is particularly useful for understanding Aboriginal perceptions of being Aboriginal, school strategies to reinforce

Unlocking the Learning Potential of Indigenous and Low …

11

Aboriginal identity and the impact of strategies that reinforce Aboriginal identity and how they contribute to unlocking young people’s potential to learn. Although it has been used in many mainstream schools, it has not been used to investigate incarcerated young people’s potential to build on their maths knowledge and understandings. Our study was guided also by the decolonising methodology of Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2021) in that we collaborated with Indigenous and low SES young people and mentors and focused on improving learning outcomes—ensuring that ‘the researched’ benefitted. In order to provide actionable findings about the teaching and learning of maths, the study adopted a mixed methods case study design (Yin 2009). It gained quantitative data via pre- and post-diagnostic assessment of children and young people, an efficacy survey of teachers and students, and a teacher locus of control survey. The qualitative component focused on observations, semi-structured interviews and focus group interviews. Some of this data will be presented through this book. The appendices provide examples of the instruments used in the study. The study’s participants were two administrators; ten teachers; two groups of mentors (an internal group (n = 6) belonging to the Child Safety Cultural Unit and an external group (n = 6) in one regional community from where the students sometimes come); and 118 non-Indigenous and Indigenous children and young people who were students at the Centre. The research site, which is referred to in this book as the Centre, was a secure custody facility for high-risk juvenile offenders where they are either remanded in custody or sentenced to a period of detention. Within the Centre, there is a state high school with a culturally diverse student population including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, M¯aori, Pacific-Islander and non-Indigenous students. Student numbers at the Centre varied and could range from 90 up to 140 at any one time. Many reflect the tendency mentioned previously that once a young person enters the juvenile justice system breaking the offending cycle becomes difficult (Armitage 2012; Drinan 2018; Feld 2019; Humes 2015). In part, this is because the causes of the offending behaviour are likely to be entrenched and therefore complex and challenging. Teaching staff include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, Samoan, Fijian Indian, Hong Kong Chinese, Ghanaian and non-Indigenous Australian maths teachers. The children’s and young people’s maths achievement is routinely assessed through the use of a pen and paper test on their entry into the Centre. They have been identified as achieving at levels anywhere from 2 to 10 years behind their peers in other schools. The duration of time they typically spend at the Centre is from 3 to 4 months, although for some this could be shorter or longer. There is a high incidence of recidivism. The young people are enrolled in Certificate Courses that largely focus on life skills and employability. Given this context, the maths teachers who elected to participate in the research were keen to improve their maths pedagogy to enhance the young people’s learning and achievement. Through our data collection and analysis, we gained in-depth insights into the ongoing learning, teaching and diagnostic testing that the students experience during their detention. Data collection, specifically designed for each participant group,

12

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

involved surveys, interviews and observation and document reviews, then administered and analysed, to complement the interviews, observations and document reviews. The surveys, which provided numerical data for quantitative analysis, comprised (a) Teacher Setting and Demographic survey, focused on years of teaching experience, qualifications and experience working with equity groups; (b) Teacher Efficacy scale; (c) Teacher Locus of Control survey; and (d) Student Attitudinal Scale. The interview data were combined and reduced and categories were identified drawing on NVivo and thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke 2006). Components of the data were further analysed using specific features of discourse analysis (Fairclough 1995, 2003) to provide a stronger base for rich descriptions of cases (teachers, students and mentors). Such features included declarative mood and expressive modality. The key themes derived from the interview data were then used as prompts for network sociogram and analysis (Mørch et al. 2014). Network interviews were used as a way of exploring further the teachers’ initial interview responses. This strategy provided a model of how specific themes are related or interconnected to each other. The teachers were asked to prioritise the themes derived from the semi-structured interviews—such as pedagogy, assessing student understanding, extrinsic/intrinsic rewards, one-on-one teaching, differentiation, embedding Indigenous perspectives, classroom management and instructional strategies—in order of significance and to discuss their reasoning for doing so. Then they were individually interviewed about their networks. Figure 1.2 provides an example of the pedagogy network analysis based on the responses of Robert (a pseudonym). A vignette from Robert’s network interview further elaborates his justification for selecting classroom management: You know, it’s hard to get the kids to start. Like get them settling down to begin work. So takes a lot of time; they be moving around, shouting in the classroom. And yeah, I find it really hard to get them started. Like getting them settled. So if they’re not settled in the beginning, we give instruction to them, but they sometimes don’t follow. A few will, and others—those are sitting. If they see others moving around, they will also kind of follow them. Becomes hard. And they see because sometime—no, most of the time, my classes come first. So when they are moving down, others are coming. They’ll be shouting, banging the windows. So there’s such a range.

Robert’s response indicates some challenges of managing his class, in particular the difficulty associated with the time it takes to settle students, especially if they are transitioning from other classes or from the student residences either at the beginning of the morning session or after lockdown. He further indicates how the range of students, between those that settle and those who take more time, impacts managing the class to begin teaching. Figure 1.3 represents a network sociogram involving interviews with five teachers, after the network analysis was complete.

Unlocking the Learning Potential of Indigenous and Low …

Fig. 1.2 Example of network interview analysis

Fig. 1.3 Network sociogram

13

14

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

Looking broadly at the network represented by the sociogram, it is evident that embedding Indigenous perspectives is not a key priority for the Centre’s teachers. Rather, considerations of assessment, instructional strategies, differentiation, classroom management and one-on-one teaching take precedence. This was a concerning finding given the evidence that this study and our previous research had uncovered about the relationship between lack of attention to students’ cultural backgrounds and their underachievement in the Australian school system. Consequently, the final and critical phase of the project was to design and develop a tailored program to unlock and support the learning potential of children and young people in juvenile detention which is presented in this book. The program is built on over ten years of research that we have conducted with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and low socioeconomic schools and communities across Australia (Du Plessis and Ewing 2017; Ewing 2017; Ewing et al. 2009; Ewing et al. 2014; Sarra and Ewing 2021; Sarra et al. 2011). It addresses the urgent need for effective maths and numeracy instruction for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and low socioeconomic students that (a) is culturally responsive, taking account of community cultural wealth such as language, aspirations, familial wisdom and social capital; (b) has the highest expectations; and (c) focuses on maths and numeracy big ideas and connections.

Overview of This Book In this chapter, we have introduced the study that underpins this book and we have argued the need for evidence-based culturally responsive pedagogy in juvenile detention centres. In Chap. 2, we discuss children and young people’s involvement in the youth justice system in Australia with a specific focus on the over-representation and nature of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who are detained in youth detention. We emphasise that individuals involved in the juvenile justice system generally come from disadvantaged backgrounds and have complex needs (AHRC 2020). Experiences of homelessness, poverty, school disengagement, abuse and neglect, drug and alcohol problems, and health concerns affect many of these children. These problems are exacerbated by their “psychosocial immaturity, and their susceptibility to exploitation and peer group pressure” (p. 6). Reasons for the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children include “restrictive bail laws and conditions and mandatory sentencing laws” and socioeconomic factors such as a history of social disadvantage, cultural displacement, trauma and grief, and poor health and living conditions. In Chap. 3, we reveal the forms of education that are provided in juvenile detention centres in Australia. We explain how the individual Australian states hold responsibility for the education of Indigenous young people in juvenile detention. As Koyama (2012, p. 36) identified, short-term detention facilities provide their own schooling and education programs, however the majority either contract or are aligned with

Overview of This Book

15

either local or state education authorities “and are held accountable to the same standards as their public school peers”. Chapter 3 also notes that very little is known about schooling and the types of programs, instructional strategies and curriculum used in youth detention centres both nationally and internationally (Koyama 2012), or about best practices and instructional strategies for educating young people in the centres whether they are placed there on remand or committed. The core focus on custody and security over programming is generally justified by the short-term nature of detention, safety of the youth and prevention of flight before the scheduled court date (Flores 2016; Humes 2015). Some studies of juvenile justice centres have identified particular challenges related to uncertainty about the young people’s length of stays, varied academic needs, delays in record transference, interruptions because of legal meetings, medical appointments and/or testing (Drinan 2018; Feld 2019; Morris 2016). The differing characteristics of young people in detention require understanding in order to allocate appropriate curriculum and resources for special education and related services. In Chap. 4, we outline the findings of our research about maths education within the complex environment of juvenile detention and how maths is taught at the Centre. We position this research in the wider Australian context where student engagement and participation in maths and numeracy learning is increasingly mentioned in national and state policies and curriculum documents with a view to improving student achievement (AAMT, n.d.; ACARA 2016, 2018). Schools and teachers play a critical role in providing a climate of learning that encourages engagement and active student participation. We explain how this study responds to the need highlighted by the Australian Association for Mathematics Teachers (2006) and the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2017) for schools and colleges to provide a high-quality education for all students. The document The Shape of the Australian Curriculum (ACARA 2012) emphasises the importance for teachers to develop in learners the capacity for and skills in analysis and problem solving, and the ability to communicate ideas and information, to plan and organise activities, and to collaborate with others. In the case of maths education, this includes the establishment of strategies for improving student outcomes. Therefore, we explore the practices that are utilised by teachers and those that are effectives and those which further marginalise and exclude young people from learning. In Chap. 5, responding to the previously identified educational needs of young people in juvenile detention, we propose a fresh evidence-based approach to Culturally Responsive Pedagogy. We argue how and why this learning and teaching approach includes community cultural wealth, privileging Indigenous voices, identities and role models. We present associated professional learning and discuss several strategies and our experiences that are culturally responsive to children’s learning in juvenile detention centre schools. More specifically, we elaborate on the use of positive role models, learning about caring for the country and caring for ourselves, and how we used these foci to support the children as they were taught and learned maths in the Centre. Drawing on a range of literature, we demonstrate the significance of our research and the need for an innovative approach to maths education in juvenile detention. The

16

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

importance of positive role models for Indigenous young people has been found to influence their identities and interactions in communities (Sarra 2012). In Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience overt and covert forms of discrimination and racism and are often portrayed negatively in the media (Due and Riggs 2011; Sarra 2012). As Due and Riggs (2011) identified, the Australian media continues to sensationalise issues relating to Indigenous people and perpetuate negative stereotypes about Indigenous people, which contributes to their ongoing disadvantage. Through more affirmative action in the media and elsewhere such as education, such negative perceptions can be challenged so that Indigenous children can “reflect on a more positive Aboriginal identity” (Sarra 2012, p. 167). Schools and teachers must be prepared to engage children in positive discourses about what it means to be Indigenous and to draw on positive role models such as sports stars, artists or members from various Indigenous communities who are making a difference in their profession or their communities. We recognise that privileging Indigenous role models’ voices and experiences will not only assist to dispel the negative views but also cultivate the learning processes for young people to want to learn through the wisdom and experiences that connect to their reality. To raise understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history, we explore colonisation in Australia and how it invokes painful and shameless memories of the atrocities endured by Indigenous Australians. Today, many Indigenous nations in Australia fight for recognition of their land and their connection through “forms of cultural knowledge to natural resources and systems for living within our environments” (Smith 2021, p.1). Therefore, we explain how Indigenous Knowledges and Ways of Doing encompass a holistic approach that is collective and relates to the worldview, relatedness and connection of Indigenous people to Country and Place. Martin in Phillips and Lampert (2012) explores the term relatedness and describes it as the “ultimate premise of Aboriginal worldview and critical to the formation of identity” (p. 27). Relatedness means knowing who you are and where you are from, that is, your Country or Place as an Aboriginal person or a Torres Strait Islander person. Furthermore, through knowledge passed down through generations and lived experiences, the roles and responsibilities expected of Indigenous people from various Aboriginal nations and communities include Caring for the Country. One’s Country or Place includes not only the waterways, lands, animals and sky but also the spiritual connection. Caring for the Country using Indigenous knowledges and ways of doing is important to continuing one of the oldest living cultures in the world. Chapter 6 focuses on how and why the educational reform proposed in this book will advance social justice for young Indigenous Australians. We discuss opportunities and obstacles for achieving this through enhanced maths learning and teaching in juvenile detention centres in Australia. We show the benefits of drawing together with the lived experiences of the authors working with Indigenous children and young people who have been marginalised, excluded and caught in the cycle of disadvantage resulting in making decisions that have led to juvenile detention. We anticipate that the reflections and new possibilities offered in this book can effect change in these young people’s learning and future lives.

References

17

References Armitage, S. (2012). Statement of Steve Armitage. Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry. http://www.childprotectioninquiry.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/161338/Arm itage_Steve.pdf. Attorney-General’s Department. (2021). Universal periodic review—National report of Australia— 2020. https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/human-rights-and-anti-discrimination/uni ted-nations-human-rights-reporting/australias-universal-periodic-review. Australian Association for Mathematics Teachers (AAMT). (n.d.) Reasoning. Top drawer teachers. http://topdrawer.aamt.edu.au/Reasoning. Australian Association for Mathematics Teachers (AAMT). (2006). AAMT standards for excellence. http://www.aamt.edu.au/Better-teaching/Standards. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2022). Queensland: aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population summary. https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/queensland-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-isl ander-population-summary. Australian Curriculum and Assessment Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2012). The shape of the Australian curriculum. Version 4. https://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/The_Shape_of_the_Austra lian_Curriculum_v4.pdf. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2016). NAPLAN. https:// www.acara.edu.au/assessment/naplan. Australian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (ACARA). (2018). F-10 curriculum: Mathematics (Version 8). Australian curriculum. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curric ulum/mathematics/. Australian Government. (2020). National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 16/21: Australia. United Nations. Human Rights Council. https://www.ecoi.net/en/document/2045581.html. Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC). (2020). Review of the age of criminal responsibility: Submission to the Council of Attorneys-General Age of Criminal Responsibility Working Group. https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/ahrc_20200226_submission_cag_ working_group_macr.pdf. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2017). Australian professional standards for teachers. http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-tea chers/standards/list. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2018). Youth justice in Australia 2017–2018. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/19707990-1719-4600-8fce-f0af9d61331c/aihwjuv-116.pdf.aspx?inline=true. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020a). Youth detention population in Australia 2020a. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-detention-population-inaustralia-2020/contents/data-visualisation/number-of-young-people-in-detention. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020b). Youth justice national minimum dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2018–19. Youth justice in Australia 2018–19. https://www.aihw.gov.au/ reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2018-19/data. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020d). Youth justice in Australia 2018– 19. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/a5a364b9-fe69-4d02-9c93-1965a69a3d93/aihw-juv-132. pdf.aspx?inline=true. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2021). Youth justice in Australia 2019– 20. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/e593cc05-884c-4a47-bce6-0dcc76fc1a66/aihw-juv-134. pdf.aspx?inline=true. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2022). Youth justice in Australia 2020–21. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2020-21/con tents/summary. Bhaskar, R. (2008). A realist theory of science (2nd ed.). Routledge.

18

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

Boyd, J. (2007). Teaching and learning coach initiative guidelines. Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77. Cashmore, J. (2011). The link between child maltreatment and adolescent offending: Systems neglect of adolescents. Family Matters, 89, 31–41. Clancey, G., Wang, S., & Lin, B. (2020). Youth justice in Australia: Themes from recent inquiries. In Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice (Vol. 605). Australian Institute of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.52922/ti04725. Corriero, M. (2006). Judging children as children: A proposal for a juvenile justice system. Temple University Press. Cunneen, C., White, R., & Richards, K. (2013). Juvenile justice: Youth and crime in Australia. Oxford University Press. Department of Youth Justice. (1992). Sentence options—Youth justice act 1992. https://www.cyjma. qld.gov.au/resources/dcsyw/youth-justice/publications/sentence-options-yj-act.pdf. Department Children Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs. (2018). Working together, chaing the story: Youth Justice Strategy 2019–2023. Retrieved 31/07/2020 from https://www.cyjma.qld.gov. au/resources/dcsyw/youthjustice/reform/strategy.pdf. Drinan, C. H. (2018). The war on kids: How American juvenile justice lost its way. Oxford University Press. Du Plessis, J., & Ewing, B. (2017). Reasonable adjustments in learning programs: Teaching length, mass and capacity to students with intellectual disability. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(10), 1795–1805. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051018. Due, C., & Riggs, D. (2011). Representations of Indigenous Australians in the mainstream news media. PostPressed. Ewing, B. F. (2017). Theorizing participation, engagement and community for primary and secondary mathematics classrooms. Creative Education, 8(5), 788–812. Ewing, B., Cooper, T., Matthews, C., Baturo, A., & Sun, V. (2009). Tagai mathematics for employment project. YuMi Deadly Centre, Queensland University of Technology. Ewing, B., Sarra, G., Cooper, T. J., & Matthews, C. (2014). Successful outcomes in vocational education and training courses and mathematics: How pedagogy and expectations influence achievement. In B. Käpplinger, N. Lichte, E. Haberzeth, & C. Kulmus (Eds.), Changing configurations in adult education in transitional times: Conference Proceedings (pp. 307–327). European Society for Research on the Education of Adults. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED546478.pdf. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis. Longman. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge. Feld, B. C. (2019). The evolution of the juvenile court: Race, politics, and the criminalizing of juvenile justice. New York University Press. Flores, J. (2016). Caught up: Girls, surveillance, and wraparound incarceration. University of California Press. Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. Homel, R., Freiberg, K., & Branch, S. (2015). CREATE-ing capacity to take developmental crime prevention to scale: A community-based approach within a national framework. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 48(3), 367–385. Human Rights Law Centre. (2021, July 8). Australia rejects UN call to raise the age of criminal responsibility. https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2021/7/8/australia-rejects-un-call-to-raise-the-ageof-criminal-responsibility. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (1997). Bringing them home: Report of the national inquiry into the separation of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families. https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/bringing-them-home-report-1997. Humes, E. (2015). No matter how loud I shout: A year in the life of juvenile court. Simon & Schuster.

References

19

Jacobi, T. (2008). Writing for change: Engaging juveniles through alternative literacy education. Journal of Correctional Education, 59(2), 71–93. Koyama, P. R. (2012). The status of education in pre-trial juvenile detention. Journal of Correctional Education, 63(1), 35–68. Law Library of Congress. (2007). Children’s rights: International laws, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Greece, Iran, Israel, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Nicaragua, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Global Legal Research Directorate. https://tile.loc.gov/storageservices/service/ll/llglrd/2018298966/2018298966.pdf. Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press. Mackie, E. (2020). Future ready Queensland: The role of the state: A philosophical position on public policy for the fourth industrial revolution. Doctoral dissertation, Southern Cross University. https://researchportal.scu.edu.au/esploro/outputs/doctoral/Future-ready-Que ensland--the-role/991012897100202368?institution=61SCU_INST. Mørch, A., Anderson, R., Kaliisa, R., & Litherland, R. (2014). Mixed methods with social network analysis for networked learning: Lessons learned from three case studies. https://www.networ kedlearning.aau.dk/digitalAssets/826/826229_14.-moerch-et-al.---mixed-methods-with-socialnetwork-analysis-for-networked-learning-lessons-learned-from-three-case-studies.pdf. Morris, M. (2016). Pushout: The criminalization of black girls in schools. The New Press. Phillips, J., & Lampert, J. (2012). Introductory Indigenous studies in education: Reflection and the importance of knowing (2nd ed.). Pearson Education. Pytash, K. E., & Kosko, K. W. (2020). Instruction matters: Pedagogical approaches to increase engagement in a juvenile detention center. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 26(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2020.1806068. Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory. (2017). Final report. https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/child-detention/ final-report. Sarra, C. (2011a). Strong and smart—Towards a pedagogy for emancipation: Education for first peoples. Routledge. Sarra, C. (2011b). Transforming Indigenous education. In N. Purdie, G. Milgate, & H. R. Bell (Eds.), Two way teaching and learning: Toward culturally reflective and relevant education (pp. 107– 118). ACER. Sarra, C. (2012). Good morning, Mr Sarra: My life working for a stronger, smarter future for our children. University of Queensland Press. Sarra, G., & Ewing, B. (2021). Culturally responsive pedagogies and perspectives in mathematics. In M. Shay (Ed.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 148–161). Routledge. Sarra, G., Matthews, C., Ewing, B., & Cooper, T. (2011). Indigenous mathematics: Creating an equitable learning environment. In N. Purdie, G. Milgate, & H. R. Bell (Eds.), Two way teaching and learning: Toward culturally reflective and relevant education (pp. 173–188). ACER. Scott, E. S. (2000). The legal construction of adolescence. Hofstra Law Review, 29(2), Article 5. Smith, L. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (3rd ed.). Zed Books. United Nations. (1990). United Nations rules for the protection of juveniles deprived of their liberty. Human Rights. Office of the High Commissioner. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Professio nalInterest/Pages/JuvenilesDeprivedOfLiberty.aspx. United Nations. (2007a). Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples. https://www.un.org/dev elopment/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf. United Nations. (2007b). General comment No. 24 (201x), replacing General Comment No. 10: Children’s rights in juvenile justice. Human Rights. Office of the High Commissioner. https:// www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/CRC/GC24/GeneralComment24.pdf. Wenitong, M. (2021, December 6). Primary health care and ecological approaches to SEWB [Conference presentation abstract]. Indigenous wellbeing conference: Connecting communities

20

1 The Proposition: Towards Culturally Appropriate Education in Juvenile …

and services to close the gap in social & emotional wellbeing, Cairns, Australia. https://astman agement.eventsair.com/QuickEventWebsitePortal/iwc/iwc-program/Agenda/AgendaItemDe tail?id=e4849ee1-a000-4430-9e36-434d62681647. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage. Yosso, T. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8, 69–91.

Chapter 2

Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

Abstract This Chapter discusses the nature of children and young people involved in the juvenile justice system in Australia with a specific focus on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Children involved in the youth justice system generally come from disadvantaged backgrounds and have complex needs. Experiences of homelessness, poverty, school disengagement, abuse and neglect, drug and alcohol problems, and health concerns charactise many of the children. We discuss the atrocities committed by British colonisation and Western imperialism forced upon Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and which are a critical part of the lived realities of families and younger generations who experience intergenerational trauma in Australian society today. Factors that contribute to the over-representation of these children are also presented.

One of our early visits to the youth detention centre—to conduct our research work with maths teachers and young people in the senior level—I remember waiting patiently in the classroom with the teacher and my colleague for the maths class to arrive for their lesson. The young people were always escorted to and from their classes and around the detention centre by security officers, and one of these officers would always be stationed in each of the classrooms during lessons. On this particular day a young Indigenous man named Peter, who was aged between 14 or 15 years old, entered the classroom and appeared full of life, joking with his friends and his teacher. When the maths lesson commenced, my past observations of the teacher showed he would spend a while trying to get his students to pay attention and engage them in the lesson. However, I noticed Peter sat and listened when required and participated in the discussion to complete his tasks in his workbook throughout the duration of the lesson. When his work was completed and checked he was given some time on the computer. I found that when I engaged with Peter to check if he required assistance, he was extremely respectful and appeared to address me as he would one of his Elders, unlike the stereotypical image that is often portrayed to represent young Indigenous and non-Indigenous people incarcerated, in detention centres through the media. Peter was just like you might consider your usual, everyday young student who you would come across in your everyday classrooms. This prompted me to wonder: What is it that tempts or attracts young people to commit a criminal offence that would likely end them up being incarcerated in a detention centre? And what social and economic factors might be at play here? (Grace)

In Australia, it is well documented that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience serious education and health disadvantage (AIHW 2021). This is attributable to the impact of colonisation and decades of education failure to © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0_2

21

22

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

adequately address the multiple needs that Indigenous peoples have continued to endure for many decades (Australian Human Rights Commission 2020; Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory 2017). It is of particular concern that although Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people represent only 3.2% of the total population of Australia (ABS 2022), their young people are significantly over-represented in the juvenile justice system, as discussed in Chap. 1. Magnifying the significance of this over-representation, international studies indicate that Indigenous youth in Canada are incarcerated at a rate 8 times higher than their non-Indigenous counterparts, and American Indians are over-represented in the US justice system (Latimer and Foss 2005). The juvenile justice system in Australia is set up to supervise and manage young people who have committed offences or alleged offences. There are differences across state and territory jurisdictions in the legislation, policies and processes which govern the implementation of their youth justice agencies. However, they are similar in the general processes by which children and young people are sentenced and charged for their offences (AIHW 2020c). A key principle in justice legislation of the juvenile justice system is to supervise young people in the community with the view that detention would be the last alternative if required. This aligns with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), and the Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (“The Beijing Rules”) (1985) which uphold that “children should be deprived of liberty only as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time” (AIHW 2020c, p. 1). The practice, however, often falls short of this principle.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in Australia Indigenous young Australians belong to one of the World’s oldest living cultures with a history that dates back over 65,000 years. However, our Indigenous people have been subjected to various forms of categorisation and disadvantage since the British invasion in 1788 which marks the commencement of British colonisation and Indigenous dispossession. At this time, Australia was claimed under British rule as Terra Nullius, a land belonging to no one (Sarra and Ewing 2021; Shay and Sarra 2021). This assumption was not overturned until the land rights case by Mabo and Others v State of Queensland in 1992 which stated: As the Governments of the Australian colonies, and latterly the Governments of the Commonwealth, States and Territories have alienated or appropriated for their own purposes the land in this country during the last two hundred years, the Australian Aboriginal people have been substantially dispossessed of their traditional land. Their dispossession underwrote the development of the nation. (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner 1995, p. 43)

Western imperialism has been a symbol of destruction and suffering for Indigenous people who have been exploited and suppressed across continents that have been

Over-Representation of Indigenous Young People in the Justice System

23

colonised. Eurocentric superiority entrenched through racial ideologies has played a significant role in the dispossession of Indigenous lands. Colonists characterised Indigenous Australian people as ‘uncivilised’, ‘inferior’, ‘savages’ or doomed to extinction through colonial discourses (Reynolds 1990; Sarra and Shay 2019; Smith 2021). This perception drove the process used to allow the colonisation of Australia. Colonial mindsets and colonial discourses justified the invasion that stole traditional lands and removed and placed Aboriginal people into reserves and missions under legislated government policies and practices such as the Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897. The aim of this approach ostensibly was to ‘protect’ Aboriginal people, although in reality it was designed to control and discipline the native through cruel and hostile practices which were enforced through legal guardianship (Sarra and Shay 2019). As found by the National Inquiry into the Separation of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, Indigenous children were placed in mission dormitories and other institutions including detention centres (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission 1997). Children were told that their families no longer loved them or did not care for them and that they were alcoholics and prostitutes, and “it was in our breed to be like that” (p. 15). This was further reinforced by teaching them to reject Aborigines and their Aboriginality. Counteracting these views, the National Inquiry indicated that the forcible removal of Indigenous children violated their human rights and was racially discriminatory. The atrocities forced upon Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are part of the lived realities of the families and younger generations who are experiencing intergenerational trauma in Australian society today. The findings and recommendations of the Bringing them home report of the above-mentioned National Inquiry highlighted that the disadvantage and dispossession continued through the removal of children. At the time of the Inquiry, Indigenous children were 21 times more likely than their non-Indigenous counterparts to have contact with juvenile justice detention (Wilson 1997, p. 31). Little had changed after 20 years to reduce Indigenous juvenile incarceration. In 2016, this figure had increased to 26 times more likely than non-Indigenous young people in custody (Papalia et al. 2019). The following section provides a breakdown of statistics about Indigenous young people in Australia’s juvenile justice system.

Over-Representation of Indigenous Young People in the Justice System As stated previously in Chap. 1, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people are significantly over-represented in the juvenile justice system. Currently, young Indigenous Australians aged 10–17 were 20 times as likely as young non-Indigenous Australians to be in detention on an average night in the June quarter of 2021; and this fluctuated at 16–25 times the non-Indigenous rate over the 4-year

24

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

period (AIHW 2020c, p. vi). On an average night in the June quarter of 2021, the rate of young Indigenous Australians aged 10–17 in detention ranged from 10 per 10,000 (or 16 young people) in Victoria to 43 per 10,000 (or 86 young people) in Western Australia. For Indigenous young people aged 10–17, on an average day during 2019– 20, the rate of supervision was highest in Western Australia and lowest in Tasmania (201 and 74 per 10,000, respectively) (AIHW 2020a). The rate for Indigenous young people in Western Australia was 2.7 times the rate of Indigenous young people in Tasmania. Across all jurisdictions, the rate of supervision on an average day was higher for Indigenous than non-Indigenous young people. Community-based supervision relates to young people aged 10 and above who are supervised outside detention centres under youth justice control, either for sentenced or unsentenced orders while awaiting a court decision. Unsentenced orders include supervised bail (otherwise known as conditional bail and home detention bail) and mean that young people who have committed offences or alleged offences are released back into the community pending the findings of court actions. Detention refers to young people who are detained whether sentenced or unsentenced depending on their legal orders and legal matters. Australian Institute for Health and Welfare (AIHW) figures cover all Australian states and territories for young Indigenous people aged 10–17 under youth justice supervision on an average day. During 2020–2021, over two-fifths (44%) of young people across state and territory jurisdictions were under community-based supervision orders (see Table 2.1). During 2020–2021, New South Wales had the highest rate of all orders followed by Victoria and then Queensland (see Table 2.2). While Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people represented only 6% of the young people population in Australia, they made up 44% of those under supervision (AIHW 2022). The geographical distribution shown in Table 2.2 indicates that of all those under youth justice supervision in Queensland, 764 or 37% are from outer regional, remote and very remote areas (AIHW 2022). Tables 2.1 and 2.2 provide overviews of the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) across Australia and Queensland. There Table 2.1 Young people by Indigenous status and number of community-based supervised orders, 2020–21 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2022. Youth justice in Australia 2020–21) Number of orders

Indigenous

Non-indigenous

Not stated

Total

1

1,413

1,988

111

3,512

2

747

839

30

1,616

3

447

490

18

955

4

321

295

9

625

5

223

178

4

405

6+

508

615

9

1,132

3,659

4,405

181

8,245

Total

Note Total excludes young people with missing order data Source AIHW Youth Justice National Minimum Dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2020–21

Over-Representation of Indigenous Young People in the Justice System

25

Table 2.2 Young people under supervision during the year by Indigenous status, sex and remoteness of usual residence, Australia, 2020–21 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2022. Youth justice in Australia 2020–21) Sex

Remoteness area

Indigenous

Non-indigenous

Not stated

Male

Major cities in Australia

1077

2930

97

Inner regional Australia

567

601

29

Outer regional Australia

706

257

14

Remote Australia

285

25

4

Female

Total

Very remote Australia

363

15

2

Major cities in Australia

423

679

19

Inner regional Australia

145

150

14

Outer regional Australia

222

46

8

Remote Australia

61

5

–

Very remote Australia

49

6

–

Major cities in Australia

1502

3610

116

Inner regional Australia

712

751

43

Outer regional Australia

929

303

23

Remote Australia

346

29

4

Very remote Australia

412

21

2

4,092

5,016

Total under supervision

244

Notes 1. Some young people excluded due to missing or invalid postcodes or because the postcode was not listed in the Remoteness areas correspondence file 2. Some remoteness areas are not found in all states and territories Source AIHW Youth Justice National Minimum Dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2020–21

are very strong links between socioeconomic position, area and juvenile justice involvement of 10 to 17-year-old Indigenous and non-Indigenous children and young people. More Indigenous children and young people (40%) live in low socioeconomic residences than non-Indigenous young people (32%) (AIHW 2020c). Furthermore, Indigenous youth in detention are younger on average than their non-Indigenous counterparts and tend to come under supervision at a younger age. During 2020–21, 37% of Indigenous young people were first supervised when aged 10–13 compared with about 14% of non-Indigenous young people. The disproportionately high level of Indigenous children and young people in the criminal justice system is a major issue confronting Federal and State Governments’ commitment to ‘closing the gap’ in Indigenous disadvantage (Abbott 2014; Ewing and Sarra 2018). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people are more at risk of incarceration “than at any other time since the release of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody final report in 1991” regardless of increases in government and non-government funding, the judiciary and community efforts and concerns (Baturo and Cooper 2008, p. 7). Of particular concern, Indigenous youth are engaging and participating in criminal activity at an earlier age, therefore increasing

26

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

the possibility of continuing through the juvenile system into the adult system (Ewing and Sarra 2018). Risk factors that have contributed to this over-representation in the juvenile justice system include social and economic disadvantage.

Factors that Contribute to the Over-Representation of Indigenous Youth in Juvenile Justice Researchers have identified many factors that may bring young people into the criminal justice system. For Indigenous youth, the risks may be further exacerbated by historical patterns of colonialism and social disadvantage. Indigenous young people are in the criminal justice system for a range of reasons. They are more likely to (a) be charged with or imprisoned for an offence if they left school early or performed badly at school; (b) be unemployed, abuse drugs or alcohol and experience financial stress; (c) live in a crowded household; or (d) be removed away from their natural family (Australian Government 2010; National Justice Chief Executive Officers Group 2009). Cunneen et al. (2013, pp. 44–45) recommend focusing on 3 important factors in determining why children and young people offend. These include individual, situational and social structural factors. First, individual factors refer to personal characteristics of the offender, such as their intelligence, or any signs of mental illness, substance and/or alcohol abuse when committing the crime. These factors, which may influence individuals’ engagement in criminal behaviour, include • • • •

Choice to commit a crime; Biological reasons; Psychological reasons; Social-psychological reasons (e.g. abusive childhood, lack of love and affection); and • Pathological conditions (i.e. related to mental illness). Second, situational factors refer to the context or circumstances of the criminal offence or deviant behaviour and specific aspects that may have influenced the incident that has taken place. It is important to consider the type of interaction that has transpired between different members of the criminal justice system, the local environment and the nature of this interaction, and how group behaviour has played a part in the activity. Some explanations for these youth offences include • • • •

A result of negative labelling, name-calling; Poor academic performance, alienation; Provision of poor parenting, neglect and lack of supervision; and Homelessness (lack of safe and secure shelter).

Finally, social structural factors refer to crime in terms of broader systems and institutions within society. These concern the relationships between classes, racial

Factors that Contribute to the Over-Representation of Indigenous Youth …

27

groups and gender and include many other social divides. Furthermore, these factors involve social institutions (e.g. employment, education and justice system) and how they respond to offences and criminal behaviour. Reasons for these offences include • Inadequate socialisation (e.g. lack of understanding between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ behaviours); • Colonialism and social disempowerment (e.g. loss or denial of culture); • Racism and discrimination (e.g. negative attitudes/perceptions from system); and • Poverty, inequality and social marginalisation (e.g. inability to achieve desired ends, social exclusion). The above three perspectives highlight the complexity of a young person’s experience of the justice system and the influences on how the crime and offender are portrayed. They indicate how the youth justice system may respond to the offence in consideration of the individual’s characteristics, the situation in terms of the interactions and behaviours between the offender and other persons, and elements within the social factors that have influenced the offender to commit a crime. Research conducted by the Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation and the University of Tasmania (2016) focused on participants who had family networks associated with the youth justice system. It privileged the voices of young Indigenous people to be heard. It shared individuals’ views and stories that described their life experiences of feeling lost and living in a world with little hope of success that did not acknowledge and respect Aboriginal culture, family, language and law. A participant stated that to obtain success, “working hard is good, but you only succeed if you’re white. If you’re Aboriginal the trade-off only buys entry to the lower rungs of white society” (p. 58). Further key risk factors for children and young people committing criminal offences, as noted by Farrington (in Cunneen et al. 2013, p. 46), are as follows: • Prenatal and perinatal factors (e.g. early childbearing, substance use during pregnancy and low birth weight); • Hyperactivity and impulsivity (e.g. attention deficit and lack of inhibition); • Intelligence and attainment (e.g. low non-verbal intelligence, abstract reasoning, cognitive and neuropsychological deficit); • Parental supervision, discipline and attitude (e.g. erratic or harsh parental discipline, rejecting parenting attitudes and violent behaviour); • Broken homes (e.g. maternal and paternal deprivation, parental conflict); • Parental criminality (e.g. convicted parents, poor supervision); • Large family size (related to parental attention, overcrowding); • Socioeconomic deprivation (e.g. low family income, poor housing); • Peer influences (e.g. male group behaviour, delinquent friends); • School influences (e.g. use of praise and punishment, classroom management); • Community influences (e.g. high residential mobility, neighbourhood disorganisation, physical deterioration, overcrowding and type of housing); and • Situational influences (e.g. specific opportunities, benefits outweighing expected costs and seeking excitement).

28

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

In addition, Wundersitz in Higgins and Davis (2014, p. 4) identified specific risk indicators for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people, namely • • • • • • • • • •

Historical factors and events; Psychological, psychiatric and mental health issues; Low educational attainment and employment; Substance misuse; Intellectual disability; Prior victimisation (child abuse, neglect and exposure to family violence); Lack of coping skills; Peer group pressure; Social and economic disadvantage; and Discrimination and lack of access to diversionary programs.

Some of these risk factors are explored below to provide an understanding of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander juvenile population in the justice system.

Historical Factors and Events According to White’s (2015) analysis, the over-representation of Indigenous young people and children has been impacted by colonialism. White also identified government intervention in Australia as part of the systemic and historical injustices experienced by the lived realities and ongoing exclusions and social controls put in place for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It is important that we understand that the process of colonialism has a discursive or linguistic dimension. Those who colonise do so with an accompanying discourse that justifies the act of colonising. Thus, Adeleke argues that the “Black experience in America, and indeed the black experience worldwide, has borne the burden of history: the history of negation. ‘The Dark Continent’, ‘Heathens’, and ‘Barbarians’ are some of the racist epithets that ‘enlightened’ Europeans mobilised to launch the imperial phase of ‘The White Man’s Burden’” (2017, p. 206). It is no surprise to learn that the white settlers in South Africa described the Indigenous San as ‘Schepsel’ (creatures) (Penn 2015, p. 164), and ‘vermin’ (p. 168). Nor was Australia an exception to this conjunction of colonial conquest and the language of denigration. Smithers (2017, pp. 190–191) tells us: Violence and bloodshed thus stained the colonial landscape. Settlers and squatters characterized this violence as examples of Aboriginal savagery and portrayed themselves as victims of murder, crime, and the dispossession of property. Aborigines were routinely described as the “most stupid insensible set of beings” and “Outlaws and Murderers,” prompting calls from settlers and squatters to enact vigilante justice and “to see the Niggers run”.

The historian Henry Reynolds (1990) indicates that in the colonial frontier period, Indigenous people were positioned as ‘a lesser species’, ‘inferior’, ‘uniquely

Historical Factors and Events

29

peaceful’, ‘nomadic’, ‘unresisting to colonial incursion’, ‘pathetically helpless’, ‘doomed to extinction’, ‘brutal’ and/or ‘noble savages beyond redemption’. To understand the contemporary relevance of the discursive dimension of colonialism, we need to say a word further about the concept of ‘the frontier’. The American historian Frederick Jackson Turner’s (1861–1932) essay in 1920 claims that constructing the American frontier was very influential among Australian historians (McQuilton 1993). For Turner, the frontier had both a geographical and a cultural dimension (McQuilton 1993, p. 26). In a similar vein, Smallwood (2015) has argued the Indigenous experience of colonialism has to be understood as being determined by the frontier, because it is a phenomenon which is neither purely geographical nor temporally bound. She argues that the present-day experience of Indigenous people represents more of ‘a continuity’ than ‘a rupture’ (p. 74). Moreover, for Smallwood: Australia’s violent colonial past is part of, and integral to its colonial present… [and] that a legacy of colonial practice at the material and discursive level, a relationship between past and present, is lived and played out within the socio-political, governance, organisational and judicial spaces pertaining to Indigenous Australians. (Cited in Tedmanson 2008, p. 143)

Thankfully, the brutal massacres of the frontier are now no more. But Sarra’s (2011) doctoral dissertation meticulously documented that the discursive dimension of the frontier is still very much with us. This relates to a crucial part of the argument of this chapter that we must understand that Indigenous youth live with a past which continues to impact them as young offenders in the criminal justice system. These injustices are not just related to the historical legacies of British invasion but are part of the generational trauma imposed through racial ideologies and discriminatory attitudes and perceptions that have impacted young offenders in Australia’s criminal justice system. Over thirty years have passed since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in Australia (1991). This inquiry found that Aboriginal deaths in custody were a consequence of the over-representation of Aboriginal people in the justice system. This inquiry represented a fight for justice for Aboriginal people against a systemically racist and unjust criminal system that required change from white colonial views that entrenched Eurocentric superiority, power and privilege. A key recommendation was to deter the high rates of young Indigenous offenders away from the criminal system, as Blagg (2012, p. 482) indicates: The political and cultural foundations for ‘contestation’ in relation to policies and practices towards the most imprisoned group in Australia, Indigenous youth, cannot be understood without reference to white Australia’s annexation and colonization of Aboriginal Australia, a fact acknowledged by a number of critical criminologists in Australia.

The Royal Commission reported that Australia had introduced government policies and practices which were enforced by law to ensure Aboriginal people were deprived not only of any human rights relating to their Aboriginal cultural heritage which resulted in the loss of land, language, culture, spirituality and identity, but also of equal treatment as human beings during times of colonialism. Furthermore, the report states:

30

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System Australia’s history since the arrival of British settlers helps explain the great sense of injustice and the strong sense of common historical experience which Aboriginal people share today. It helps explain their economic, social, residential status and their attitudes to non-Aboriginal Australians and the nation whose foundation was premised on their dispossession. Following the takeover of their land by the British, the personal liberty of Aboriginal people was jeopardized. They no longer had the freedom to live as they pleased and their life choices were dictated much more by government and government-approved missions than was the case for non-Aboriginal people. Their children were taken away to dormitories or distant towns, as parents and kin were thought to be a degrading influence. The various colonial and later State, Commonwealth and Territory Governments introduced policies which led to intrusions into most aspects of their everyday lives. These included inspections of camp sites and other residencies, and limitations upon their mode of living, work, financial and leisure activities. Institutionalization was to be a dominant theme in Aboriginal lives. The general population discriminated against Aboriginal people in many ways, which affected their education, housing, employment, income and self-esteem. (Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody 1991, vol. 2, p. 3)

Today, these historical legacies contribute to the intergenerational trauma experienced by many Indigenous families through past government policies and practices such as the Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897. This Queensland law was enforced by colonial mindsets to separate and forcibly remove Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission 1997). It led to the brutal and inhumane treatment of Indigenous people who were depicted as ‘uncivilised’ and ‘doomed to extinction’ (Reynolds 1990). This policy sought to validate and enact ‘protection’ which in reality was a way to segregate, control and discipline Indigenous people. The Indigenous people who were forcefully removed from their families are now known as the Stolen Generation. Most Aboriginal intergenerational families in some way or another have experienced traumas which may have included health-related illnesses, family violence and breakdown in family lineage with kin. For young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, these high levels of socioeconomic disadvantage influence their involvement in the justice system (Atkinson 2013). Moss and Lee (2019) predict a tripling in the statistics by 2035 of out-of-home care nationally for Indigenous young people, with a high proportion engaging in criminal activities and being incarcerated. Furthermore, research suggests that youth are more likely to be exposed to criminal offences if they themselves have experienced physical and/or sexual abuse, witnessed domestic violence or have been subject to violence in school or the community (Branson et al. 2017).

Mental Health Issues Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in the youth justice system are a vulnerable population with regard to mental health as many have experienced some form of intergenerational trauma, interpersonal and institutional racism, and cycles

Mental Health Issues

31

of family violence. Thus, they continue to suffer the psychological consequences of colonisation and the devastating effects of child removal from families. Intergenerational trauma has been described as “the collective emotional and psychological injury experienced by a group of people is subjectively remembered and experienced by both individuals and the later community of later generations” (Atkinson et al. in Fernando and Bennett 2019, p. 49). Similar to Indigenous people in other colonised countries around the world, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been impacted by violence, loss of cultural identity and self-worth, forcible displacement and removal from their traditional country. These experiences have contributed to heightened levels of domestic violence and family breakdowns in Indigenous families and have seriously affected the mental health of Indigenous young Australians and the risks of self-harm, suicide and mental illness. The collective mental health effects of historical and intergenerational trauma are patently clear among young Indigenous people in the child protection and juvenile justice systems in Australia (Atkinson 2019; Fernando and Bennett 2019). International studies have identified relationships between childhood trauma and involvement in the justice system. Childhood trauma is also considered a risk factor for continued involvement in criminal activities. Young people who tend to reoffend and are in and out of the juvenile justice system are at greater risk of additional trauma and consequently, this intensifies any psychological distress that they may be suffering. In addition, those who have experienced childhood trauma are more likely to drop out of school and have higher rates of suicide attempts (Branson et al. 2017; Cauffman et al. 2015). Youth suicide is an escalating health issue prevalent in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people at risk due to a range of social determinants that impact their health and well-being (Dudgeon and Holland 2018). Their experience of over-policing practice and the lack of culturally appropriate practices in the justice system place them at further risk of youth suicide. The health and well-being of incarcerated Indigenous young people are shaped by their lived experiences and the conditions in which they have been born, where they grow, live, work and age, and also by the systems placed to deal with illness (Blass in Menzies 2019). Trauma in their childhood can increase the risk of substance and alcohol misuse, depression and anxiety, and these effects can contribute to learning difficulties and disengagement in their schooling and employment. They may also suffer from foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) which is considered a neurodevelopmental impairment due to overexposure to alcohol during prenatal care. It can lead to impairment in memory, language, learning and attention in young people. Although there is limited literature on the prevalence of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder for incarcerated youth in Australia, it is recognised that young people in the justice system show a prevalence of intellectual disability and poor mental health (Bower et al. 2018).

32

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

Intellectual Disability There is an apparent over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with intellectual disability in the criminal justice system, although there are widespread challenges in Indigenous communities related to the collection of accurate data. This over-representation is associated with the limited availability of specialised professionals to provide a diagnosis of cognitive and mental impairment. Additional problems range from misdiagnosis to under-diagnosis of cognitive impairments due to the cultural bias in testing instruments which impact the accuracy of the diagnosis. Historical, social, economic and environmental factors that have contributed to the intellectual disability of Indigenous people tend to be overlooked. These include dispossession and associated intergenerational trauma; foetal alcohol disorder (FSD) causing brain damage as a consequence of prolonged alcohol abuse, inhalant use and violence; and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Furthermore, the diagnosis of a cognitive impairment coupled with poor social determinants of health has the ability to intensify criminal offences (Atkinson 2019; MacGillivray and Baldry 2013). Foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD), also known as foetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), is another disability that is known to inhibit the concentration, learning and educational outcomes of Indigenous young people in detention centres. FASD, which can affect cognitive, social, emotional and behavioural development, refers to a collection of disorders caused by prenatal alcohol exposure and alcohol-related neurodevelopmental disorder (Blagg et al. 2012; Bower et al. 2018; Passmore et al. 2021). Intergenerational trauma is associated with the high incidence of FASD among Indigenous people. Blagg et al. (2012) identify an intersection between FASD and systems of colonial control which continue to perpetuate forms of institutionalisation on Indigenous young people. Similarly, the Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation and the University of Tasmania (2016) related FASD to developmental delays in young people. At Banksia Hill Detention Centre in Western Australia, researchers have implemented a ground-breaking training intervention to upskill the custodial workforce in management strategies for young detainees with FASD and other neurodevelopmental impairments (Passmore et al. 2021). Elsewhere however, young people impacted in the justice system by FASD may still go unidentified and not receive the necessary support and education to break the cycle of recidivism. Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a pervasive and severe neurodevelopmental/neurogenetic disorder with behavioural and emotional symptoms that emerge in early childhood and progress into adolescence and adulthood (Lane and Chong 2019; Young and Cocallis 2021). ADHD, especially where unidentified and/or untreated, results in extremely adverse psychosocial and socioeconomic outcomes and costs for sufferers and wider society. Young people who are living with ADHD are at greater risk of involvement with the juvenile justice system at a younger age have higher rates of recidivism and are more likely to make false confessions, and progress to adult imprisonment (Young and Cocallis 2021).

Intellectual Disability

33

Symptoms of ADHD include inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity (Knecht et al. 2015; Sibley et al. 2011) with children engaging in a broad array of problem behaviours that frustrate and disrupt family, school and peer relationships (Stern 2001). Boredom sets in for children who are inattentive and easily distracted, have difficulty focusing on a task, and can initiate tasks but fail to complete them resulting in school failure, truancy and dropping out. Hyperactive children appear to move constantly, have difficulty sitting still, wander around the room, squirm in their seats or repeatedly tap a pencil. Impulsive children tend to act without thinking and often lack control of immediate reactions to people, events or even their own thoughts and feelings. Consequently, they may speak without thinking or dash into the street without looking where they are going (Sibley et al. 2011). Most children (and adults) experience transient episodes of these symptoms, perhaps due to stress or in response to certain medications. Younger children tend to be more active and have shorter attention spans than older ones. These symptoms indicate “ADHD only if they occur over an extended period of time, typically for at least 6 months; begin before age 7; appear in different settings; and occur at a level that is both performance impairing and developmentally inappropriate” (Stern 2001, p. 2). As they grow older, children with untreated ADHD—often in combination with oppositional-defiant and conduct disorders—may abuse drugs or alcohol, have involvement with the juvenile justice system, engage in antisocial behaviour, and suffer physical injury at higher rates than the general population (Lane and Chong 2019; Pelham et al. 1996; Stern 2001). Later effects of ADHD can include employment and social problems, low self-esteem and a higher incidence of car accidents. There is an increased risk that boys with ADHD will engage in delinquent and antisocial behaviour (Young and Cocallis 2021). There is limited research about girls and ADHD, however, that which is available shows that ADHD has long-term negative effects on girls. Given the gravity of juvenile offending, and the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds in the juvenile justice system, much attention has been directed towards identifying developmental pathways to serious delinquency in order to identify children who are most at risk. There are concerns for children with ADHD because they are more likely to continue their criminal behaviour into adulthood, commit more severe and violent crimes, and experience a variety of poor personal outcomes (Lane and Chong 2019; Moffitt and Caspi 2001). Sibley et al. (2011, p. 2) states: There is currently consensus that the progression to serious delinquency begins early, with problems at school, at home, and with peers. Most agree with the hypothesis that this troubling path begins with impulsivity, ADHD, uncontrolled temperament, or some variant thereof. (Patterson et al. 2000)

Negative environmental factors (e.g. poor parenting, life stressors) are thought to lead to an escalation of antisocial behaviour in children, resulting in a comorbid diagnosis of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) and, eventually, Conduct Disorder (CD) (Patterson et al. 2000). Barkely (2006) estimates that the progression to

34

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

comorbid ODD develops in 59% of school-aged children with ADHD. In about twothirds of these children diagnosed with ADHD+ODD, CD later develops (Greene and Ablon 2005). In these children, antisocial behaviour often becomes chronic and evolves into a pattern of problematic delinquency. Children with ADHD need chronic treatment that commences in early childhood and continues into adolescence and adulthood. The challenge, however, is that assessment and treatment are more complex in juvenile justice systems. Children and young people in these systems are at a further disadvantage because ADHD symptoms may go unrecognised and/or misunderstood, missed or misdiagnosed (Young and Cocallis 2021). Research has shown the propensity of police to misunderstand and misattribute ADHD sufferer behaviour (Lane and Chong 2019). Given their role as initial gatekeepers of the criminal/youth justice system, police buy-in to better understand ADHD and appropriate training around it are of vital importance. A further challenge is that treatment for adolescents is under-researched. There is a critical need to develop preventions and interventions in childhood and adolescents with ADHD. The resulting impact is a greater short- and long-term cost to the individual from a rehabilitative and health perspective as well as wider society (Young and Cocallis 2021). Overall, as Indigenous Australians in general have intellectual disability more commonly than their non-Indigenous counterparts, they are more susceptible and likely to attract the attention of police and experience incarceration. Indigenous youth with a combination of intellectual disability and alcohol and drug use, or other social detriments, are more likely to experience contact with police and the justice system than young people with no disability (MacGillivray and Baldry 2013). Moreover, the cases of young people with intellectual disability are often mishandled. For example, in Queensland a person accused of an offence must be of sound mind to undertake a trial prior to any conviction. If the defendant is unable to participate in providing evidence or to instruct their counsel, then the trial should not proceed. Despite this legal provision, young people with intellectual disabilities are often still convicted for punishable crimes (O’Leary et al. 2013).

Low Educational Attainment and Employment Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in the justice system experience low levels of literacy and numeracy skills. These in turn impact their education and employment opportunities and chance to break the cycle of recidivism, disadvantage and exclusion (Ewing and Sarra 2018). Moreover, the traumatic effects of exposure to violence on young people can inhibit their educational outcomes and employment (Branson et al. 2017). Young offenders who have suffered physical or sexual abuse or have witnessed domestic violence are more likely to experience higher rates of school absenteeism.

Social, Economic and Political Disadvantage

35

Disengagement in learning within a school context is a consequence of the disparity or clash between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and a Eurocentric Western culture that marginalises or ‘others’ those who may be different to a Western worldview. Edward Said (1978) through his study on colonialism defined the term ‘othering’ based on the description of who ‘we’ are, and the membership of one’s own social groups, its boundaries and comparison of that construction with a group considered to be less than ‘them’. Within a colonial context, native peoples represent ‘the other’ (Tait 2016). Thus, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in the juvenile justice system are locked out of learning and are stuck in a cycle of underachievement, a scenario which contributes to unacceptably high levels of recidivism (Australian Council for Educational Research 2014). This is the reality for most Indigenous young people incarcerated in the justice system. Contributing to the higher levels of recidivism is substance abuse, violence, mental illness and many other factors which can influence their underperformance in education and negatively affect their future employment prospects when released back into mainstream society.

Social, Economic and Political Disadvantage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are among the most vulnerable people in Australia and continue to experience social and economic disadvantages. As the aforementioned research of the Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation and the University of Tasmania (2016) revealed, young people likely to have contact with the criminal justice system are at significant risk of factors which lead to an increase in Indigenous youth suicide due to exposure to over-policing and the lack of culturally appropriate practices in the justice system, all of which lead to systemic failure and risks to the path of suicide for young Aboriginal people. The research report recommended that: the impact of past policies and history on the social and emotional wellbeing of contemporary Aboriginal youth must be acknowledged. Appropriate services and therapies must be made available to tackle the intergenerational trauma and grief that significantly increase the risk of youth suicide. Investments must be substantial and long-term, in recognition of the lengthy history of dislocation and mistreatment and their consequent effects. (Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation and the University of Tasmania 2016, p. 75)

These social and economic factors combined with racism and discrimination, marginalisation, alcohol and substance abuse, and low levels of educational achievement have contributed to the over-representation of Indigenous young people aged 10–17 years in the criminal justice system. It is important when analysing the over-representation of Indigenous youth within the criminal justice system to bear in mind that the offending youth are not the only agents in the process. A range of people are involved in making the judgements that lead to incarceration, not least the magistrates and judges. Here, for instance, one should be aware of the meticulously documented phenomenon of ‘noise’ or the

36

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

unwarranted variability in sentencing (Kahneman et al. 2021). Given the variability of this noise and its possible influence, the authors suggest with some irony that someone going to court for sentencing should be praying that the judge’s sports team won in the weekend (Kahneman et al. 2021). There is also the impact of the political, social and moral climate to consider. Here in Australia, we need to consider, however briefly, the impact of the neoliberal conjuncture (Harvey 2007). We use the phrase ‘conjuncture’ as deployed by the Marxist theorists Antonio Gramsci (1977) and Louis Althusser (1971, 1976). It refers specifically to a block of time where a political set of beliefs are so dominant or hegemonic that they form the common sense of that period. Neoliberal refers to the belief that there must be no constraints on the market and that all attempts by the state to plan or control an economy will end in authoritarian disaster. Harvey (2007) provides a very accessible critique of neoliberalism. Dating the neoliberal conjuncture is a difficult task, although Davies (2016) pinpoints the onset of neoliberalism in 1975. He argues that neoliberalism has three main phases. The first of these he labels ‘combative’ and dates it from 1987 to 1989. The second phase of neoliberalism, from 1989 to 2008, is what he calls ‘normative’, which is the dominant social paradigm. Normative neoliberalism was administered by social liberals such as President Clinton in the US, Prime Minister Blair in the UK and Prime Minister Hawke in Australia. The third phase from 2008 and the economic crash saw neoliberalism enter a new period marked by increasing tendencies for administrations to respond punitively to poverty and the widespread application of tough love and zero tolerance (Fram and Pearse 2000; Kowalski 1976; Phelps 2011; Sridhar 2006). Abrams (2013) shows how in the 1980s and 1990s the public was often persuaded to accept increased incarceration as the solution to crime, and to move away from considering causes. He exposed a tendency to regard children as belonging to others and even dehumanised. A clear instance of this is the way in which the concept ‘superpredator’ was promoted in 1996 by the Princeton academic John DiIulio. He described superpredators as “morally vacant and lacking impulse control or empathy” and argued explicitly that “A superpredator is a young juvenile criminal who is so impulsive, so remorseless, that he can kill, rape, maim, without giving it a second thought” (DiIulio cited in Boghani 2017). However, Abrams (2013) claims the use of this epithet helped to create a moral panic and stoke fears about the young. Here in Australia, the Indigenous experience of the punitive turn in the provision of social welfare was spearheaded by the Family Responsibilities Commission (FRC). All the rhetorical armoury of neoliberal thought developed in the period leading up to Clinton’s Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 is present in the thinking around the FRC. Thus, its policy emphasises the promotion of ‘tough love’ and the ‘right to take responsibility’, ‘welfare dependency’ and ‘reform’ (Karvelas 2013; Lewis 2007; Pearson 2000, 2007, 2009, 2011a, b, 2018a, b). Two other aspects of social discrimination call for consideration if we are to understand the phenomenon of mass incarceration of Indigenous youth. These are the notion of a school-to-prison pipeline and moral panics about Indigenous youth behaviour. The pipeline concept was developed in the USA to address and counter

Chapter Summary

37

the excessive incarceration of Afro-Americans, Latinos and other minorities (Fowler 2011; Kim et al. 2010; Kupchik 2014; Tuzzolo and Hewitt 2006; Winn et al. 2011). The impact of the pipeline has been described as the “devastating trend of funnelling students out of the classroom and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems” (Banner 2015, p. 301). We need to ask to what extent the pipeline is operating in Australia and what we can do to remedy that situation. Moral panics are produced when the mass media create a situation where “public perceptions of the degree and form of violent crime are largely inaccurate, exaggerated, and based on stereotypical accounts of youth subcultures: the gang” (Schissel 1997, p. 196). Because of media coverage, the public may become more susceptible to moral panic and receptive to punitive policy targeted at Indigenous youth. For example, this effect becomes evident when comparing the imagery of two television current affairs programs related to Townsville in the state of Queensland. One showed Indigenous young people in the stereotypical ‘young offender’ dress of hooded jumpers and masks (Channel Nine 2016), while the other featured predominantly white protestors calling for tougher youth sentencing (ABC 2013). This example represents the classic ingredients of a moral panic—sensational coverage and a frightened and disturbed public demanding increased punishment. It is especially important to grasp that firstly the panic targets First Nations young people, and secondly the incidence of crime in Townsville is decreasing (Queensland Police 2022).

Chapter Summary In Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people involved in the youth justice system have experienced systemic failure from numerous government jurisdictions. There exist laws, practices and policies intended to ensure that they have opportunities to improve their health and well-being and an education that will contribute to their life chances in employment. However, high rates of recidivism in the juvenile justice system and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander deaths in custody remain a constant reminder of how much improvement is still required to bring about changes that will make a difference to young people and alter the trajectory of their lives. At the commencement of this chapter, we identified a young male student, named Peter, who was incarcerated in a juvenile detention centre. Peter is clearly a product of a society that disadvantages Indigenous young people. Although he is bright and well capable of successfully completing school tasks, the socioeconomic factors discussed in this chapter have contributed to his incarceration. Therefore, as educators, government agencies and a society, we must urgently seek ways to both reduce the risk factors that lead to conviction and improve the lives of young people who are incarcerated. But how can we reduce the risk factors and improve the lives of incarcerated young people? Initiatives to reduce the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in youth detention have indicated that community engagement, culturally appropriate practices and cultural competence are necessary at all levels in program design, development and implementation (Higgins and Davis 2014). Such an approach will be explored in further detail in the following chapter:

38

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Children in Juvenile Detention Centres in Australia.

References Abbott, T. (2014). Closing the gap Prime Minister’s report. Australian Government. https://www. niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/closing_the_gap_2014.pdf. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner. (1995). Social justice report 1995. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/ 1995-social-justice-report. Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897. (Qld). https://www.foundi ngdocs.gov.au/resources/transcripts/qld5_doc_1897.pdf. Abrams, L. S. (2013). Juvenile justice at a crossroads: Science, evidence, and twenty-first century reform. Social Service Review, 87(4), 725–752. https://doi.org/10.1086/674074 ACER. (2014). Indigenous student maths achievement in context: Findings from PISA. ACER. Adeleke, T. (2017). Afrocentric intellectuals and the burden of history. In B. D. Behnken, G. D. Smithers, & S. Wendt (Eds.), Black intellectual thought in modern America (pp. 206–236). University Press of Mississippi. Althusser, L. (1971). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses: Lenin and philosophy and other essays. Monthly Review Press. Althusser, L. (1976). Essays on ideology. Verso. Atkinson, J. (2013). Trauma-informed services and trauma-specific care for indigenous Australian children. (Resource Sheet no. 21). Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. https://www.aihw. gov.au/getmedia/e322914f-ac63-44f1-8c2f-4d84938fcd41/ctg-rs21.pdf.aspx?inline=true. Atkinson, J. (2019). Aboriginal Australia—Trauma stories can be healing stories if we work with therapeutic intent. In R. Benjamin, J. Haliburn, & S. King (Eds.), Humanising mental health care in Australia: A guide to trauma-informed approaches (pp. 133–142). Routledge. Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). (2013, February 26). Townsville youth crime protesters get a hearing (Television broadcast). https://www.abc.net.au/local/photos/2013/02/26/3698793. htm. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2022). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People: Census. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islanderpeoples/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people-census/latest-release. Australian Government. (2010). Closing the gap: Prime Minister’s report 2010. https://www.clo singthegap.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/ctg-report-2010.pdf. Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC). (2020). Review of the age of criminal responsibility: Submission to the Council of Attorneys-General Age of Criminal Responsibility Working Group. https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/ahrc_20200226_submission_cag_ working_group_macr.pdf. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020a). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health performance framework: Summary report 2020a. Tier 2—Determinants of health. 2.11 contact with the criminal justice system. https://www.indigenoushpf.gov.au/. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020b). Youth justice national minimum dataset (YJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2018–19. Youth justice in Australia 2018–19. https://www.aihw.gov.au/ reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2018-19/data. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020c). Youth justice in Australia 2018– 19. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/a5a364b9-fe69-4d02-9c93-1965a69a3d93/aihw-juv-132. pdf.aspx?inline=true.

References

39

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2021). Youth justice in Australia 2019– 20. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/e593cc05-884c-4a47-bce6-0dcc76fc1a66/aihw-juv-134. pdf.aspx?inline=true. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2022). Youth justice in Australia 2020– 21. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2020-21/contents/ summary. Banner, K. (2015). Breaking the school-to-prison pipeline: New models for school discipline and community accountable schools. In N. E. Dowd & C. J. Ogletree (Eds.), A new juvenile justive system: Total reform for a broken system (pp. 301–310). NYU Press. Barkley, R. A. (2006). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press. Baturo, A., & Cooper, T. (2008). Developing mathematics understanding through cognitive diagnostic assessment tasks. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Blagg, H. (2012). Re-imagining youth justice: Cultural contestation in the Kimberley region of Australia since the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. Theoretical Criminology, 16(4), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480611436360. Boghani, P. (2017, May 2). They were sentenced as “superpredators”. Who were they really? Frontline. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/they-were-sentenced-as-superpred ators-who-were-they-really/. Bower, C., Watkins, R., Mutch, R., Marriott, R., Freeman, J., Kippin, N., Safe, B., Pestell, C., Cheung, C., Shield, H., Tarratt, L., Springall, A., Taylor, J., Walker, N., Argiro, E., Leitão, S., Hamilton, S., Condon, C., Passmore, H., & Giglia, R. (2018). Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and youth justice: A prevalence study among young people sentenced to detention in Western Australia. British Medical Journal Open, 8(2), e019605–e019605. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj open-2017-019605 Branson, C., Baetz, C., Horwitz, S., & Hoagwood, K. (2017). Trauma-informed juvenile justice systems: A systematic review of definitions and core components. Psychological Trauma, 9(6), 635–646. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000255 Cauffman, E., Monahan, K. C., & Thomas, A. G. (2015). Pathways to persistence: Female offending from 14 to 25. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 1, 236–268. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40865-015-0016-z Channel Nine. (2016). A current affair: Youth crime (Television broadcast). https://www.9now.com. au/a-current-affair/2016/clip-civhv30up00480gq9zp0q6rzz. Cunneen, C., White, R., & Richards, K. (2013). Juvenile justice: Youth and crime in Australia. Oxford University Press. Davies, W. (2016). The new neoliberalism. NLR, 101, 121–134. Dudgeon, P., & Holland, C. (2018). Recent developments in suicide prevention among the Indigenous peoples of Australia. Australasian Psychiatry: Bulletin of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, 26(2), 166–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/1039856218757637 Ewing, B., & Sarra, G. (2018). Working with incarcerated indigenous and low socioeconomic status youth and their teachers to improve learning outcomes in mathematics. Curriculum Perspectives, 38(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-018-0056-8 Fernando, T., & Bennett, B. (2019). Creating a culturally safe space when teaching Aboriginal content in social work: A scoping review. Australian Social Work, 72(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/0312407X.2018.1518467 Fowler, D. (2011). School discipline feeds the “pipeline to prison.” Phi Delta Kappan, 93(2), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/23048938 Fram, E. H., & Pearse, R. (2000). Commentary: “Tough Love” teaching generates student hostility. College Teaching, 48(2), 42–42. Gramsci, A. (1977). Antonio Gramsci: Selections from political writings 1910–1920 (J. Mathews, Trans.). International publishers. Greene, R., & Ablon, J. (2005). Treating explosive kids: The collaborative problem solving approach. New York. The Guildford Press.

40

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

Harvey, D. (2007). A brief history of neo-liberalism. Oxford University Press. Higgins, D., & Davis, K. (2014). Law and justice: Prevention and early intervention programs for Indigenous youth. Resource sheet no. 34. Closing the Gap Clearinghouse. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australian Institute of Family Studies. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/ 85dd676d-62ab-47cf-8a01-a1847a05a17a/ctg-rs34.pdf.aspx?inline=true. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (1997). Bringing them home: Report of the national inquiry into the separation of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families. https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/bringing-them-home-report-1997. Kahneman, D., Sibony, O., & Sunstein, C. R. (2021). Noise: A flaw in human judgement. Harper Collins. Karvelas, P. (2013, May, 3). ’Tough love’ path to prosperity as Noel Pearson’s welfare-to-work trial boosted. The Australian. Kim, C. Y., Losen, D. J., & Hewitt, D. T. (2010). Challenging suspensions and expulsions. In The school-to-prison pipeline (pp. 78–96). NYU Press. Knecht, C., de Alvaro, R., Martinez-Raga, J., & Balanza-Martinez, V. (2015). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), substance use disorders, and criminality: a difficult problem with complex solutions. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 27(2), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh-2015-5007. Kowalski, N. C. (1976). Smother love vs. tough love. Social Work, 21(4), 319–321. Kupchik, A. (2014). The school-to-prison pipeline: Rhetoric and reality. In F. E. Zimring & D. S. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Choosing the future for American juvenile justice (pp. 94–119). NYU Press. Lane, C., & Chong, M. (2019). A hard pill to swallow: The need to identify and treat ADHD to reduce sufferers’ potential involvement in the criminal justice system. http://www5.austlii.edu. au/au/journals/JCULawRw/2019/9.pdf. Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation & University of Tasmania. (2016). Telling it like it is: Aboriginal perspectives on race and race relations. http://www.utas.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0004/877324/telling-it-like-it-is-linkage-launch-media-handout.pdf. Latimer, J., & Foss, L. (2005). The sentencing of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal youth under the young offenders act: A multivariate analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 47(3), 481–500. Lewis, S. (2007, June 26). ALP backs ‘tough love’ approach. The Australian. http://www.kooriweb. org/foley/resources/pearson/aust26jun2007.html. MacGillivray, P., & Baldry, E. (2013). Indigenous Australians, mental and cognitive impairment and the criminal justice system: A complex Web. Indigenous Law Bulletin, 8(9), 22–26. Menzies, K. (2019). Understanding the Australian Aboriginal experience of collective, historical and intergenerational trauma. International Social Work, 62(6), 1522–1534. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0020872819870585 McQuilton, J. (1993). Comparative frontiers: Australia and the United States. Australasian Journal of American Studies, 12(1), 26–46. Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2001). Childhood predictors differentiate life-course persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial pathways among males and females. Development and Psychopathology, 13(2), 355–375. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579401002097. Moss, M., & Lee, A. (2019). TeaH (Turn ‘em around Healing): A therapeutic model for working with traumatised children on Aboriginal communities. Children Australia, 44(2), 55–59. https:// doi.org/10.1017/cha.2019.8 National Justice Chief Executive Officers Group. (2009). Staying strong on the outside: Indigenous young adults. Final report. https://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/resources/staying-strong-onthe-outside-indigenous-young-adults-final-report/. O’Leary, J., O’Toole, S., & Watt, D. (2013). Exploring juvenile fitness for trial in Queensland. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20(6), 853–866. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2012. 745059

References

41

Papalia, N., Shepherd, S., Spivak, B., Luebbers, S., Shea, D., & Fullam, R. (2019). Disparities in criminal justice system responses to first-time juvenile offenders according to Indigenous status. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(8), 1067–1087. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854819851830 Passmore, H. M., Mutch, R. C., Watkins, R., Burns, S., Hall, G., Urquhart, J., Carapetis, J., & Bower, C. (2021). Reframe the behaviour: Evaluation of a training intervention to increase capacity in managing detained youth with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and neurodevelopmental impairments. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 28(3), 382–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020. 1780643 Patterson, G. R., DeGarmo, D. S., & Knutson, N. (2000). Hyperactive and antisocial behaviors: Comorbid or two points in the same process? Development and Psychopathology, 12(1), 91–106. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400001061. Pearson, C. (2009, July 18–19). Cold reality trumps the warm inner glow. The Australian. Pearson, N. (2000). Our right to take responsibility. Black Inc. Pearson, N. (2007, July 21–22). Leftist policies pave kids’ road to hell. The Australian. Pearson, N. (2011a, August, 10). Taking our culture on the road of Adam Smith The Australian. Pearson, N. (2011b, February 27). There is nothing the Government can do for you that you are unwilling to do for yourself: The Sir Robert Menzies Lecture 2011b. Cape York Partnership. https://capeyorkpartnership.org.au/noel-pearson-sir-robert-menzies-lecture-2011b/. Pearson, N. (2018a, February 16). Noel Pearson: We must be actors in our own destiny. The Australian. Pearson, N. (2018b, December 1). Queensland deals welfare reform a killer blow. The Australian. Pelham, W., & Hoza, B. (1996). Intensive treatment: A summer treatment program for children with ADHD. Psychosocial treatments for child and adolescent disorders: Empirically based strategies for clinical practice (pp. 311–340). https://doi.org/10.1037/10196-013. Penn, N. (2015). The destruction of hunter-gatherer societies on the pastoralist frontier: The Cape and Australia compared. In M. Adhikari (Ed.), Genocide on settler frontiers: When huntergatherers and commercial stock farmers clash (pp. 159–184). Berghahn Books. Phelps, M. S. (2011). Rehabilitation in the punitive era: The gap between rhetoric and reality in U.S. prison programs. Law & Society Review, 45(1), 33–68. Queensland Police. (2022). Queensland crime statistics. My Police Townsville. https://mypolice. qld.gov.au/townsville/queensland-crime-statistics/. Reynolds, H. (1990). The other side of the frontier: Aboriginal resistance to the European invasion of Australia. Pelican. Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory. (2017). Final report. https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/child-detention/ final-report. Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. (1991). Report. National Archives of Australia. https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/first-australians/royal-commission-abo riginal-deaths-custody. Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. Vintage Press. Sarra, C. (2011). Strong and smart—towards a pedagogy for emancipation: Education for first peoples. Routledge. Sarra, G., & Ewing, B. (2021). Culturally responsive pedagogies and perspectives in mathematics. In M. Shay (Ed.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 148–161). Routledge. Sarra, G., & Shay, M. (2019). Indigenous education, critical perspectives to enhance learning practices. In M. Peters (Ed.), Encyclopedia of teacher education (pp. 1–8). Springer. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-981-13-1179-6_195-1. Schissel, B. (1997). Youth crime, moral panics, and the news: The conspiracy against the marginalized in Canada. Social Justice, 24(2), 165–184. Shay, M., & Sarra, G. (2021). Locating the voices of Indigenous young people on identity in Australia: An Indigenist analysis. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Education, 15(3), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/15595692.2021.1907330.

42

2 Indigenous Young People in Australia’s Justice System

Sibley, M. H., Pelham, W. E., Molina, B. S., Gnagy, E. M., Waschbusch, D. A., Biswas, A., MacLean, M. G., Babinski, D. E., & Karch, K. M. (2011). The delinquency outcomes of boys with ADHD with and without comorbidity. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39(1), 21–32. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10802-010-9443-9. Smith, L. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (3rd ed.). Zed Books. Smithers, G. D. (2017). Science, sexuality, and race in the United States and Australia, 1780–1940 (rev. ed.). University of Nebraska Press. Sridhar, C. R. (2006). Broken windows and zero tolerance: Policing urban crimes. Economic and Political Weekly, 41(19), 1841–1843. Stern, K. R. (2001). A Treatment Study of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. United States: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Tait, G. (2016). Making sense of mass education (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Tedmanson, D. (2008). Isle of exception: Sovereign power and Palm Island. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 4(2/3), 142–165. Tuzzolo, E., & Hewitt, D. T. (2006). Rebuilding inequity: The re-emergence of the school-to-prison pipeline in New Orleans. The High School Journal, 90(2), 59–68. United Nations. (1985). Standard minimum rules for the administration of juvenile justice (“The Beijing rules”). https://www.ohchr.org/documents/professionalinterest/beijingrules.pdf. United Nations. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. Human Rights. Office of the High Commissioner. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx. White, R. (2015). Indigenous young people and hyperincarceration in Australia. Youth Justice., 15(3), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473225414562293. Wilson, R. D. (1997). Bringing them home: A guide to the findings and recommendations of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Winn, M. T., Behizadeh, N., Duncan, G., Fine, M., & Gadsden, V. (2011). The right to be literate: Literacy, education, and the school-to-prison pipeline. Review of Research in Education, 35, 147–173. https://doi.org/10.2307/41349015. Young, S., & Cocallis, K. (2021). ADHD and offending. Journal of Neural Transmission (Vienna, Austria: 1996), 128(7), 1009–1019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-021-02308-0.

Chapter 3

Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People in Detention: Critical Reality

Abstract This Chapter investigates the forms of education that are provided in juvenile justice systems specifically in Australia. The educational responsibility for children and young people in detention, who are held accountable to the same standards as their public school peers, is tied to state responsibilities. We explore the various elements associated with this responsibility. Very little is known about schooling and the types of programs, instructional strategies and curricula used in juvenile justice systems. This chapter responds to this gap by identifying best practices and instructional strategies for educating young detainees.

A man saw a person drowning in a river and dove in to save him. The next day, another person was swept down the river, and once more the courageous bystander plunged into the waters to save the struggling victim. The following day, there were three people drowning, and this time the bystanders had to seek help to make the rescues. The day after that, more people needed saving, and many citizens had to join the rescue effort. Soon the river was full of drowning people, and the entire community worked without end to save them. Finally, someone said, “We should go upriver to find out where all these drowning people are coming from.” But others answered, “We can’t we’re too busy saving lives down here.” (Bates 2012, p. 6)

Echoing the above parable, this chapter springs from a belief that we all, including the state, have a responsibility to ensure that children in detention receive an effective education. We have to respond to the situation we are faced with now. We cannot let the children ‘drown’. They have rights and we have responsibilities. Accordingly, the first part of this chapter gives an account of what education is being provided now, beginning with a detailed statement of what is to be understood as the status quo. But we also have a responsibility to ‘go upriver’ and seek an understanding of how incarcerated children’s experience of education has resulted in so many Indigenous and low socioeconomic young people being locked up. This is the task we undertake in the second part of the chapter. To put this another way, we pursue the task of underlabouring (Bhaskar 2008) with the tools of Critical Realism (Mackie 2020) to develop a philosophical understanding of the dominant forms of education that are provided in schools and juvenile detention centres, explicitly in Australia. Through this philosophical discussion, we highlight the underlying need for innovative culturally appropriate educational support for Indigenous children and young © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0_3

43

44

3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People …

people in juvenile detention. We argue that it is not enough to just maintain the status quo which often fails to acknowledge the extensive social and economic disadvantage and negative impacts of colonialism, outlined in Chap. 2, that influence the life experience of many of these young detainees. Rather, through research and practice it is essential to understand and redress the factors that contribute to the over-representation of Indigenous people within the Australian criminal justice system.

The Status Quo or That Which is Our Responsibility to Understand As stated in Chap. 1, the educational responsibility for Australia’s Indigenous and low socioeconomic young people in juvenile detention is tied to state responsibilities. Short-term juvenile detention facilities provide their own schooling and education programs. However, little is known about this education provision and what constitutes culturally appropriate instruction to support these children and young people. In what follows, we address the challenges entailed in supporting young people in the justice system, and the use of diversionary programs in the youth justice system.

Challenges in Supporting Young People in the Justice System In Australia and internationally, juvenile justice systems are legally responsible for the provision of juvenile detention centres and justice facilities that ensure a quality education for youth detainees, although what this looks like varies across states, territories and jurisdictions. In similar circumstances to Australia, youth correctional facilities in the United States need to align educational curricula and standards with state and public education (Pace 2018). However, in both countries the system is often flawed. For example, in the Australian context, there was a failure in the Northern Territory’s Don Dale Detention Centre “to provide young detainees with access to education or rehabilitation programs” (Rudd et al. 2021, p. 194). As Pace (2018) identifies, there may be limited opportunities in detention centres to provide a variety of curriculum choices due to limited staffing; teacher expertise and knowledge across learning areas; and challenges faced by teachers in providing individualised learning plans to cater to the diverse educational needs and differing durations of sentencing for individual students. Education for young people in detention centres has often been unproductive which has contributed to the disengagement and continuing poor levels of literacy and numeracy achievement. Furthermore, intersecting complexities related to disadvantage, oppression, racism and discrimination, learning difficulties and intellectual disabilities (Drinan 2018; Morris 2016; Sarra and Ewing 2021) are factors that have contributed to high levels of recidivism.

Diversionary Programs in the Youth Justice System

45

Australian young people in custody often have poor experiences of education. Many of them fall within the age of compulsory education (up to 17 years) but even for those who are older, engaging in education is an important aspect of rehabilitation and promotes skills for the future (Commission for Children and Young People 2017, p. 82). There are many young people in the youth justice system who are diagnosed and undiagnosed with disabilities, such as cognitive impairment, intellectual disability or disorders in the area of language and communication, which have contributed to significant disruptions in their education. As a result, this underperformance negatively affects their future employment opportunities. Armytage and Ogloff (2017, p. 162) reported that key risk factors for lack of participation in education for young people in the justice system are related to high rates of absenteeism through truancy and low academic achievement in schools in Victoria, as follows: • Among young people aged 13–17 years, 93.8% of those serving a custodial sentence recorded truancy in the past year, and 76.9% recorded low academic achievement; • Among young people aged 13–17 years, 79.5% of those on community orders recorded truancy in the past year, and 77.3% recorded disruptive behaviour at school; • Among young people aged 18+, 84.5% of those in custody were rated as a risk for not participating in education, and 66.4% left school early; and • Among young people aged 18+, 87.5% of those in the community were rated as a risk for not participating in education, while the same proportion recorded truancy in the past year.

These results indicate that teachers face significant challenges in supporting and teaching young people in the justice system and those incarcerated in detention centres, especially when working with young Indigenous people with an intellectual disability and a higher risk of reoffending than those without an intellectual disability. A number of factors indicate that these young people are more likely to display a “history of antisocial behaviour; antisocial personality pattern, antisocial cognition, antisocial associates; family issues and substance abuse” (Frize et al. 2008, p. 511). Furthermore, an important factor in reoffending and intellectual disability is the Indigenous status of the offender. However, there is evidence that some Indigenous youth who have been diagnosed with an intellectual disability may be incorrectly diagnosed due to cultural bias in IQ tests (Davidson 1995).

Diversionary Programs in the Youth Justice System Culturally appropriate diversionary programs are an essential educational alternative to detention for Indigenous youth. This calls for the re-evaluation of current diversionary paradigms. In particular, the Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs (2015, para 5.84) of the Australian Parliament’s House of Representatives asserted that “there is a great need for diversion programs which redirect individuals [with FASD] who come in contact with the criminal justice system”.

46

3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People …

Each State and Territory in Australia is responsible for its youth justice legislation, policies and practices. However, there are similarities across the processes adopted relating to how young people are charged and sentenced in courts. During 2018–19, the following key policy priorities for supporting young people in the social justice system were identified: • offering alternatives to detention, including the use of warnings, cautions and conferencing; • providing bail assistance for young people to reduce unnecessary remand, particularly where a young person does not have access to suitable accommodation; • delivering better outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people; • providing effective evidence-based assessment processes, case-planning and intervention/rehabilitation programs to address the offending behaviour of young people under supervision; • improving infrastructure in detention facilities; and • improving the pre- and post-release support provided to young people leaving custody, including accommodation and other forms of support to help them reintegrate into the community. (AIHW 2020, p. 3)

In Australia and internationally, countries have revised and made changes to the way policies and practices have been implemented and in the development of the principles and decision-making processes that underpin these systems in youth justice. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2020), this has been influenced by a number of reports which have included • The United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations 1989); • Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice 1985 (also known as the Beijing Rules) (United Nations 1985); • Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency 1990 (also known as the Riyadh Guidelines) (United Nations 1990a, b); and • Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (also known as the Havana Rules) (United Nations 1990a, b). The Convention on the Rights of the Child acknowledges in Article 28 that “children have the right to an education. Discipline in schools should respect children’s human dignity”; and Article 29 states that “education should develop each child’s personality and talents to the full. It should encourage children to respect their parents, their cultures and other cultures” (United Nations 1989). In addition, a key recommendation from the Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation and the University of Tasmania (2016, p. 75) was that: … the impact of past policies and history on the social and emotional wellbeing of contemporary Aboriginal youth must be acknowledged. Appropriate services and therapies must be made available to tackle the intergenerational trauma and grief that significantly increase the risk of youth suicide. Investments must be substantial and long-term, in recognition of the lengthy history of dislocation and mistreatment and their consequent effects.

Towards an Ontological Understanding of the Historical and Social …

47

Towards a Philosophical Understanding of Our Responsibility To develop a deeper theoretical understanding of the educational responsibilities due to young people in juvenile detention, we now present the underlying philosophy of our research and practice. We are acutely aware that some may feel that what follows is overly philosophical, too abstract and not ‘practical’ or insufficiently ‘nitty gritty’. However, we concur with the answer that Bhaskar gave to his own question in Plato, etc.: “Is philosophy worth it?” His response was: “philosophy matters because it is causally efficacious, and bad philosophy is…regressively so”. (Bhaskar 2010, p. 16: original emphasis). We follow the reasoning of Bhaskar (2008) who in turn drew upon Locke’s (1632– 1704) concept of underlabouring to provide the conceptual clarity to guide scientific practice. Specifically, we adopt the philosophy of Critical Realism to enable an understanding that will contribute to the grounding of an improved practice in juvenile detention centres in Australia and in schools generally. This approach underpins our deep conviction that the development of such an understanding is the responsibility of all of us, including the state. We use the Critical Realist ‘tool kit’ (Mackie 2020) which comprises concepts of time, totality and the concrete universal. This usage accords with Bhaskar’s view that: Philosophy is providing a tool kit for the set of tools that you actually use in social analysis, it is underlabouring for underlabouring. It is at a very high level of generality and refinement, but it is necessary to get our concepts clear. Unless we get our categories clear, we will not be able to do all those nitty gritty things that some members of the audience want us to turn our attention to. (Bhaskar 2012, p. 143)

We also engage with the work of Dr Chris Sarra (2011a, b, 2012), who has sought to address the scourge of low expectations in Indigenous education. His work, we feel, will help us break with the current Zeitgeist which is marked by a mixture of cynicism and despair. We must, instead, ‘do hope’ (Seligman 1991, 2002, 2011). We also return to the Bhaskarian tense of the future in the present. We will argue that we all have a responsibility to disrupt the current situation, where we are mired in an ‘endless present’ (Bensaïd 2001) where it seems easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine a situation where the First Nations Peoples of this land and their young begin to truly move from surviving to thriving.

Towards an Ontological Understanding of the Historical and Social Complexities of the Incarceration of Indigenous Youth: Drawing upon the Three Levels of the Critical Realist Ontology There are many historical and social complexities that have led young people down a pathway that leads to short or long stays in detention centres. These relate to

48

3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People …

the risk factors identified in Chap. 2 which included substance abuse, mental and sexual abuse, broken homes and domestic violence, foetal alcohol syndrome and socioeconomic deprivation, to name a few. It is most important, though, to grasp from a Critical Realist perspective as these problems cannot be understood simply by listing them. To begin with, these social problems are of course not limited to Indigenous communities. Nor should the social complexities be seen as the defining attributes of Indigenous peoples. Rather, they must be grasped in terms of the underlying relationship that has given rise to them. To be clear, the historical and social complexities should be seen for what they are—a defining attribute of the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Every Indigenous child is thrown into that underlying relationship and must seek to negotiate it. The underlying relationship can be understood spatially as a ‘contact zone’ where Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Australians interact. The contact zone was established following the invasion of 1788. The notion of a contact zone is a staple of postcolonial theory. Mary Louise Pratt first articulated the notion in 1991 when she wrote: I use this term [contact zone] to refer to social spaces where cultures meet, clash and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power, such as colonialism, slavery, or their aftermaths as they are lived out in many parts of the world today. (Pratt 1991, p. 34)

Pratt’s concept has proved extremely valuable, though from a Critical Realist perspective it would be more so if it were more clearly framed in ontological terms.

Three Levels of Critical Realism The critical realist ontology has three levels—the real, the actual and the empirical. The first level, the real, incorporates the other levels, and also specifically consists of underlying structures or mechanisms and tendencies. If these structures or tendencies are realised, we have the level of the actual. If humans experience the actual, then we have the empirical. By way of explanation, let us take the classic instance of water. Due to its underlying atomic structure, water has a tendency to boil at 100 degrees centigrade at ground level. That tendency is real, and it would still be real even if it were not actualised and experienced. That is, the tendency for water to boil is real, irrespective of whether the water boils or not. Moving from the natural to the social domain, we have chosen the word ‘complexity’ in an endeavour to draw attention to the fact that the problems confronting Indigenous people and their communities have a real history and, the problems are to be understood not simply in terms of actual observed behaviour, but in terms of the underlying experienced or empirical social relationships that generate such behaviour (Bhaskar 1989). To be explicit here: the underlying relationship between the settler colonists and Indigenous Australians was one where the settlers exercised oppressive power over the Indigenous people. If the underlying

The Critical Realist Concept of Time

49

relationship had been based not on expropriation but on love and cooperation then different tendencies would have existed, and we Indigenous people would not have been stretched out on what Hegel referred to as the “slaughter bench of history” (Hegel 1807/1977, p. 3; Smallwood 2015, pp. 13–14). To sum up this section, if we work with a critical realist ontology that consists of underlying structures, mechanisms and tendencies, we can avoid the trap of actualism. The latter error induces despair because we cannot see the potential for development and change that are intrinsic to the human condition. Actualism leaves us feeling trapped in the status quo. The critical realist ontology also includes a unique account of time, towards which we turn next.

The Critical Realist Concept of Time For Bhaskar time is both real and tensed. There are five basic tenses—the past, the past in the present, the present, the future in the present and the future. At any one moment, we can be affected by one or other of the five tenses. Following the examples of the Indigenous scholars Hau’ofa (1994) and Ka’ili (2017), we will concentrate here primarily on the past and the past in the present. However, when we return to a consideration of the role of the philosophy of meta-reality in providing grounds for hope, we will contemplate the role of the future in the present. Let us turn now to the work of Bhaskar on the notion of time advanced by the Cambridge philosopher John Ellis McTaggart. McTaggart’s (1993) critique of the notion of the reality of time need not concern us here, but what is of significant use is his division of traditional notions of time into Series A and Series B. Within Series A, events are regarded as being “related as past, present, and future” (Bhaskar 2008). The alternative to Series A is Series B where “events are compared as earlier than, simultaneous with or later than” (Bhaskar 1993). For our purposes, the distinction between Series A and Series B is most important. In fact, it is the essence of the Critical Realist approach to time that we should act on the assumption that Series A is real. This means that we regard the past of the incarcerated youth as being efficacious in (or continuing to have an effect on) the present. In other words, their lived experience and that of their people exist as the past in the present. Therefore, it is impossible to understand our Indigenous incarcerated youth, an Indigenous community school or any Indigenous community without acknowledging the weight of the past in the present. If, however, one assumes that Series B is the sole accurate description of time, and Series A is simply a fanciful distinction, then there is no past in the present. People should simply ‘get over it’. Moreover, with Series B there is little or no responsibility for what has happened. It is of course Series B that people resort to when they refuse to say ‘sorry’ for the Stolen Generations, or when they argue that they were not physically present at a massacre or at the destruction of Aboriginal culture so that means they have no responsibility to do anything.

50

3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People …

The past is however, as we said above, very real and we mean that it is efficacious in the present. To grasp the relevance of McTaggart’s distinction, let us examine the following two statements, both by former Prime Minister John Howard. First, on Gallipoli he said: Gallipoli has such a compelling place in Australian history… that to actually… wander around Lone Pine and go to the viewage places… that we learnt about as children, and learnt more about as we got older, is quite an emotional experience. And it infects everybody. The spirit amongst the young Australians there on both occasions was terrific. They were so Australian—they were… they were fairly unrestrained, but they were respectful. It was a… a respectful larrikinism. It’s the undisputed iconic moment in Australian history. No matter how hard some people may try to say, ‘Oh, it shouldn’t be like that,’ or, ‘It wasn’t like that,’ the fact is, it’s got this place in our hearts and our history that will never be removed. People rightly see it as a time and a place and an event, a tragic one, that put some wonderful Australian characteristics on display—mateship, courage… endurance, resilience, ingenuity (Howard 2015).

For Howard, then, Gallipoli is part of Series A. It is the past, and it is real and efficacious in the present and it should always be so. We have no quarrel with this whatsoever. We are totally supportive of a respectful attitude towards the experience of the Diggers at Lone Pine. For us too, it belongs to Series A. However, let us turn to another statement by Howard: But it’s very easy to apologise for other people’s mistakes. The Australian public would have a lot more confidence in politicians who apologised for their own mistakes rather than the mistakes of others. On top of that I didn’t accept the conclusion of the Bringing Them Home report that genocide had been practised against the Indigenous people. I didn’t believe genocide had taken place, and I still don’t. (Howard as cited in Davidson 2014)

For Howard, the past of Indigenous Australians belongs to Series B. That was then and this is now. The lived experience of Indigenous Australians is to be treated as if it were not efficacious in the present. However, we propose that it is difficult, if not impossible, to understand leaders of our country if they cannot acknowledge and learn from our history. Many mistakes were made and indeed many atrocities were perpetrated in the past on the Indigenous people of Australia. There have been attempts to re-write this history, most notably by Windschuttle (2002) who now as editor-in-chief of Quadrant Online continues to be a massacre denier and publishes like views. Thus, Robert Murray, in a recent issue, wrote: The background of these “massacres”, where understood at all, is often complicated, involving for example local Indigenous tribal politics, misunderstandings, bad behaviour by individuals on both sides. Aborigines taking cattle and sheep was usually the spark. Policing, when available, usually improved things. (Murray 2020).

Scholarly consensus is that the evidence for a practice of the systematic massacre of Indigenous Australians is now irrefutable (Auty 2004; Bamford 2019; Barker 2007; Bottoms 2013; Clark 2011; Copland et al. 2006; Curthoys 2015; Evans 2010; Evans et al. 1975; Grassby and Hill 1988; Grewcock 2018; Harris 2003; Penn 2015; Peters-Little et al. 2010; Reynolds 1998, 2000, 2013; Roberts 2005; Ryan 1996, 2003, 2010; Tatz 2017; Watson 2010).

The Critical Realist Concept of Time

51

Moreover, in terms of what Howard refers to as the “other people’s mistakes” (Howard as cited in Davidson 2014), some of these can scarcely be called so in that they were both callous and pre-meditated. Thus, with regard to the policy of child removal, the Chief Protector of Aborigines of Western Australia, Auber O. Neville (1875–1945), had this to say: The native must be helped in spite of himself. Even if a measure of discipline is necessary, it must be applied…Let us try it for a generation or two, and we need not fear the outcome. But when I say try it, I mean that every agency now in force and to be employed for the betterment of the native people must look upon the pursuance of the accepted united policy as paramount. There must be complete and enthusiastic co-operation between those charged with its initiation and conduct without reservation, and no backsliding, changes or let-down behind Authority’s back must be permitted… the end in view will justify the means employed—to wipe out forever an existing blot upon Australia’s escutcheon, and succeed in the ultimate elevation of a minority of our people to social equality with the majority and, what is equally important, to give them the ability to think for themselves. (Neville as cited in Grewcock 2018, p. 224)

Although Murray (2020) refers above to massacres in scare quotes, in their groundbreaking work Evans et al. (1975) unveil a ‘war of the races’ in colonial Queensland. They begin by citing from Advance Australia: An account of Eight Years’ work, Wandering and Amusement by Harold Finch-Hatton. Writing in 1885, he reported upon how an unnamed squatter of his acquaintance gave “the niggers…something really startling to keep them quiet” in the shape of poisoned food: The rations contained about as much strychnine as anything else and not one of the mob escaped. when they awoke in the morning they were all dead corpses. More than a hundred Blacks were stretched out by this ruse of the owner of Long Lagoon’. …The frightened shepherds at Kilcoy Creek in 1842 …fled their outstation, leaving behind poisoned flour which would cause some sixty native to die in great agony….The Kilcoy incident…was merely one of the better publicised examples of this quietly lethal process. James Dunbar records the poisoning of an unspecified number near Laidley in the 1840s, while Tom Petrie and Edgar Foreman gave evidence of arsenic placed in food killing “fifty or sixty” at Whiteside’s Station on the Upper Pine river. Foreman recalled some of the ghastly remains of this feast: “I, as a little boy, rode though a small pocket of what was called Rush Creek and saw scores of bleached bones including a complete skeleton. (Cited in Evans et al. 1975, p. 49)

Moreover, many lives continued to be lost in massacres until the Coniston Massacre of 1928 (Cribbin 1984). Like the Holocaust, these accounts belong to the world of horror beyond commentary. If we turn, from the topic of the killing fields to education, a simple reading of the archives is more than sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the schooling of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people was part of a system that aimed to discipline and control and never to educate (Fletcher 1989; Mackie 2018). A high proportion of young Indigenous people in detention centres today reside in and come from these Aboriginal reserves and missions that were set up as settlements to discipline and control the Aborigines. An example of this is the Barrambah settlement, now named Cherbourg, which is one of the communities with high numbers of Indigenous young people in detention centres.

52

3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People …

Blake argues very convincingly that: A principal objective of the Barrambah settlement was to control and discipline those removed there. Barrambah was never a passive institution where the displaced remnants of the indigenous inhabitants were able to maintain their culture and lifestyle without interference. Aboriginal culture was regarded as intrinsically inferior, and a central feature of the settlement’s modus operandi was the attempt to destroy the inmates’ cultural identity and inculcate a ‘limited amount of civilisation’. (Blake 2001, p. 57)

The role of the school was to support this overall system. That this was quite methodical in both planning and execution can be seen from the inspectors’ reports. However, this is not to say that there were no tensions and contradictions at work within the schooling system, although in overall terms, the purpose of schooling in these communities was to reproduce the values of the dominant system and to ensure that the Indigenous people did not constitute a challenge to that system. This then is the past in the present that Indigenous Australians inhabit: Present absence → orientation to future → grounding in the presence of the past → praxis (Bhaskar 1993, p. 255).

Chapter Summary This chapter has argued for a philosophical understanding of the historical and social complexities that underpin the lived experience of incarcerated Indigenous youth. We have argued for an explanation that sees the problems in ontological terms. That has led us to a consideration of the three levels of the Critical Realist ontology—the real, the actual and the empirical. The real is constituted by structures and tendencies that can be traced to the relationship between the colonists and the colonised. That relationship was based firstly on expropriation. In other words, it was marked by oppression and domination. From that underlying relationship have flowed the historical and social complexities that all incarcerated Indigenous youth have inherited. Armed with this understanding, we can set about the creation of a new relationship and on the basis of that we can build an education system that will cater to the needs of all Australians. The next chapter is devoted to an aspect of education system.

References Armytage, P. & Ogloff, J. (2017). Youth justice review and strategy: Meeting needs and reducing offending—Part 1. Justice and community safety. Victorian Government. https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/justice-system/youth-justice/youth-justice-review-and-str ategy-meeting-needs-and-reducing-offending. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2020). Youth justice in Australia 2018– 19. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/a5a364b9-fe69-4d02-9c93-1965a69a3d93/aihw-juv-132. pdf.aspx?inline=true.

References

53

Auty, K. (2004). Patrick Bernard O’Leary and the Forrest River massacres, Western Australia: Examining ‘Wodgil’ and the significance of 8 June 1926. Aboriginal History, 28, 122–155. Bamford, M. (2019, November 18). Colonial frontier massacres researchers add dozens of sites to map of Aboriginal killings. ABC. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-18/dozens-of-massacresites-added-to-map-of-aboriginal-killings/11707916. Barker, B. (2007). Massacre, frontier conflict and Australian archaeology. Australian Archaeology, 64, 9–14. Bates, D. M. (2012). Foreword. In P. Teamp˘au (Ed.), Success stories in the IMPACT program (p. 6). New Horizons Foundation. https://www.worldvision.com.au/docs/default-source/seeddocs/youth-livelihoods/impact-clubs/evidence-documents/impact-successstory.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Bensaïd, D. (2001). Résistances: Essai de taupologie générale. Fayard. Bhaskar, R. (1989). Reclaiming reality: A critical introduction to contemporary philosophy. Verso. Bhaskar, R. (1993). Dialectic: The pulse of freedom. Routledge. Bhaskar, R. (2008). A realist theory of science (2nd ed.). Routledge. Bhaskar, R. (2010). Plato etc.: The problems of philosophy and their resolution. Routledge. Bhaskar, R. (2012). From science to emancipation: Alienation and the actuality of enlightenment. Routledge. Blake, T. (2001). A dumping ground: A history of the Cherbourg settlement. University of Queensland Press. Bottoms, T. (2013). Conspiracy of silence: Queensland’s frontier killing times. Allen & Unwin. Clark, I. D. (2011). The convincing ground aboriginal massacre at Portland Bay, Victoria: fact or fiction? Aboriginal History, 35, 79–109. Commission for Children and Young People. (2017). Annual report 2016–17. https://ccyp.vic.gov. au/assets/corporate-documents/CCYP-Annual-Report-2016-17.pdf. Copland, M., Richards, J., & Walker, A. (2006). One hour more daylight: A historical overview of Aboriginal dispossession in southern and southwest Queensland. Social Justice Commission, Catholic Diocese of Toowoomba. Cribbin, J. (1984). The killing times: The Coniston massacre 1928. Fontana Books. Curthoys, A. (2015). Indigenous dispossession and pastoral employment in Western Australia during the nineteenth century: Implications for understanding colonial forms of genocide. In M. Adhikari (Ed.), Genocide on settler frontiers (pp. 210–231). Berghahn Books. Davidson, G. (1995, March 1). Cognitive assessment of indigenous Australians: Towards a multiaxial model. Australian Psychologist, 30(1), 30–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/000500695082 59601. Davidson, H. (2014, September 22). John Howard: There was no genocide against Indigenous Australians. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/22/john-howardthere-was-no-genocide-against-indigenous-australians. Drinan, C. H. (2018). The war on kids: How American juvenile justice lost its way. Oxford University Press. Evans, R. (2010). The country has another past: Queensland and the history wars. In F. E. A. PetersLittle, A. Curthoys, & J. Docker (Eds.), Passionate histories: Myth, memory and indigenous Australia (pp. 9–38). ANU Press. Evans, R., Saunders, K., & Cronin, K. (1975). Exclusion, exploitation and extermination: Race relations in colonial Queensland. Australia and New Zealand Book Company. Fletcher, J. J. (1989). Clean, clad and courteous: A history of Aboriginal education in New South Wales. Angus & Robertson. Frize, M., Kenny, D., & Lennings, C. (2008). The relationship between intellectual disability, Indigenous status and risk of reoffending in juvenile offenders on community orders. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 52(6), 510–519. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008. 01058 Grassby, A., & Hill, M. (1988). Six Australian battlefields. Angus & Robertson. Grewcock, M. (2018). Settler-colonial violence, primitive accumulation and Australia’s genocide. State Crime Journal, 7(2), 222–250. https://doi.org/10.13169/statecrime.7.2.0222

54

3 Cultural and Educational Responsibility for Indigenous Young People …

Harris, J. (2003). Hiding the bodies: The myth of the humane colonisation of Aboriginal Australia. Aboriginal History, 27, 79–104. Hau’ofa, E. (1994). Our sea of islands. The Contemporary Pacific, 6(1), 148–161. Hegel, W. G. F. (1977). Phenomenonology of spirit (A. V. Miller, Trans.). Oxford University Press (Original work published 1807). Howard, J. (2015, March 6). Former Prime Minister John Howard discusses the impact of Gallipoli on Australian identity. In Gallipoli: The first day (Centenary ed.). https://www.abc.net.au/ww1anzac/gallipoli/commentaries/200021802.html. Ka’ili, T. O. (2017). Marking Indigeneity: The Tongan art of sociospatial relations. University of Arizona Press. Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation & University of Tasmania. (2016). Telling it like it is: Aboriginal perspectives on race and race relations. http://www.utas.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0004/877324/telling-it-like-it-is-linkage-launch-media-handout.pdf. Mackie, E. (2020). Future ready Queensland: The role of the state: A philosophical position on public policy for the fourth industrial revolution. Doctoral dissertation, Southern Cross University. https://researchportal.scu.edu.au/esploro/outputs/doctoral/Future-ready-Que ensland--the-role/991012897100202368?institution=61SCU_INST. Mackie, I. F. (2018). Innovation and reform in Queensland Indigenous educational policy 2010– 2012. Doctoral dissertation, Southern Cross University. https://researchportal.scu.edu.au/esploro/ outputs/doctoral/Innovation-and-reform-in-Queensland-Indigenous/991012923300502368. McTaggart, J. M. E. (1993). The unreality of time. In R. Le Poidevin & M. MacBeath (Eds.), The philosophy of time (pp. 23–34). Oxford University Press. Morris, M. (2016). Pushout: The criminalization of black girls in schools. The New Press. Murray, R. (2020, January 26). Don’t like the past? Invent a new one. Quadrant. https://quadrant. org.au/opinion/history-wars/2020/01/dont-like-real-history-just-invent-your-own/. Pace, S. (2018). From correctional education to school reentry: How formerly incarcerated youth can achieve better educational outcomes. Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights, 23(2), 127–143. Penn, N. (2015). The destruction of hunter-gatherer societies on the pastoralist frontier: The Cape and Australia compared. In M. Adhikari (Ed.), Genocide on settler frontiers: When huntergatherers and commercial stock farmers clash (pp. 159–184). Berghahn Books. Peters-Little, F., Curthoys, A., & Docker, J. (Eds.). (2010). Passionate histories: Myth, memory and Indigenous Australia. ANU Press. Pratt, M. L. (1991). Arts of the contact zone. Profession, 33–40. Reynolds, H. (1998). This whispering in our hearts. Allen & Unwin. Reynolds, H. (2000). Why weren’t we told? Penguin. Reynolds, H. (2013). Forgotten war. UNSW Press. Roberts, T. (2005). Frontier justice: A history of the Gulf Country to 1900. University of Queensland Press. Rudd, P., Senior, K., & Sharp, J. (2021). Juvenile (in)justice in Darwin: Young people’s voices from the Don Dale Youth Detention Centre. In K. Senior, R. Chenhall, & V. Burbank (Eds.), Indigenous Australian youth futures (pp. 183–200). ANU Press. Ryan, L. (1996). The aboriginal Tasmanians. Allen & Unwin. Ryan, L. (2003). The right book for the right time? Labour History, 85, 202–206. Ryan, L. (2010). ‘Hard evidence’: The debate about massacre in the Black War in Tasmania. In F. Peters-Little, A. Curthoys, & J. Docker (Eds.), Passionate histories: Myth, memory and Indigenous Australia (pp. 39–50). ANU. Sarra, C. (2011a). Strong and smart—Towards a pedagogy for emancipation: Education for first peoples. Routledge. Sarra, C. (2011b). Transforming Indigenous education. In N. Purdie, G. Milgate, & H. R. Bell (Eds.), Two way teaching and learning: Toward culturally reflective and relevant education (pp. 107– 118). ACER.

References

55

Sarra, C. (2012). Good morning, Mr Sarra: My life working for a stronger, smarter future for our children. University of Queensland Press. Sarra, G., & Ewing, B. (2021). Culturally responsive pedagogies and perspectives in mathematics. In M. Shay (Ed.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 148–161). Routledge. Seligman, M. (1991). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life. Pocket Books. Seligman, M. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. Free Press. Seligman, M. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. William Heinemann. Smallwood, G. (2015). Human rights and first Australians’ well being. Routledge. Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs. (2015). Alcohol, hurting people and harming communities: Inquiry into the harmful use of alcohol in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. House of Representatives. Parliament of Australia. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Busi ness/Committees/House/Indigenous_Affairs/Alcohol/Report. Tatz, C. (2017). Australia’s unthinkable genocide. Xlibris US. United Nations. (1985). Standard minimum rules for the administration of juvenile justice (“The Beijing rules”). https://www.ohchr.org/documents/professionalinterest/beijingrules.pdf. United Nations. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. Human Rights. Office of the High Commissioner. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx. United Nations. (1990a). Guidelines for the prevention of juvenile delinquency (“The Riyadh guidelines”). https://www.ohchr.org/en/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/PreventionOfJuveni leDelinquency.aspx. United Nations. (1990b). Rules for the protection of juveniles deprived of their liberty. Human Rights. Office of the High Commissioner. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ JuvenilesDeprivedOfLiberty.aspx. Watson, J. (2010). Palm Island: Through a long lens. Aboriginal Studies Press. Windschuttle, K. (2002). The fabrication of Aboriginal history, volume one: Van Diemen’s land 1803–1847. Macleay Press.

Chapter 4

Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

Abstract In this Chapter, we focus on the findings of our research gathered between 2017 and 2019 at the Centre and explore the role of mathematics teachers in juvenile justice centres and the approaches they use to teach children and young people mathematics within this complex environment. Considering the implications of these findings, we discuss how in Australia student engagement and participation in mathematics and numeracy learning are increasingly mentioned in national and state policies and curriculum documents with a view to improving student achievement. Schools and teachers play a critical role in providing a climate of learning that encourages engagement and active student participation. We discuss teaching practices and identify those that are effective and those that may work to further marginalise and exclude young people from learning. Three important caveats are necessary here. First, the data gathered for the study occurred between 2017 and 2019 and therefore reflects a particular point in time and just prior to the COVID19 pandemic outbreak at the beginning of 2020 in Australia. Second, youth detention in Queensland underwent two reviews, one in 2016, Independent Review of Youth Detention (McMillan and Davis 2016), with the Queensland Government releasing its response in 2017 (Queensland Government). The second review, Report on Youth Justice (Queensland Government 2018), provided the framework for the Queensland Government’s Working Together: Changing the Story: Youth Justice Strategy 2019–2023 (Department of Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs 2018). In 2020, the Centre school underwent a review as part of Education Queensland’s regular State School review. Processes and changes were improved but these were after the data collection period of this study. Finally, when reference is made to a class of students, this class could be a combination of students who have been detained for the first time and students who could potentially be on their second or third detainment. Data were not gathered from individual students nor the school pertaining to the average number of days a child is not enrolled in a school prior to detention; mean and median detention periods; the number of admissions per year per individual child; the number of children who had a school enrolment upon entry to detention. The percentage of children who have never attended a secondary school was not a core focus of the study. Further, this data would identify the site where the study was conducted.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0_4

57

58

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention Our hope is that these students become productive members of society and can live well and have choices like the rest of us have been blessed with. (Brian, maths teacher)

The story of fifteen-year-old Indigenous student Josiah, told in Chap. 1, illustrates the multi-dimensional problems that young people experience in schools and in juvenile detention centres. Principal among these is the mismatch between their educational needs and the instructional approach adopted in these learning contexts. Josiah’s experience highlights the consequences of decisions that the courts make and the need for educational provisions that will enhance young people’s current and future well-being. Our study prompts re-thinking about whether these young people are just ‘born criminals’ or children who have the potential and capacity to become contributing members of Australian society. Are they simply dismissed as children born into a world of poverty, drugs and violence—namely poor children and Indigenous children—and so denied equitable learning opportunities? In this chapter, we discuss the nature and implications of these concerns, relating them to the literature and our ARC Indigenous Discovery project: Unlocking the learning potential of Indigenous and low socioeconomic young people’s learning potential: Mathematics for future success (IN150100045). In particular, we critique the approaches to maths teaching and resources identified during our data collection period at the Centre school demonstrating the limitations and implications of current educational approaches in juvenile detention centres and schools more widely.

Causes for Concern: Research Gaps and Misunderstandings Our own professional experience and review of the literature had alerted us to significant gaps in knowledge and misunderstandings about the types of education that are provided to children and young people in juvenile detention centres. As mentioned previously, very little is known about education, teaching and learning in these contexts. Very little is known about how children and young people from Indigenous cultures and low socioeconomic backgrounds are supported and encouraged to learn through the application of culturally responsive pedagogies that draw on their cultures, histories, stories and language. As these children enter the education system with a host of emotional, social and physical challenges, they will likely face an uphill academic battle in a traditional classroom setting where instruction-based approaches are used. Coupled with significant absences and/or disengagement from school, children raised in poverty endure chronic stress which can inhibit their learning capacity (Drinan 2018). Jensen (2009, p. 25) claims: Exposure to chronic or acute stress is hardwired into children’s developing brains, creating a devasting, cumulative effect. … Compared with a healthy neuron, a stressed neuron generates a weaker signal, handles less blood flow, processes less oxygen, and extends fewer cognitive branches to nearby cells. The prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus, crucial for learning, cognition, and working memory, are the areas of the brain most affected by cortisol, the so-called “stress hormone.” Experiments have demonstrated that exposure to chronic or

Causes for Concern: Research Gaps and Misunderstandings

59

acute stress actually shrinks neurons in the brain’s frontal lobes—an area that includes the prefrontal cortex and is responsible for such functions as making judgments, planning and regulating impulsivity…–and can modify and impair the hippocampus in ways that reduce learning capacity.

These children are especially subject to stressors that undermine learning, behaviour and performance (Jensen 2009). Girls and boys exposed to abuse are likely to experience mood swings and impairments in curiosity, learning and memory. The stress resulting from transience—frequent short-distance, poverty-related moves— affects children’s ability to succeed in learning and engage in positive social interactions. Poverty can dramatically increase the likelihood of a child entering the juvenile justice system—even when controlling for other intersecting variables like race and ethnicity (Drinan 2018). From an educational perspective, these findings raise concerns for children like Josiah and those who have lived their young lives in poverty: are they children who have incarcerated parents, and who witness violence in the home, and therefore are statistically more likely to end up in the juvenile justice system? Are they becoming adults before their time? Is crime a destiny for some children, particularly those who live in poverty? As belief and hope diminish, crime and violence increase. Despair in the lack of a future falls most heavily on juvenile populations across cities, and in rural and remote locations in Australia. It is expressed in such forms as ‘Gansta Rap’—the rage against oppression and police brutality. So how can teachers in juvenile detention centre schools persuade children like Josiah to believe that they matter and have the power to change the circumstances of their lives through the development of their talent? The idea of mattering is important (Love 2019). That it is still possible for them to realise their dreams of becoming a contributing member of society. That they can escape the inverse relationship between belief and hope on the one hand and crime and violence on the other. The silence, the trance-like state so poignantly shown by Josiah, cannot be answered simply by resorting to the rhetoric of those who cry that today’s youth have an equal opportunity to succeed just as we did. It just is not that simple. The challenge presented by children like Josiah requires a rejuvenation of spirit, a realistic and meaningful display of opportunity and an absolute right to the best education possible in Australia so that they will be prepared to embrace opportunity when it is presented to them. When children come into the Centre school, providing them with access to learning can be a difficult and challenging task for teachers, particularly if they lack socialisation and successful experiences in school, have substantial gaps in knowledge and understandings because of limited experiences of schooling and are repeat offenders and distrust people. As Kilila, one of the Centre teachers, indicates: But it’s difficult if you’ve had students that haven’t—I had a student the other day in an induction class who when we had talked about when he last went to school it was in 2015 so he hadn’t been to school since 2015, so he could quite possibly have learning difficulties that have never been picked up because he’s missed out on mainstream schooling and then to come in so late.

60

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention I think a lot of the students would believe even subconsciously that no-one is trustworthy or that everyone is—you should have distrust for everyone. I think a lot of them have come from backgrounds that distrust would be far more common than trust and they mightn’t be able to verbalise that but they’re, they’re wary of their surroundings and wary of allowing themselves to be vulnerable because of that. So I don’t think I can change their world view because there’s so many kids from trauma and they’ve obviously been through a lot to get in here to start with, but I would like them to know that there’s one adult that gives a shit enough to listen to them, to provide them with a quality education and to care.

With the research outlined in Chap. 1, we sought to meet this challenge. First, through our fieldwork from 2017 to 2019, we needed to observe and examine how maths was taught and learned in the Centre school. Then through our evidence-based intervention we sought to ask—actually no, we tried to persuade—the young people to believe that they can accomplish in maths, attain broader goals and that they mattered. We presented maths learning that could prepare them for future learning and opportunities to succeed. We were not always successful, but the teachers and leadership team in the Centre expected us to make the effort and we attempted to do our part. Communicating how we planned to engage and have the children participate in maths learning took several forms and was an integral part of our method. The findings of our study show just how challenging learning and teaching mathematics in a juvenile detention centre can be, for both students and teachers. They indicate the need for radical reform in educational provision for young detainees, especially those from low socioeconomic and Indigenous backgrounds.

Remembering, Observing and Analysing Maths Teaching Approaches ‘How many of you can remember working through pages of algorithms in the prescribed maths textbook in secondary school?’ That is a question that I often pose to maths teacher educators and pre-service teachers in maths lectures at the university where I work. The serious point of the question is to emphasise that my audience and children share at least one thing in common: the maths learning experience in secondary school. Evoking educators’ memory of maths learning is crucial to understanding the experiences of children in juvenile detention centre schools. The first step to capturing the nature of maths learning for these children is to remember it. Not just the pleasant memories of attainment made sweeter with the passing of time but also the feelings generated as much by failure as by success, by shame as well as pride. We all had to traverse the secondary maths classroom at a time when we saw ourselves evolving in size, knowledge, and appreciation for what was right and wrong. For the children and young people in juvenile detention centres, the journey is much more difficult than for others. (Bronwyn)

Together, the Centre’s students and teacher participants revealed a complex array of social and economic disadvantages in the lives of the children and young people who find themselves in juvenile detention. Again, Kilila notes:

Remembering, Observing and Analysing Maths Teaching Approaches

61

There’s just lots of violent reactions to things that you wouldn’t expect there to be a violent reaction to. Before the kids get here they’ve got their own whole range of social challenges on the outside which can be you know, lack of parents, lack of any love and affection and a safe relationship or safe place to live. I had a student in induction this week who I said ‘what was your address before you came in here?’ ‘I don’t have one’, and she was 13, so the social challenges that they’re facing are just astronomical. They’re just massive. But then they come in here and if they were the only one in the group on the outside that was aggressive or broke the law, they come in here and they’re with everyone else that’s done the same thing. So I’ve sort of seen kids—their behaviour it starts to seem normal to them—their behaviour becomes normalised, like everyone else is doing it.

Riley, a student who we met during one of our visits to the juvenile detention centre in the Spring of 2018, characterises this experience. He arrived at class fully escorted by the security youth worker from the residential facility with two other students. He reluctantly sat down at the tables which were neatly organised in a U-shape with the opening facing the whiteboard. As the teacher waited for the remaining students to arrive, Riley and his peers were asked to take their folders from the desk and start work in their maths booklets. Pencils and erasers were counted and handed out by the security youth worker—one of each per student. Riley was slow to respond to the directive and instead pulled his hat down over his forehead to partially hide his eyes and then muttered that he disliked doing the maths and the work in the booklets. Kristine, a maths teacher, offers her perceptions: I think the biggest concern is the students’ perception of maths. They don’t see it as being valuable in here, despite the fact that I feel they have a greater grasp or understanding of the subject than they’re willing to let on, they don’t want to actually do it, so to speak in booklet form. Possibly because they find it boring, offensive, a waste of their time, below their actual ability. So their perception of it is a big thing.

We continued to observe Riley to try and learn about why he disliked maths and the booklets. The booklets were levelled from 2 to 4 using the Australian Curriculum, General Capabilities, Numeracy Learning Continuum (Version 8.4) (ACARA, n.d.a) and broadly focused on understanding and using numbers in context, estimation and calculation, and using money. Typically, students achieve level 2 by the end of the Year 2 school year. Level 3 is typically achieved at the end of Year 4, and Level 4 is achieved at the end of Year 6. Riley was on level 2. The booklets were made up of approximately 25 photocopied pages of routine word problems and algorithms focusing on various topics but particularly Number and Operations, namely addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. There were limited connections to students’ culture and experiences as can be seen in Figs. 4.2 and 4.3 later in this chapter. Further discussion of the booklets can be found in the section Textbooks and Booklets Here it is a vocational education system also later in this chapter. Riley reached out and half-heartedly dragged his folder across the desks to where he was sitting. He took up his pencil and eraser and started his maths work. Ten minutes passed, and the other students were working on their booklets individually, but Riley continued to communicate that he did not like working through the booklets. Bronwyn recalls:

62

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention At that point I decided to sit nearby in the event that he asked for help. He did. He asked me to read the maths question because he was not sure what was being asked of him. I responded and read the question to him, then he asked me for the answer! I told him that I was challenged sometimes with word problems when I was in school as a young person and needed the teacher’s help. I wanted him to know that I was interested in his learning—that he mattered. I didn’t give him the answer, but he trusted me enough and allowed me to work through the question with him as he worked towards a reasonable solution. What became evident as the lesson progressed was that Riley struggled to read and consequently did not understand the maths involved in the questions. I soon discovered across several other lessons observed in the Centre that Riley was not the only child who experienced problems with reading, maths, and the booklets. Feelings of shame and failure were evident.

With a similar example, Kristine talks about social communication and trusting relationships and their importance in the classroom: The communication—I’m not in control of anyone else’s behaviour and I’m very, very aware of that so the only thing that I know I can control is the way that I communicate and interact with the students, so I’m not holding any grudges. It’s not, it’s not a two-way street in that if I give them respect, I expect respect back. I would love respect back, that would be absolutely wonderful but sometimes it doesn’t happen and that doesn’t change my approach to the students because I will always give them respect because I think the only way that you can move forward in a positive way with students that are disrespectful or disengaged is to grant them the respect that they deserve immediately, every lesson no matter what happened the last lesson um in the hope that down the track they realise that no matter how foul or disrespectful they are, there’s not a reaction from me and I’ll still welcome them into my room and be respectful. I try to shake their hands when they walk in the classroom, pat on the back, all that sort of stuff but it’s definitely not me doing it with an expectation of something in return. I hope that that happens but they’re independent of each other.

The observations of Riley’s and Kristine’s comments highlight two key points of concern arising from our study about the maths instruction at the Centre school. These concerns relate to the teaching approaches and the resources identified and show limited connections made to students’ culture and lived experiences. First, the teaching approaches were primarily found to be instruction-based—highly structured and using explicit teaching (Farkota 2003; Rumph et al. 2007a). They focused on “small chunks deliberately isolated from the complexities of actual situations” (Hirsch 2002, p. 63). A step-by-step direct and explicit approach is said to benefit students because of the limitations of the working memory. During instruction, the teacher’s task is to ensure meaningful attention by students to what is to be learned using whatever methods are available. Rehearsal, also referred to as rote learning or drill, is seen as one means to this end. Second, the vocational education and training booklets for the Certificate in General Education Courses, which aligned with the Australian Core Skills Framework (Department of Education Skills and Employment 2020), were written to support learners such as Indigenous learners, students with disabilities and students who have had interrupted schooling. The booklets appeared to present challenges for some students, such as those who struggled to read and understand what was being asked of them in the booklets. Teachers indicated that the booklets were used

Instruction-Based Approaches to Teaching Maths

63

because of their focus on vocational skills development—eventually preparation for employment and for some students returning to mainstream schooling. According to Kristine: Here it is a vocational education system. So we differentiate based on the fact that we do have—we test kids. We pre-test kids based on their BKSB levels or the ACF levels or their [LLN] levels, all those different ones. [LLN refers to Language, Literacy and Numeracy].

Most of the teachers’ interview responses were constructed in terms of struggles over approaches to the teaching and learning of maths to incarcerated students and the system that created the curriculum for this teaching and learning to occur.

Instruction-Based Approaches to Teaching Maths In the Centre, as elsewhere, instruction-based or traditional approaches continue to dominate the practices of secondary maths classrooms (Ambrose 2012; Boaler 2015; Felton et al. 2012; Gutstein 2006). As Cuban (1988) observes, in the USA context, the structure and assumptions of these approaches go back to the 1880s (cf. Cohen 1988), while for Boaler (2002, p. 48) they constitute “a common method of teaching that has been used by maths teachers for centuries”. The term, instruction-based includes such recent developments as direct and explicit instruction which are policy-driven organisational forces focusing on neoliberal and conservative agendas (Ewing 2011). The pressure to raise standards and increase attainment grouping in the organisation of maths classes and within classes is interconnected with the establishment of highstakes accountability regimes that have prevailed in Australia and elsewhere over the last fifty years (Boylan and Povey 2012; D’Ambrosio 2016). Whatever their epistemological differences, these approaches share a common commitment to an instruction-based approach to maths education. Instruction-based approaches are predicated on long-standing tacit or explicit assumptions that are grounded in assumptions from behavioural science about teachers, students and the nature of maths knowledge. Here mathematical knowledge either remains fixed and eternal, to be taught, not discovered (Ewing 2009), or it constitutes an essential body of facts to be transmitted to those who do not possess it. In this didactic or transmission framework, teachers are considered the authoritative possessors of knowledge who transmit approved parts of that knowledge to those who do not possess it—students. In the following vignette from Daniel, a maths teacher at the Centre, an instruction-based approach is evident: So I think the basic method I use is through oral. I ask the questions and ask them to explain. Within their answers then I try to pick on some mistakes there and ask them to clarify it. I think that’s the best way to do it. The second way is from the written test, so that’s completed skills that’s all. That’s not a concept, it is the skill. So I would like to—always have a lot of conversations with the students, question and answer, question and answer. … I usually give them some questions to answer or some problems. The main idea is to let the students use the theory they have learnt in the lesson to solve those mathematical problems. If I give them 10, if they can finish five or six really efficiently then they don’t have to finish the rest because

64

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention they know the theory. If they are still struggling about it, then I know that the student does not understand the theory, then those students I need to give them more personal attention.

This vignette shows that instruction-based maths is a particular form of maths, that is primarily driven by the teacher using a question-and-answer format. Students are expected to learn ‘theory’ which is presented in the booklets as a collection of unrelated facts and figures structured into an information-transfer relationship between teacher and student. The approach is a teacher-driven context where students receive oral and written instruction in concepts, practise working ‘efficiently’ through applications of rules and formulas and then indicate their understanding of ‘theory’ by proficiency in their solutions to maths problems. There is a strong argument, well supported in the literature on direct instruction, that rehearsal or rote learning is necessary for the retention of what is learned (cf. Hirsch 2002; Rumph et al. 2007a). Directly and explicitly teaching requires students to rehearse what they have learned. This is done at a very fast pace, rather than through drawn-out explanations of new concepts. Typically, what is remembered is determined by how often it has been rehearsed. This approach is largely driven by a pedagogy centred on the belief that maths is a fixed, static body of isolated and decontextualised knowledge which is mechanistically manipulated using symbols and numbers and learned for its intrinsic value, as an end in it itself. In doing so, it presents challenges for students’ mathematics learning in the Centre.

The Challenges of Instruction-Based Approaches As already discussed, instruction-based approaches are associated with a longstanding tradition of maths education, in which maths teachers, as the authoritative possessors of the requisite mathematical knowledge, transmit approved parts of it to those who do not possess it, their students (Scherer and Steinbring 2006). This approach is problematic for students who have had exposure to chronic or acute stress which impacts making judgements, planning and regulating impulsivity (Jensen 2009). These stressors undermine learning, attainment and behaviour and are evident in Richard’s vignette: They have difficulty reading questions and they don’t like word problems, because there’s a lot of reading to do. Yes, and they have difficulty understanding that.

The emphasis on repetition and reproduction of received knowledge may be challenging for these students and unrelated to the experiences that they bring to the learning context. The teacher provides information, demonstrates procedures and determines whether the necessary ‘theory’ has been acquired through questioning and testing. Learning opportunities are limited for students and teachers to discuss together not simply how, but why the procedures work and where they connect in real life.

Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches

65

Moreover, if maths is seen as the transmission of the knowledge with minimal or no discussion, it follows that it involves rote learning, rehearsal, memorisation and isolation. In classrooms that reflected an instruction-based approach, an overemphasis on memorising procedures was found to occur instead of conceptual understanding and linkages to the students’ prior experiences. Memorisation rather than fluency and flexibility seemed to be the natural concomitant to instructing and lecturing students. As students moved through the booklets, limited opportunities were provided for defending answers and justifying their mathematical thinking. A focus on the transmission of mathematical knowledge rather than learning how to inquire into mathematical ideas with understanding meant that most students received little or no practice at participating in solving mathematical problems that have connections with their lives and culture (cf. Alro and Johnsen-Hoines 2016; Gutstein 2012b). In a focus group of students in the Centre who were discussing how they would like to learn maths, one student stated: I don’t know. Because you can relate to it kind of thing. That’s why. It makes it kind of like more interesting, you know what I mean?

In maths classrooms that adopt an instruction-based approach, students learn that there is only one correct way to solve mathematical tasks—usually the rule most recently demonstrated by the teacher. Step-by-step instructions for working through rules that emphasise speed and accuracy have been shown to limit any form of knowledge construction or inquiry (Appelbaum 2019). The assumptions underpinning this approach are questionable, in particular that maths knowledge can be passed or handed over from the teacher (or the booklet) to the student.

Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches Instruction-based approaches that are teacher-centred generally involve one-way communication from the teacher to the student. The teacher is seen to be the authority of mathematical knowledge, while students by definition lack that knowledge (Gutstein 2006). Consequently, classroom communication is initiated by the teacher and directed to a student or students, who then respond. The teacher then evaluates their response. The teacher, who should possess sound mathematical content knowledge, is seen as the expert who passes this knowledge on to students via direct or explicit instruction. It is the teacher who tells the students what they need to know and learn. Interactions generally do not involve student-to-student interactions, although these are not discounted (Jones and Southern 2003). However, if teachers are to instil a deep understanding of maths in the students they teach, they must provide explicit explanations that students understand and can use across a range of contexts (Stein et al. 2006). In this framework, then, teachers are expected to possess a thorough knowledge of the content and processes of maths. They require an understanding of

66

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

the big ideas and general principles of maths to guide their application effectively and to support student learning. Teacher-centred communication is directed from the teacher, and its success is contingent on their ability to communicate with clarity. Advocates for it argue that this type of instruction supports student learning of maths. They claim that it provides adequate learning and practice opportunities for all students.

The Challenges of Communication in Instruction-Based Approaches International comparisons indicate that the type of interactions between teachers and students is statistically significant when associated with student success/failure and performance (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 2001). It was found that one-way interaction from the teacher to the student did not support student achievement because it provided limited opportunities to talk about what was being learned. While the typical intention of teacher talk is to support students with learning maths, it can have the opposite effect on students (Begehr 2006). The consequence is that they are denied opportunities to describe the content to be learned in their own words and to reflect on what they are learning and have learned and what they need to learn in the future. Their efforts to understand the maths content are reduced to disjointed fragments without explicit links made, while opportunities diminish for them to interact genuinely in and with the overall content. Instead, they are guided along a narrowly defined path that does not grant them time to express their own thoughts about their learning or to engage with and use the mathematical language. In consequence, they are less likely to develop and learn the rich body of language associated with maths and use it when talking about their learning, or indeed applying it to real-life contexts.

Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches Textbooks feature significantly in many primary and secondary maths classrooms across the globe (Jäder et al. 2020; Mullis et al. 2012). The results from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2011 identified that more than half of students in secondary schools in countries such as Australia, Finland, Singapore, Sweden, South Africa and Canada were taught maths using a student textbook as the basis of instruction (Mullis et al. 2012). Mathematics textbooks have been found to be the foundation of mathematical education for 48% of students in the United States, and in some countries, it is higher than 90% (Mullis et al. 2012).

Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches

67

There is a clear relationship between textbooks and classroom instruction. While the usage of textbooks in classrooms varies, they are a major influencing factor in the teaching of maths and what maths is important to teach and learn (Rezat and Strasser 2014). This tendency is strongly influenced by textbook publishers, despite possible discrepancies between textbooks and national curriculum goals, standards and research findings. Yet teachers regard textbooks as an authority of maths knowledge because opportunities to learn are created by published images and explanations (Ewing 2006). Textbooks shape the instructional situations together with teachers and students. As Romberg and Kaput (1997, p. 358) identified in their study of maths classroom contexts: The expert knowledge of the teacher was deliberately subjugated to that of the textbook. Because of that process, the teacher was able to camouflage his [sic] role as authoritarian, thus eliminating student challenges of authority. (Weller cited in Romberg and Kaput 1997, p. 358)

These researchers found that when textbooks were used in classrooms, teachers used the term ‘they’—as in ‘Do it as they show you in the book’—to imply that the authors knew what students needed to know (Romberg and Kaput 1997). In this way, teachers reduced any likely challenges to their authority from students, potentially shifting responsibilities for teaching and learning to the authors. Consequently, the textbook and authors were used as a substitute for the teaching and learning process.

Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches Our observations revealed that the booklets used in the Centre school were an intervention strategy as well as a ‘curriculum’ for learning. The booklets were an accountability measure to document student learning. The intention was to improve students’ mathematics learning during the times that they were detained. This period could be three days, three weeks, six months or two years depending on whether they were remanded, sentenced or on their second or third detention. While improving students’ learning was well intended, the maths content was more about learning facts and formulas rather than learning maths that was embedded in Indigenous perspectives which is more likely to support student engagement in learning. All the Centre maths teachers were required to work through the booklets with students. As the previous discussion of Riley and the booklets indicated, the junior secondary booklets were guided by the Australian Curriculum, General Capabilities, Numeracy Learning Continuum (Version 8.4) (ACARA, n.d.a) which broadly focused on understanding and using numbers in context, estimation and calculation, and using money. Typically, students achieve level 2 by the end of the Year 2 school year. Level 3 is typically achieved at the end of Year 4, and Level 4 is achieved at the end of Year 6. Senior secondary students completed the Certificate in

68

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

General Education for Adults booklets written by the Centre in 2016. These booklets were informed by the Australian Core Skills Framework Levels 1–4 (Department of Education Skills and Employment 2020). There was a range of topics in this Certificate, including Introductory topics on Direction, Measurement, Number and Money and Shapes. Actual Certificate 1 topics included Calculations, Measurement, Shape and Direction and Sports Statistics. The teachers’ programming was guided by the content in the booklets as Kendrick, a maths teacher reveals: Okay, so the fundamental one is the vocational education, okay. So we look at—we have the five units for numeracy. So you’ve got your—your whole numbers—your calculations. You’ve got your data. You’ve got measurements. You’ve got shape, shape and direction. So we use those to guide us okay. So that’s vocational. That’s set by Queensland Education. With the junior secondary, which is below 15, they don’t have that. So what we’re using is ACARA [Australian Curriculum] and we are starting to—we’re not teaching to age level because these kids are usually on average 10 or so years below their reading levels. So it’s not fair to teach them grade nine work when they can’t even read at a grade two level. So we’ve adjusted all our curriculum for junior secondary down to that sort of um—their appropriate age levels, okay. So in our junior secondary we have what’s called prime one, prime two, prime three. Prime one’s your very low level kids that can’t recognise numbers and letters basically, all the way up to they can—they’re pretty close to their age level ability. So—so grade—your ones that can’t recognise, we’re looking at prep, grade one sort of the Australian curriculum. Prep prime two, we’re looking at about grade three, four, five and the prime three we’re looking at about grade six, grade seven sort of level.

The booklets provided a routine and time-saving approach for planning and teaching maths. Generally, they informed what happened in maths lessons from one day to the next. As the booklets were levelled from 1 to 4 teachers were required to test the students on entry into the Centre school to identify their maths level as teacher Wesley mentions: We have different levels; pre level, we have level one, level two, level three. It actually goes up to—to five but we generally just look at those four levels and we try them on level one at the start. I mean, we could start kids at level two and so on, which is more difficult, but the reason why we go on level one is we find that generally that’s the main level that our kids are at. It also gives them success. So, they’re, oh, this diagnostic testing isn’t—isn’t scaring me, it’s so not hard. If it’s too easy then we can easily bump them up to level two and try that. But really, we try them on level one because it’s generally the same for everyone, and secondly, yeah, that success.

Despite the booklets being levelled and intended to be used as a differentiation strategy, they still presented challenges for teachers and students. To explain, all students assessed at level one were provided with the same booklet regardless of whether the booklet was age-appropriate, culturally responsive, suitable for students for whom English was their second or third language or supportive of students with intellectual or learning disabilities. All students identified as level one, two, three or four were given the booklet that corresponded to their assessed level. The assumption here was that all students at level one were the same, and so on.

Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches

69

Meaningful interaction and inquiry into real-life experiences where maths could be used were identified but generally within the instructional context of the booklets. Brian explains: Generally the use of, of visual and visceral aids as well. I know some of my students, the majority of my students, don’t enjoy numbers or written words, or written numbers, so in terms of teaching, especially junior students, giving them another way to represent these numbers, and so they can see what is being transferred or what is being timesed together, they have a physical amount that they can hold, and that can be represented by anything. And that’s where I try and make it engaging for students. So, if you have this many tires for your motorbike and you need this kind, how would you change that? Generally giving them different options of how to get these things together—just having numbers on a page, times these together, it’s not representative to some of these children and it’s not interesting to them, but I find if you can find something that will be relevant to them, which is mathematics but almost fooling them into thinking it’s not, it’s just functional living. And, and yeah, just visual and, and visceral. Something they can hold. I like using the MAB [multi-base arithmetic] blocks. Some students turn those off, but even the fact of saying okay, you’ve got this many, and they can hold it. They’ve got it in their hand. Now, what are we doing to that amount? And they can, they can transfer it over in front of them. They’ve still got the oral side of things. They can hear what is happening at the same time, and hopefully they could find success via that method. Generally that’s the type of instructional practice I have I say. I write on the board what’s going on so they can see, and I’ve generally got a physical representation in front of them as well, and that—I try to cater to all learning types in that reference. With the kids that are below the point, again, it’s making it even more visceral and demonstrating it in different ways, and if need be wiping the board clean with that one and going let’s think about it from this point of view. And even if it’s a case of stand up, there’s two of you there. We’re timesing this, so two of you would move into this position. Getting the kids engaged and moving, especially at that lower level. I understand that some kids don’t want to use MAB blocks, or they don’t want to appear lesser in their peers’ eyes, especially in an environment like this, but that’s where I’ll take it to.

Brian explains that he tried to connect and differentiate the learning of concepts by using visuals and ‘visceral aids’—kinesthetics (the body) and multi-base arithmetic blocks (MABs)—and the booklets inform the instruction. Gates (2019), who studied social class in UK schools with an eye to looking at students in maths classrooms and the use of visualisations, argued that there is some evidence that social class affects the development of mathematical skills: When the mode of representation is verbal, children from middle-class families did better. Yet when the mode of representation is visual or non-verbal, the social class gap is much reduced possibly because verbal and written forms of communication are less prioritized in working class families. (Gates 2019, p. 51)

Richard, a maths teacher at the Centre school, highlights the challenges that students experience with reading questions in the booklets: They have difficulty reading questions. Yeah, and they don’t like word problems because there’s a lot of reading to do. Yes, and they have difficulty understanding that.

70

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

Research on youth incarceration frequently highlights low levels of literacy in detained children and young people with an average Year 4 level and over one-third being illiterate (Yan and Wilkerson 2017). Many have reading skills well below the level that would be expected based on their age (Austin 2019; White et al. 2019). Unfortunately, these results are not entirely surprising given that data from an annual survey of detained young people from the Youth Parole Board (2018) in the Department of Justice and Community, Victorian State Government, for example, showed “that 65% had previously been suspended or expelled from school and 41% presented with cognitive difficulties that affect their daily functioning” (White et al. 2019). The results indicate a potential barrier to educational participation and more specifically literacy and numeracy learning. Literacy and reading are significant capabilities that enable people to engage and participate in society and life, for well-being and further education and training. Incarcerated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people, and those from the low socioeconomic background, have experienced significant social, emotional and educational disadvantages, but being able to read opens up possibilities for taking control of their own lives (White et al. 2019). Mayer provides some strategies for supporting these children. Mayer (cited in Gates 2018) identified that learners with reading difficulties may profit from text illustrations. He suggests that learners with reading difficulties are more able to construct mental models from text with pictures whereas they are more likely to fail on the basis of text alone. Further, learners with limited prior mathematical knowledge may benefit from visuals with text, whereas students with higher prior knowledge are able to construct mental models from the text provided. Visuals reduce the reading-related working memory overload for learners with reading difficulties; however, there are claims that informationally rich materials present challenges for these learners. Gates points out that they might benefit from “support and guidance in mapping between graphic and text information and the resulting mental models” (2019, p. 51). Therefore, diagrams and visual representations, including manipulatives, should be used to support learners’ reasoning as they shift between physical models and symbolic representations. Earlier in this chapter, we discussed Riley and his reluctance to engage with the booklets. It became apparent that he struggled to read the information presented in the booklets. Responding to these challenges, several teachers reported the adoption of a new intervention strategy in the Centre—Reading to Learn (R2R). This approach developed by David Rose was a guiding framework to support teachers in teaching reading to primary school age students to ensure that they understand what they are reading (Rose 2016; Rose and Martin 2012). Figure 4.1 provides the guiding framework for teachers when they are working with students in the Centre. The use of the R2L framework is intended to familiarise students with the vocabulary of maths and enhance their technical reading fluency. This is supposedly beneficial as achieving solutions to maths word problems has been found to be strongly associated with reading and comprehension performance (Mayer 1997; Vilenius-Tuohimaa et al. 2008). What is not clear in this structure is how students are supported with the information-rich visuals and graphics provided in texts. As

Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches

71

Fig. 4.1 Guiding Reading 2 Learn framework for teachers (Rose 2016) (Reproduced with permission of the author)

previously pointed out, students who have reading difficulties are particularly challenged with materials that are informationally rich and provide very few examples of how to use visual presentations. Kendrick explains how he applies the framework: Okay, so for example, I mean I—I do like the Reading 2 Learn by David Rose from University. Okay. So he—he stipulates—because he is a—he’s aimed at primary school teachers, he stipulates that you put step one, read the question, step two, get the important information out. So for example, if I’m—I’ve got to word a question I’ll give the kids a highlighter. Highlight— you know, we’ll read it together, highlight the important stuff and then underneath, I just don’t get them to highlight, because that theory is that—so the studies have shown that the highlighting doesn’t do a great deal. What I get the kids to do now is to list it down. I’ve got to then say for example, [as simple as]—let’s say speed equals distance over time, S equals, we don’t know what it is. We’re calculating that, so a question mark. D is distance, equals 30 m, T equals whatever it is. So now they can see it. Then after that, the step number four I think it is, is what is the rule or what rule or what strategy are you going to use to—to solve that problem? I guess it comes down to that. I do it in a step by step—so I say actually right step one, step two and I get the kids to write that sort of stuff. So they know. For those kids that are more visual, I’ll use flowcharts and those sort of diagrams sort of things.

In this vignette, Kendrick points out that students do not like word problems because of the amount of reading that is required. His response suggests that the students may have difficulty reading, and when presented with photocopied booklets with few visual examples, these difficulties are reinforced by the students’ negative responses to them. In a pedagogical sense, prioritising fluency in technical

72

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

reading skills before providing support for how to map between graphic and textual information may prove frustrating for students. Further investigations of booklets and the way they are used in the Centre classrooms indicate that the teaching and learning activities were largely procedural, focusing more on repetition and review. The sample sheets shown in Figs. 4.2 and 4.3 are used for teaching place value. They are informed by the Australian Curriculum General Capabilities: Numeracy (ACARA, n.d.b) and the Australian Core Skills Framework (Department of Education, Skills and Employment 2020). In the above example, the intention is that the students learn place value; however, it appears more as a statistical literacy exercise with students having to read, write and complete the table. In practice, it would be expected that teachers instruct students about what place value is, how it is used with all numbers and why it is needed in everyday life when working with numbers. This instruction will more than likely provide students with the rationale for why it needs to be learned and completed.

Fig. 4.2 Place value chart (Reproduced with permission of the author)

Challenges with Textbooks and Booklets in Instruction-Based Approaches

73

Fig. 4.3 Place value explanation (Reproduced with permission of the author)

Figure 4.3 shows that when two-digit numbers are written there are separate columns for tens and ones. This is the only explanation for place value. Place value refers to the position of a digit which determines the number being represented. For example, 2 in 20 names ‘two tens’ or ‘twenty’ and has a different mathematical meaning to the 2 in 32 which names ‘two ones’. Further, the zero plays a similar role. It has a positional role in the second example, reporting a lack of quantity for that place. Our base-ten system is characterised by trading 10 ones for 1 ten (or 1 ten for 10 ones). These trades illustrate the composing and decomposing of numbers known as regrouping. They establish the foundation for learning about numbers less than 1 in decimal form, that is, 1 can be traded for 10 tenths (or 10 tenths for 1) (Reys et al. 2021). Our research shows that while these tasks might have their place in the booklets, the authors might consider providing a balance between these tasks and more complex

74

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

ones where students are required to consider the mathematical properties of the tasks (Jäder et al. 2020). If not, the risk is that students may develop weak conceptual understandings for solving tasks when applying to real-life contexts. Consequently, we recommend that while booklet authors do not have complete authority over how the booklets are used in classrooms, they do need to talk with teachers about the maths and pedagogical ideas underpinning the texts and how they might be contextualised to students’ cultures and experiences.

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches With instruction-based approaches, the allocation of students into homogeneous groups is largely informed by students’ performance on tests (Watkins and Slocum 2004). These ‘objective’ tests are generally designed to measure student attainment on maths concepts and encompass a range of specific skills needed for progress and successful learning (Rumph et al. 2007b; Watkins and Slocum 2004). Their results are used to indicate each student’s starting place in a program of instruction (Stein et al. 1997; Watkins and Slocum 2004). Objective testing is also referred to as summative testing. Summative testing measures pre-existing knowledge. Put another way, it attempts to summarise a student’s learning at a given point in time (Larson and Keiper 2007). Although assumed to have negative consequences, supporters of instruction-based approaches argue that they can have positive effects if they are aligned closely with instruction that is “deeply criterion-referenced, incorporating the intended curriculum, which should be clearly salient in the perceived assessment demands” (Biggs 1998, p. 107). Timed tests are used in instruction-based approaches. The teacher sets a specified time that is realistic for the students. A short time, “a minute or two” (Stein et al. 1997, p. 89), is provided for students to study the test that is located at the bottom half of their worksheets. The teacher then instructs them to get ready (Stein et al. 1997, p. 89). The results are then recorded by the teacher. Depending on the performance of the students, the same questions and concepts may be presented to students again in the next lesson or worksheet. This system of testing claims to allow the teacher to link activities similar to the test and utilise memorisation exercises. It is also claimed that it allows for precision and fluency in basic skills (Wu 1999) and easy monitoring of student performance and progress (Stein et al. 1997). Warren’s vignette explains how the BKSB ‘assessment test’ is applied to students in the Centre: One of the things we rely on, or I rely on, is our BKSB, which is—it’s like a diagnostic test, finding out where the kids’ levels are at and determining where their strengths and their weaknesses are and that’s—that’s a great help because the kids that we have here are so transitional that we have very little time to really find out what they need help with and then decide how we’re going to help them. So from the BKSB we then decide what level of maths

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches

75

to assign them or what courses to—to assign them. At the same time, ah, we—we have a plan as to what gaps—we identify the gaps and then come up with goals as to how we can close those gaps and keep a working log of—of their time addressing those gaps as well as doing their—their course work. We have different levels; pre level, we have level one, level two, level three. It actually goes up to—to five but we generally just look at those four levels and we—we try them on level one at—at the start. I mean, we could start kids at level two and—and so on, which is more difficult, but the reason why we go on level one is we find that generally that’s the main, level that our kids are at. It also gives them success. So they’re, oh, this diagnostic testing isn’t—isn’t scaring me, it’s so not hard. Ah, if it’s too easy then we can easily bump them up to level two and try that. Um, but really we try them on level one because it’s generally the same for everyone, and secondly, yeah, that success. When they complete all their—let’s say the level one activities, we then put them through that test, that same test, to see whether, you know, how they’ve gone and if they’re successful in that we bump them up to the next level. It’s the same—same test. So that diagnostic test. It’s basically we’ll resit that test.

Evident in this vignette is how BKSB is used to inform instruction and the levels of the students. Through testing and practice of basic skills, it is thought that this process frees attention for thinking about complex operations (Snider and Crawford 2004). In this framework, basic skills are seen as forming the foundation for conceptual understanding. Their acquisition provides the stepping-stones to higher-level skills. Testing enables teachers to monitor student mastery of basic skills so that they can move to more complex tasks.

Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task (CDAT) In the project, we used a Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task (CDAT) which was developed at QUT’s YuMi Deadly Centre by Baturo and Cooper (2008) to diagnose the students’ strengths and areas that needed strengthening. CDAT is informed by scientific theoretical frameworks on the cognitions that underpin students’ mathematics learning, which are missing from traditional testing procedures. Cognition is the core of the substance of understanding and sense-making. CDAT is designed to be used in formative and summative classroom assessment, in particular to identify what mathematical concepts and processes students understand before, during or at the conclusion of teaching. It provides a vehicle for deepening teachers’ understanding of core ideas in maths and consequently to modify or extend their instruction. Thus, CDAT also offers a springboard for intervention. CDAT Number tasks are categorised from Levels 1–5 (Baturo and Cooper 2008). These do not represent school year or grade levels, but rather they represent concept development levels. For example, Level 1 is for the Beginning Stage of development, so Level 1 for Number would correspond with the school Year or Grade 1, while Level 1 for Decimal Fractions would correspond with Years or Grades 3, 4 or 5 (depending on the curriculum followed). There are two tasks for each level. Type

76

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

A tasks focus on structural knowledge that students have abstracted after extensive teaching and learning. Type B tasks focus on the representational knowledge that students should have developed in acquiring structural knowledge. Tasks A should be done before Tasks B. For our project at the Centre we administered Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Tasks to students commencing in May 2017 to identify their maths knowledge and understanding. In consultation with the Head of Curriculum and maths teachers (n = 5), it was agreed that Number 2A would be administered to students; however, on the first day of testing, it became apparent that several students showed potential for attempting the next level Number 3A. Of the students who were administered the CDAT, 30 attempted Number 2A and 34 attempted 3A. One student attempted both 2A and 3A and is included in both totals of students attempting the tasks. In the following discussion, the 2A answers and objectives are presented along with students’ results in table form with an accompanying discussion. The following Figs. 4.4 and 4.5 provide an overview of the tasks for CDAT Number 2A. These resources are reproduced here with the Creative Commons licence of the YuMi Deadly Centre. The YuMi Deadly Centre acknowledges the traditional owners and custodians of the lands in which the mathematics ideas for this resource were developed, refined and presented in professional development sessions. Figure 4.4 shows the questions that test students’ structural knowledge for development Level 2 and Fig. 4.5 shows the answers and responses to the objectives for the CDAT Number Level 2A test. The objectives are written in such a way that explicit connections across and within maths topics are evident. Knowing how these questions, answers and objectives are connected enables the teacher to use similar representations to assist students with connecting new learning with prior learning. For example, knowing that multiplication and place value are structurally related through grouping helps teachers make better choices about multiplication and place value materials and relating language. Table 4.1 provides a succinct analysis of the Number 2A CDAT results for the test that we administered to the Centre students. It shows the question numbers, respective focus area, mean of correct answers, total number of students and percentage of students with correct response, question objective and analysis. Several significant aspects standout in the results of the CDAT Number 2A administered to students (N = 30) at the Centre. First, as is apparent in Table 4.1, place value, renaming, multiplicative structure and rounding present as challenges for a number of students. In the light of these outcomes, we provided the following recommendations to guide the Centre and the project with the particular areas that require attention through Professional Learning, Lesson Modelling (researcher and then teacher) with observation and post-CDAT follow-up after a 10-week teaching cycle: 1. That all students be explicitly taught to know and understand that place value is shown by the position of digits, with the ones on the right-hand side, the tens to the left of the ones and the hundreds to the left of the tens. Without this knowledge, students would continue to struggle with using large numbers

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches Fig. 4.4 Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task: Number 2A (Baturo and Cooper 2008)

77

NUMBER 2A Name: _________________Year Level: ________Date: _________ 1.

2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7.

8. 9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

Write the number for each number name: a. sixty-seven _____________________ b. fifty _____________________ c. thirteen _____________________ Write the number name for each number: a. __________________________ 83 b. __________________________ 30 c. __________________________ 17 Write the number that has: a. 3 tens 8 ones ______________________________ b. 7 ones 6 tens ______________________________ c. 0 ones 8 tens ______________________________ d. 0 tens 4 ones ______________________________ a. Write a zero in 54 without changing its value _______ b. Write a zero in 54 so that its value changes _______ Write the missing numbers: a. 66, 67, 68, ___ ___ ___ b. 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, ___ ___ ___ c. 57, ___ 59, ___ ___ 62, 63 d. 28, 38, 48, 58, ___ ___ ___ e. 74, 64, ___ 44, ___ ___ ___ a. What number is 10 more than 42? ______ b. What number is 10 less than 26? ______ c. What number is 1 more than 58? ______ d. What number is 1 less than 70? ______ In each box, circle the larger value: a. 67 82 b. 47 45 c. 17 70 d. 59 60 e. 31 13 Put in order from smallest to largest value: a. 40, 14, 41, 39, 47 ____ ____ ____ ___ ___ Write the missing numbers: a. 54 = 4 tens ____ ones b. 38 = ____ 18 ones c. ____ = 6 tens 17 ones d. ____ = 1 ten 10 ones e. 63 = 3 tens ____ ones f. ____ = 0 tens 37 ones Write the missing place value names: a. 3 ones x 10 = 3 ____ b. 4 tens + 10 = 4 ____ Write the missing numbers: a. 6 ones x ____ = 6 tens b. 7 tens + ____ = 7 ones Round to the nearest 10: a. 37 ____ b. 22 ____ c. 35 ____ Circle the numbers that could be rounded to 50: a. 24 b. 45 c. 55 d. 48 e. 59

78

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

Fig. 4.5 Answers and objectives for Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task: Number 2A (Baturo and Cooper 2008)

when using operations (+ − × ÷) and when applying to real situations such as understanding their salaries, taxes, costs of clothing, food and so on. 2. That all students be explicitly taught that zeros are place holders, if there are tens but no ones, or hundreds but no ones and or tens, these positions are filled with a 0, e.g. 4 hundreds and 2 ones is 402, to ensure the right place value is indicated. 3. That all students be taught how to rename and regroup and decompose and rename to provide a solid foundation of the basics of place value. This will prepare students for what happens next: . When the number of ones passes ten in numbers, 2 tens and 14 ones are regrouped and renamed as 3 tens and 4 ones. . When the number of parts passes the total number of parts in fractions, 2 ones and 9 fifths are regrouped and renamed as 3 ones and 4 fifths. . When the number of units passes the conversion to the next unit in measurement, 2 m and 124 cm are regrouped and renamed as 3 m and 24 cm. 4. That all students be explicitly taught place value using the ‘pattern of 3’, initially with whole numbers to ensure that they have mastery of place value with whole

96.67

Identification

Identification

1a, b, c

2a, b, c

80.67

% of students with correct response (n = 30)

Focus areas

Qns Analysis

Number—number name (language) for two-digit numbers

(continued)

Questions 2a and 2c required students to write out the number name for each number in words. Some students appeared to have difficulty with this task and declined to write anything for fear of getting the words incorrect, despite being informed that their spelling was not the focus in this instance

Number name—number for Most students responded correctly to two-digit numbers (no zero/s, zero all of the items in this area. Of teen) importance was that several students (n = 5) required the number words to be read to them

Question objectives

Table 4.1 Overview of Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Task: Number 2A—results administered at the centre (30 students, 43 questions)

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches 79

63.33

Place Value

Seriation

4a, b

5a, b, c, d, e

84.00

53.33

Place value

3a, b, c, d

% of students with correct response (n = 30)

Focus areas

Qns

Table 4.1 (continued)

Counting by ones and tens (past tens and hundreds) for two-digit numbers

Role of zero in two-digit numbers (when a zero changes or does not change a number’s value)

Place values—number (given out of sequence)

Question objectives

(continued)

Questions 5a to 5e required students to rely on solving the answers by looking at numbers only

Both 4a and 4b required students to place the ’0’ to change the value of the number. Slightly more than half of the students (n = 17) for item 4a and (n = 21) for item 4b answered this correctly. Worthy of note is that a high number of students asked for clarity on this question

A high number of students found this question challenging because of the way that the place and value of numbers were shown. Several students informed the researcher that there were errors with how the place and value of numbers were written. Of importance was that some students (n = 14) indicated that they could not write the words. It was observed that some were concerned about spelling the names correctly which detracted from attempting the questions

Analysis

80 4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

% of students with correct response (n = 30)

80.00

80.67

83.33

Focus areas

Seriation

Comparing

Ordering

Qns

6a, b, c, d

7a, b, c, d, e

8a

Table 4.1 (continued)

Two-digit numbers from smallest to largest (numbers having characteristics of item 7)

Two two-digit numbers (teens—matching tens, teens-number digits reversed)

Determining 1 more, 1 less, 10 more and 10 less for two-digit numbers

Question objectives

(continued)

There was only one question in this category, and of the 30 students, 25 students answered the problem correctly

Items 7a to 7e asked students to show which number had the larger value of two numbers

Responses to questions 6a to 6d required students to read ’words’ and ’numbers’ to obtain their answers. The correct response rate to these four questions 6a to 6d from the nine seriation questions was slightly lower overall. Of importance, several students (n = 5) had to have this question read to them

Analysis

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches 81

Focus areas

Renaming

Multiplicative structure

Qns

9a, b, c, d, e, f

10a, b

Table 4.1 (continued)

31.67

55.33

% of students with correct response (n = 30)

Place value and regrouping

Two-digit numbers in both directions (number-tens and ones; tens and ones—number)

Question objectives

(continued)

Overall the students had difficulty providing a correct response to this question with 9 students responding correctly to item 10a. Of significance here is that knowledge of place value is required for this multiplicative question

Responses to question 9f identifies that 25 students out of 30 achieved a correct answer. In 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d and 9e no student achieved higher than a response rate of 15 correct answers for any of these items, with the lowest response rate being 9e with only 10 students answering this question correctly. Of significance was that a high number of students (n = 27) asked the researcher if the questions had errors in them because of how they were presented

Analysis

82 4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

35.00

Multiplicative structure

Rounding

Rounding

11a, b

12a, b, c

13

68.33

82.00

% of students with correct response (n = 30)

Focus areas

Qns

Table 4.1 (continued)

Two-digit numbers to a given ten (rounded number—number; reverse of item 12)

Two-digit numbers to the nearest 10 (number—rounded number)

Determining the operation that underlies a place value position change (reverse of item 10)

Question objectives

Of this series of rounding question, item 13d posed a challenge to many students, with only 16 students achieving a correct response for this question. Of interest was that several students (n = 7) required support to answer this series of questions

12 students responded correctly to items 11a and 9–11b. Of significance here is that knowledge of place value is required for this multiplicative question, thus proving a challenge for students

Analysis

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches 83

84

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

numbers. Once this is achieved and students demonstrate mastery at least three times using different representations, then progress can be made in using multiplicative structure to show that whole numbers increase in value when multiplied and decrease in value when divided. 5. That all students be explicitly taught place value and decimal numbers again using the ‘pattern of 3’. Once this is achieved and students demonstrate mastery at least three times using different representations, then progress can be made in using multiplicative structure to show that decimal numbers increase in value when multiplied and decrease in value when divided.

Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches Homogeneous grouping of students is influential in maximising and benefiting student learning (Engelmann 2002). Here homogeneous grouping describes the practice of using general measures of performance testing—and by inference of ‘ability’—in maths to allocate and differentiate students to an appropriate group level in the classroom. These groups are graded from low through to high ‘ability’. Such grouping is seen as necessary for instruction-based approaches (Engelmann 2002). Instructivists argue that it enables individuals and groups of students to get the maximum benefit from effective instruction. In this process of classification, they are to be grouped according to the level “where they have the necessary prerequisite skills and have not yet mastered the objectives” (Watkins and Slocum 2004, p. 40). Here, the skills to be taught should be closely aligned with what students have already learned but just beyond their current level of understanding (Watkins and Slocum 2004). In this way, it is argued that teachers can instruct the student or group and attend to the learning needs and resource requirements of individual students in those groups. Warren explains how students are grouped in the Centre: As far as the whole school goes, we have our deputy principal who puts the—our kids— streams the kids in different classes. So, we were talking about our levels in BKSB before. So each of those levels would be assigned a certain course to do and so if we find that the kids who are at the lowest level, and I’m talking about prep to grade three level, they would be put into our core group. At the moment there are two core groups. I’ve got one of them and Kendrick has another one. But when that—when that overflows then those kids we put in other maths classes. So, we try, you know and stream those kids into certain classes but that won’t always be the case. I guess what it comes down to is we have our activity—let’s say our whole class activity at the start of the class and you’ve just got your simple, simple examples. So for—so for let’s say my lowest level class, you know, it could be, let’s say addition, using the vertical format, adding from left to right and then for—you might have another kid in my class who’s a—who’s a level higher or course higher. It’s not uncommon that you’re going to have, you know, kids with different abilities, and then with that kid you will be giving them work. Let’s say, again using the vertical format you know, maybe going from right to left, adding the ones first and so on. So, whilst we’ve got the same activity you’re giving them different.

According to a report on balancing approaches for teaching students with learning difficulties (Ellis 2005), this type of small group instruction is effective in providing

Assessment (Testing) and Differentiation in Instruction-Based Approaches

85

opportunities for the teacher to direct and attend to students and provide them with feedback about their learning. In this way, those students who are achieving can progress more quickly, while those who are not can receive the necessary support and practice to further their learning (Ellis 2005). However, if groups are heterogeneous—comprised of students who know the content to be learned and those who do not—the latter are less likely to learn that content in the allocated time. This will particularly be the case if the instruction is targeted at those who have the prerequisite skills and are ready to move on. In this instance, the effectiveness of the program of instruction for accelerating all students is considerably reduced (Kauffman et al. 2005). Students do not enjoy learning maths when they have not been well matched or grouped to their prior knowledge or ability to learn (Kauffman et al. 2005). They are more likely to do whatever it takes to withdraw or exclude themselves from that instructional situation. This may be because the instruction requires understanding and performance that is too difficult for the student, thus resulting in embarrassment, disruptive, inattentive behaviour and anxiety. Alternatively, it may be that the instruction is too easy for the student and requires them to review what they have already mastered, and the likely result is boredom and inattention. In short, homogeneous student grouping and/or levelling is claimed to benefit all students in their learning. Providing the instruction is effective, the needs of students will be appropriately addressed.

The Challenges of Assessment and Differentiation (Grouping) Student performance on assessment tests, such as pen-and-paper tests (which include online assessment using the same format as pen-and-paper tests) has been shown to be used to define the students’ attainment in the subject (Klenowski 2009; Marshall et al. 2007; Ruthven 2002; Watson 2001, 2002). As a consequence, students’ learning is differentiated according to their performance on tests, with ‘ability’ perceived as relatively fixed and able to be measured on the basis of test scores (Gillborn and Youdell 2001, p. 77). Attainment is seen as a measurable and permanent trait, a perception that restricts the capacity for learning of many students. Increasing the predictability of test tasks and limiting them to repetitious questions and practice items imposes further restrictions on student capacity for learning (Watson 2001). Items that have been identified as encouraging rote and superficial learning, with the giving of marks overemphasised, should not be considered reasonable grounds for determining students’ knowledge and understanding of maths (Marshall et al. 2007; Watson 2001). Under achievement in maths assessment has been found to occur in the same social groups of students, reinforcing the idea that maths assessment is a tool for sorting different groups of students (Appelbaum 2019; Bol and Berry 2005; Gates 2019). Unfortunately, when students are viewed as possessing the problem, they are precluded from the very things they need for their success in maths.

86

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

Achievement on tests has also been shown to be closely associated with teacher expectations of groups of students (Bol and Berry 2005; Thompson 2004). Differences in teachers’ expectations of particular groups of students work to widen the gap between those students who can perform well on tests and those who cannot (Bol and Berry 2005). For those who cannot, emphasis is placed on teaching and testing basic, low-level skills (Lubienski 2002). Consequently, when particular groups of students do demonstrate that they are capable of achieving, they are confronted with the low expectations of the teacher, thus constraining their educational opportunities in the subject. How students are perceived as a result of the ‘diagnostic tests’ influences how they identify themselves as maths learners—potentially positioned in an unbreakable cycle of low attainment (Appelbaum 2019; Gutstein 2012). If students see themselves as unsuccessful in maths, they are not likely to have a strong sense of themselves as maths learners nor participate in the maths learning of the Centre classroom. On entry into the Centre school, students go through an induction process. As part of that transition, they are assessed on their literacy and numeracy. This assessment could take place on Monday if they have been detained on the weekend. It could be online or paper-based during class time. Kilila explains: There’s no lag period for them to come into induction. They can come in straight away. We do try to do induction in an order so that they do enrolment forms and different permissions to get unique student identifiers. Like all these forms and stuff first, but it is possible that they could be put on a diagnostic test. If you had six new students in a morning and you’ve got a teacher and a teacher aide, you can’t be one on one with everyone, so some students could be put on BKSB diagnostics. They could get here at three in the morning and be in a class at nine. I’ve had that before. They could be drug and alcohol affected. I think we get lots of false lows. I wouldn’t gamble on the percentage of false lows. I really don’t know but it’s a significant amount of false lows on the diagnostic. That’s my personal opinion. I don’t know what other people would say but I don’t think there’s much way of getting a false high on there unless you just randomly guessed and got a false high, but the false lows are significant. When students come into my maths class on numerous occasions I’ve said to students they are obviously at a level higher than the books they’re working on. ‘Mate did you try when you did that diagnostic test?’ That’s what we use to see what you know and what you don’t know. ‘Oh no, I just clicked next. I got sick of it. It was my third test’ and I say ‘well would you like to resit it? It’s, it’s—I know it sucks to have to do a test again, but I need to be able to see what you do know and what you don’t know because you obviously know everything that’s in this book already, and you’re bored’. A sure-fire way to piss kids off in here who are already aggravated is to not have them at the right level so that it’s either too hard or mainly it’s too easy, because with our diagnostic testing, we can get many, many false lows because they start the students off on Level 1. If you’ve got a student that’s literate and numerate, and can do that, they do that for half an hour, 40 min, then the next lesson they do Level 2. Then if they do all right at that, next lesson they do Level 3. I find by the time they get to Level 3, we’ve got a lot of kids that click on next, next, next because they’re sick of diagnostic testing and then we end up with Level 3 36%. Put them on the books, the course that goes with that level. They’re trapped on that level and they’re bored, and I think it’s a thing that we really need to change.

Chapter Summary

87

As mentioned previously, a diagnostic assessment can provide teachers with information about students’ prior knowledge, where they are currently in terms of that knowledge, and where they want to take the students in terms of building on from that existing knowledge. These steps may be what is intended in the entry test and booklets. With this information, the type of instructional materials and activities to support students’ maths learning can then be designed. This strategy can have positive effects on students’ learning if it leads to specific interventions and more accurate differentiation of their learning (Du Plessis and Ewing 2017; Ollerton 2014). However, simply administering a ‘diagnostic test’ to asses students’ strengths and weakness in a short period of time will not improve their learning and address the gaps in their mathematics knowledge. It should however provide a starting point for planning and making decisions about students’ current knowledge, the next steps in building on from that knowledge and how they will learn that knowledge through the teachers’ instructional strategies. Any growth would need to be diagnostically assessed after a period of instructional time to ascertain if the teaching has been beneficial to students’ learning. When the students are tested early in their detention, any judgements about their maths knowledge and level of achievement are at a given point in time and with potentially false lows, as Kilila stated previously. In contexts such as the Centre school, and regardless of the types of assessments used, teachers need to be aware of the biases in them (Bennett 2011; Klenowski 2009). In his discussion of formative assessment, Bennett (2011, pp. 17–18) asserts that “formative inferences are not only subject to uncertainty, they are also subject to systematic, irrelevant influences that may be associated with gender, race, ethnicity, disability, English language proficiency, or other student characteristics”. Put simply, the school’s formative actions may be unintentionally biased. To reduce this tendency, teachers need to recognise their biases and consider evidence from multiple sources and learning experiences. To address racial bias, Klenowski (2009) explains the concept of culture-fair assessment. Culture-fair assessment is based on the premise that no particular culture has an advantage over another, thus eliminating the privileging of particular groups over others. She considers culturally sensitive responses as those that recognise the importance of the sense of place, emphasise different forms of prior knowledge and build connections between different cultures including Indigenous and nonIndigenous students. To achieve these elements, teachers need to know where students come from and the point at which they have arrived. Such understandings of bias and disadvantage are applicable when considering assessment in juvenile detention centre schools.

Chapter Summary In instruction-based approaches with their underlying behaviourist and instrumental assumptions and their associated discursive practices, students are constructed as the

88

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

objects of mathematics education who are to be trained by continued practice and positive or negative reinforcement to produce appropriate (that is, correct) responses (that is, answers) to prescribed problems using the correct (that is, prescribed) method (Ewing 2009). This is indeed a transmission model in both content and process. In classrooms where individual interests, experiences and representations of students’ culture, language and storytelling occur, power and authority are invested in both the teacher and students. Culturally responsive approaches to teaching maths assume and require much greater and more active student participation. This is implicit in their shared assumption that students can construct their mathematical ways of knowing and that the knowledge, culture, language and experiences they bring to the learning situation provide the basis on which their learning is built. In this process, teachers are knowledgeable mentors and facilitators of maths learning who actively assist learners by scaffolding appropriate experiences and material to build on and extend their existing knowledge and capabilities. This will require reconstructing the practices of the classroom so that teachers and students together constitute a community of learners. More effective participation by those who would otherwise be disadvantaged by gender, Indigeneity, ethnicity, socioeconomic or cultural background is supported through a commitment to socially just, equitable and inclusive teaching practices. The upcoming Chap. 5 outlines the Culturally Responsive Pedagogy that we implemented in the Centre as part of the ARC Indigenous Discovery project. We demonstrate how with this approach the authority of the teacher remains, while the relations of power between teachers and students are fairer and more transparent.

References Alro, H., & Johnsen-Hoines, M. (2016). Critical mathematics education in the context of “Real-Life Education.” In P. Ernest, B. Srirman, & N. Ernest (Eds.), Critical mathematics education: Theory, praxis and reality (pp. 227–252). Information Age Publishing. Ambrose, D. (2012). Dogmatic neoliberal ideology: Suppressing talent development in mathematics. In L. Jacobsen, J. Mistele, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education in the public interest (pp. 83–98). Information Age Publishing. Appelbaum, P. (2019). From equity and justice to dignity and reconciliation: Alterglobal mathematics education as a social movement directing curricula, policies and assessment. In C. Xenofontos (Ed.), Equity in mathematics education (pp. 23–40). Information Age Publishing. Austin, J. (2019). Literacy practices of youth experiencing incarceration: Reading and writing as points of regulation and escape. Libri, 69(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2018-0108 Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (n.d.a). F-10 curriculum: Mathematics. Version 8.4. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/mathem atics/. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (n.d.b). General capabilities: Numeracy. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/ numeracy/. Baturo, A., & Cooper, T. (2008). Developing mathematics understanding through cognitive diagnostic assessment tasks. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

References

89

Begehr, A. (2006). Students’ verbal actions in German mathematics classes. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries: The insider’s perspective (pp. 167–182). Sense. Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2010.513678 Biggs, J. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning: A role for summative assessment? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 103–110. Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Lawrence Erlbaum. Boaler, J. (2015). The elephant in the classroom: Helping children learn and love maths. Souvenir Press. Bol, L., & Berry, R. (2005). Secondary mathematics teachers’ perceptions of the achievement gap. The High School Journal, 88(4), 32–45. Boylan, M., & Povey, H. (2012). Moving off track: Mathematics teacher education for all attainment teaching. In L. Jacobsen, J. Mistele, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education in the public interest (pp. 117–158). Information Age Publishing. Cohen, D. K. (1988). Teaching practice, plus que ca change. In E. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp. 27–84). McCutchan Publishing. Cuban, L. (1988). Constancy and change in schools (1880s to the present). In E. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspective on research and practice (pp. 85–106). McCutchan Publishing. D’Ambrosio, U. (2016). Ethnomathematics: A response to the changing role of mathematics in society. In P. Ernest, B. Sriraman, & N. Ernest (Eds.), Critical mathematics education: Theory, praxis and reality (pp. 23–34). Information Age Publishing. Department of Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs. (2018). Working together, changing the story: Youth Justice Strategy 2019–2023. Retrieved 31/07/2020 from https://www. cyjma.qld.gov.au/resources/dcsyw/youthjustice/reform/strategy.pdf. Department of Education, Skills and Employment. (2020). Australian core skills framework. https:// www.employment.gov.au/australian-core-skills-framework. Drinan, C. H. (2018). The war on kids: How American juvenile justice lost its way. Oxford University Press. Du Plessis, J., & Ewing, B. (2017). Reasonable adjustments in learning programs: Teaching length, mass and capacity to students with intellectual disability. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(10), 1795–1805. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051018 Ellis, L. (2005). Balancing approaches: Revisiting the educational psychology research on teaching students with learning difficulties. ACER. https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art icle=1005&context=aer. Engelmann, S. (2002). Summary of presentation to Council of Scientific Society Presidents, December 8, 2002. http://www.zigsite.com/PDFs/CSSP_Acceptance.pdf. Ewing, B. (2006). “Go to the page and work it from there”: Young people’s experiences of learning mathematics from a text. Australian Senior Mathematics Journal, 20(1), 1–8. Ewing, B. (2011). Direct instruction in mathematics: Issues for schools with high Indigenous enrolments—A literature review. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(5), 64–91. Ewing, B. F. (2009). Students’ accounts of their experiences of learning mathematics, Doctoral dissertation, Griffith University. Griffith Theses. https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/1819. Farkota, R. M. (2003). The effects of a 15 minute direct instruction intervention in the regular mathematics class on students’ mathematics self-efficacy and achievement. Doctoral dissertation, Monash University. http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/FarkotaThesis.pdf. Felton, M., Simic-Muller, K., & Menendez, J. (2012). Math isn’t just numbers or algorithms. In L. Jacobsen, J. Mistele, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education in the public interest (pp. 231–252). Information Age Publishing.

90

4 Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Juvenile Detention

Gates, P. (2018). The importance of diagrams, graphics and other visual representations in STEM teaching. In R. Jorgensen & K. Larkin (Eds.), STEM education in the junior secondary: The state of play (pp. 169–196). Springer. Gates, P. (2019). Why the (social) class you are in still counts. In C. Xenofontos (Ed.), Equity in mathematics education (pp. 41–64). Information Age Publishing. Gillborn, D., & Youdell, D. (2001). The new IQism: Intelligence, “ability” and the rationing of education. In J. Demaine (Ed.), Sociology of education today (pp. 65–99). MacMillan. Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy for social justice. Routledge. Gutstein, E. (2012). Foreword. In L. Jacobsen, J. Mistele, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education in the public interest (pp. xi–xv). Information Age Publishing. Gutstein, E. (2012b). Using critical mathematics to understand the conditions of our lives. In T. Wrighley, P. Thomson, & B. Lingard (Eds.), Changing schools: Alternative ways to make a world of difference (pp. 181–193). Routledge. Hirsch, E. D. J. (2002). Classroom research and cargo cults. Policy Review, 115, 51–69. Jäder, J., Lithner, J., & Sidenvall, J. (2020). Mathematical problem solving in textbooks from twelve countries. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(7), 1120–1136. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1656826 Jensen, E. (2009). Teaching with poverty in mind: What being poor does to kids’ brains and what schools can do about it. ASCD. Jones, E., & Southern, W. (2003). Balancing perspectives on mathematics instruction. Focus on Exceptional Children, 35(9), 1–16. Kauffman, J., Landrum, T., Mock, D., Sayeski, B., & Sayeski, K. (2005). Diverse knowledge and skills require a diversity of instructional groups. Remedial and Special Education, 26(1), 2–6. Klenowski, V. (2009). Australian Indigenous students: Addressing equity issues in assessment. Teaching Education, 20(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210802681741 Larson, B., & Keiper, T. (2007). Instructional strategies for middle and high school. Routledge. Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press. Lubienski, S. (2002). A closer look at black-white mathematics gaps: Intersections of race and SES in NAEP achievement and instructional practices data. The Journal of Negro Education, 71(4), 269–287. McMillan, K., & Davis, M. (2016). Independent Review of Youth Detention: Confidential report. http://www.youthdetentionreview.qld.gov.au/review-of-youth-detention-centres-rep ort-updated-28-June-2017.pdf. Marshall, B., Wiliam, D., Harrison, C., Lee, C., & Black, P. (2007). Assessment for learning. McGraw-Hill International. Mayer, R. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions. Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1–19. Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2011/international-results-mathematics.html. Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD). (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from the OECD programme for international student assessment (PISA) 2000. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/53/33691596.pdf. Ollerton, M. (2014). Differentiation in mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Teaching, 240, 43–46. Queensland Government. (2018). Education Young People in Youth Detention. Retrieved 12/05/2018 from https://www.qld.gov.au/law/sentencing-prisons-and-probation/young-offend ers-and-the-justice-system/youthdetention/helping/educate. Reys, R., Lindquist, M., Lambdin, D., Smith, N., Rogers, A., Cooke, A., Bennett, SE., Ewing, B., & West, J. (2021). Helping children learn mathematics (3rd Australian ed.). WileyDirect. Rezat, S., & Strässer, R. (2014). Mathematics textbooks and how they are used. In P. Andrews & T. Rowland (Eds.), Master class in mathematics education: International perspectives on teaching and learning (pp. 51–62). Bloomsbury.

References

91

Romberg, T., & Kaput, J. (1997). Mathematics in context: Impact on teachers. In E. Fennema, & B., Nelson Scott, (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 357–380). Lawrence Erlbaum. Rose, D. (2016). Reading to learn: Accelerating learning and closing the gap. Reading to Learn. Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Equinox. Rumph, R., Ninness, C., McCuller, G., Holland, J., Ward, T., & Wilbourn, T. (2007a). “The shame of American education” redux. Behavior and Social Issues, 16(1), 27–41. Rumph, R., Ninness, C., McCuller, G., Holland, J., Ward, T., & Wilbourn, T. (2007b). Stimulus change: Reinforcer or punisher? Reply to Ellis and Magee. Behavior and Social Issues, 16(1), 50–58. Ruthven, K. (2002). Assessment in mathematics education. In L. Haggarty (Ed.), Teaching mathematics in secondary schools (pp. 176–191). The Open University. Scherer, P., & Steinbring, H. (2006). Noticing children’s learning processes: Teachers jointly reflect on their own classroom interaction for improving mathematics teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(2), 157–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-006-0004-7. Snider, V., & Crawford, D. (2004). Mathematics. In N. Marchand-Martella, T., Slocum & R., Martella (Eds.), Introduction to direct instruction (pp. 206–245). Pearson. Stein, M., Kinder, D., Silbert J., & Carnine, D. (2006). Designing effective mathematics instruction: A direct instruction approach—Chapter 1: Direct instruction. Direct Instruction News, 6(1), 20–31. Stein, M., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D. (1997). Designing effective mathematics instruction: A direct instruction approach. Merril. Thompson, G. (2004). Playing god with other people’s children. The High School Journal, 87(3), 1–4. Vilenius-Tuohimaa, P. M., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J. E. (2008). The association between mathematical word problems and reading comprehension. Educational Psychology, 28(4), 409–426. Watkins, C., & Slocum, T. (2004). The components of direct instruction. In N. Marchand-Mertella, T. Slocum, & R. Martella (Eds.), Introduction to direct instruction (pp. 28–66). Pearson. Watson, A. (2001). Making judgements about pupils’ mathematics. In P. Gates (Ed.), Issues in mathematics teaching (pp. 217–231). Routledge/Falmer. Watson, A. (2002). What does it mean to understand something and how do we know when it has happened? In L. Haggarty (Ed.), Teaching mathematics in secondary schools (pp. 161–175). The Open University. White, J., Riele, K., Corcoran, T., Baker, A., Moylan, P., & Manan, R. (2019). Improving educational connection for young people in custody. Final report. Australia: Victoria University, University of Tasmania, Deakin University, Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation. https://www.vu.edu.au/ sites/default/files/Improving-educational-connection-for-young-people-in-custody.pdf. Wu, H. (1999). Basic skills versus conceptual understanding. American Educator, 23(3), 14–19, 50–52. Yan, M.-C., & Wilkerson, K. L. (2017). Reading instruction in juvenile correctional facilities for students with and without disabilities. Journal of Correctional Education (1974-), 68(2), 37–61. Youth Parole Board. (2018). Annual report 2017–2018. State of Victoria. Department of Justice and Regulation. https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/justice-system/youth-justice/youth-parole-board-ann ual-report-2017-18.

Chapter 5

Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile Detention

Abstract In this Chapter, we explore the Culturally Responsive Pedagogy identified in the project and our experiences that are culturally responsive to children’s learning in juvenile detention. More specifically, we describe Culturally Responsive Pedagogy as a way of life, of seeing the world and a way of taking action against injustice. We explain the significance of understanding community cultural wealth and capital, namely aspirational, linguistic, familial, social, navigational and resistant capital. We highlight the significance of privileging Indigenous voices, strengthening Indigenous identity, positive role models and the professional development provided to teachers as part of our project. We bring these critical elements together to describe the resources designed for teachers to support their students’ mathematics learning.

I think there’s so much more we can do embedding those Indigenous perspectives, the knowledge, just having—and, um, yeah, there’s—yeah, I—I would love to see what I can do—what the school can do, um, to—to support that and I think, you know, because we have such a high population of Indigenous students here I think we should have that—we should have, ah, cultural education. But again, embedding a lot of that, as much as we can, into—into our subject areas. (Warren, maths teacher)

Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP) is evolving in maths education. As more research is emerging, the approach is yet to crystallise. Currently, this research seeks to document and understand the diversity of maths teaching practices of the very cultures that CRP seeks to empower (Gay 2018; Sarra and Ewing 2021; Snyder and Fenner 2021). In this chapter, we elaborate on the theory and practice of CRP and the pedagogical framework that we propose for the juvenile detention context. Based on our research, we argue that CRP is about tearing down old structures and ways of thinking. As illustrated by Fig. 5.1, CRP concerns exploring different ways of seeing the world and forming new ideas and types of social interaction; new ways to be inclusive of culture; new ways to discuss inequality and distribute wealth and resources; to resist and new ways to maintain order and cultural safety. In particular, CRP privileges Indigenous voices and offers new ways to reach out to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and low socioeconomic children. Role models encourage these young people by showing that they are valued in this world, that they matter, can develop positive identities and achieve meaningful goals. CRP recognises and promotes long-term © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0_5

93

94

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Fig. 5.1 Culturally responsive pedagogy

sustainable change. It involves new ways to establish an educational system that works for everyone, especially those who are put at the edges of classrooms and society like the children in juvenile detention centres (Love 2019). In this way, CRP contributes to building cultural wealth and the social well-being of the whole community.

CRP: Ways of Life, Seeing the World and Taking Action Against Injustice CRP was originally developed in 2010 by Gay (2018) and is now gaining acceptance in US and Australia through the work of Pirbhai-Illich et al. (2017) and Morrison et al. (2019). Our project is the first to investigate the potential of CRP in juvenile detention centres and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and low socioeconomic background students. Culturally Responsive Pedagogy has been defined through the use of many different terms (Lopez 2016; Pirbhai-Illich et al. 2017; Sarra and Ewing 2021). Morrison et al. (2019) describe CRP as culturally centred education and culturally relevant pedagogy. It originated from the rise of the civil rights movement in the United States of America to draw attention to the lack of educational inequalities experienced by students of colour. In response, this fight against educational injustices meant that educators were required to respond and address how they would cater to the diversity of their students and their ways of knowing, thinking and communicating (Howard and Rodriguez-Scheel 2017; Pirbhai-Illich et al. 2017).

CRP: Ways of Life, Seeing the World and Taking Action Against Injustice

95

Our project and approach to CRP are attuned with much of what US scholar Love (2019) writes about in her book We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. In this way, we are advocating for children and their teachers, as well as for juvenile justice centres and schooling more broadly. CRP is not simply about a teaching approach. It is about a way of life, a way of seeing the world and a way of taking action against injustice. It seeks to resist and tear down education exclusion through teachers who work in solidarity with their schools’ communities to achieve incremental changes in their classrooms, schools and juvenile detention centres for students today and into the future. Change according to Freire (2004, p. 62) implies dynamic discussions between critiquing injustice and arguing that it can be overcome. It is necessary to challenge and change what is taken for granted in education because preserving injustice and unfairness is “immoral”. Freire argues that the success of a teacher resides in certainty, change is possible, and that preserving the status quo is morally wrong. No one teacher can abolish education exclusion but if we all work together, it can be achieved. In our view, CRP is an inclusive approach to teaching and learning that values and promotes students’ cultural knowledge and experiences to enhance their well-being and sense of belonging in diverse societies. It emphasises reforming school systems by focusing on Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and changing teacher viewpoints or understanding of learners and learning. There is no one way to be a CRP teacher. Some teachers will provide a culturally safe ‘homeplace’ (Love 2019, p. 80; see also Bin-Sallik 2003; Miller and Steele 2021) for their students while teaching them with the highest expectations (Sarra 2012). Some will understand and accept maths practised by distinct cultural groups such as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as developed over history—the ideas, techniques, working with measures, calculations, inferences and the ability to model the natural and social environments to explain and understand maths (D’Ambrosio 2016; D’Ambrosio and Rosa 2008). Some will fight standardised testing (Oliver and Forrest 2021); some will restore justice to their classrooms; some will create justice-centre curriculums and teaching approaches (Flores and Barahona-López 2021; Gutstein 2012); some will stand with their students to end violence (Drinan 2018); some will fight in the effort so communities can peacefully govern themselves to control their children’s education, housing, healthcare and ideas about peace, justice and incarceration and some will do a combination of all of these (D’Ambrosio 2016; Harrison and Sellwood 2016; Love 2019; Ober et al. 2021). There will be teachers who leave the profession emotionally, mentally, physically and spiritually spent, seeking out other ways to make an impact on education outside the classroom (Flores and Barahona-López 2021), but all the while working towards restoring humanity with their eyes on the education exclusion of children from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds and low socioeconomic backgrounds. For centuries in Australia, Indigenous people and non-Indigenous people have tried and continue to try and tweak and reform systems of injustice such as education (Gray and Beresford 2008). However, these steps are just the first tugging away at

96

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

these systems. The recent release of the Closing the gap report (Australian Government 2020) demonstrates that while there have been improvements over the past decade to 2018: about one in four Indigenous students in Years 5, 7 and 9, and one in five in Year 3, remained below national minimum standards in reading. Between 17 and 19% of Indigenous students were below the national minimum standards in numeracy.

The same report indicates that there have been no improvements in school attendance rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students over the past five years, with rates remaining lower than for non-Indigenous children: Gaps in attendance are evident for Indigenous children as a group from the first year of schooling. The attendance gap widens during secondary school. In 2019, the attendance rate for Indigenous primary school students was 85%—a gap of around 9 percentage points. By Year 10, Indigenous students attend school 72% of the time on average—a gap of around 17 percentage points. (Australian Government 2020)

How is it evident that children from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and low socioeconomic backgrounds matter in countries like Australia that measure knowledge against a ‘gap’ that governments and society created? The ‘gap’ is not about non-Indigenous children and young people outperforming Indigenous students, it is about a history of injustice and oppression. It is the education ‘debt’ that has accumulated over time due to education exclusion. The claim that the ‘gap’ is about race and class is a fallacy when government and society fail to acknowledge that racism and privilege are the sources of the achievement gap (Love 2019). But Indigenous people continue to fight, hope, love, believe and dream despite obstacles wrapped in racism. It is through this endurance that CRP starts in the imaginations of teachers, but only after deep and honest interrogation of Australia’s and other countries’ racism and privilege that created education exclusion. That imagination forms what is possible, rather than what is not possible in education for Indigenous and low socioeconomic children and young people. Although CRP is a driving force for change in countries such as Canada and New Zealand, it is slowly gaining recognition in Australia as a model for teaching and learning (Harrison and Skrebneva 2020; Morrison et al. 2019). However, this model cannot be replicated unproblematically in Australian schools where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds have experienced education exclusion. Critical race theorists (Hokowhitu et al. 2020; Hooks 1994; Yosso 2005) argue for an end to racism with the aim of abolishing racism and drawing on the resources of Indigenous communities. Yosso (2005, p. 77) recommends that one way to examine these resources is through what she calls ‘community cultural wealth’ which Culturally Responsive Pedagogy helps to build.

CRP and Community Cultural Wealth

97

CRP and Community Cultural Wealth CRP embraces the six types of cultural capital that Yosso (2005) identified. In summary, these relate to what teachers need to see, understand and use to engage and empower students beyond the dominant narratives about what cultural capital is and is not, as follows: . Aspirational capital refers to the ability to maintain hopes and dreams for the future, even in the face of real and perceived barriers. [….] . Linguistic capital includes the intellectual and social skills attained through communication experiences in more than one language and/or style. [….] . Familial capital refers to those cultural knowledges nurtured among familia (kin) that carry a sense of community history, memory, and cultural intuition (see Delgado Bernal 1998, 2002). This form of cultural wealth engages a commitment to community wellbeing and expands the concept of family to include a broader understanding of kinship. [….] . Social capital can be understood as networks of people and community resources. These peer and other social contacts can provide both instrumental and emotional support to navigate through society’s institutions (see Gilbert 1982; Stanton-Salazar 2001). [….] . Navigational capital refers to skills of manoeuvring through social institutions. Historically, this infers the ability to manoeuvre through institutions not created with Communities of Color in mind. [….] . Resistant capital refers to those knowledges and skills fostered through oppositional behaviour that challenges inequality (Freire 1970, 1973; Giroux and Purpel 1983; McLaren 1998; Delgado and Stefancic 2001; Solórzano and Bernal 2001). This form of cultural wealth is grounded in the legacy of resistance to subordination exhibited by Communities of Color (Deloria 1969). (Yosso 2005, pp. 77–80)

Although Yosso’s (2005) community cultural wealth theory focuses primarily on dark students accessing colleges in the United States, we argue that the theory extends beyond this context to the everyday lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and low socioeconomic students living and learning on the margins of society in Australia. Indigenous parents and communities want the best for their children, and although there might not be a blueprint, they believe in their children despite an education system that is flawed and works to exclude them. Community cultural wealth not only provides an intellectual space to critique racism and education exclusion, but also how to empower communities to recognise the wealth they already have to fight racism and exclusion. Their imaginations fuel resistance and drive out apathy and so a quest for change becomes an internal desire to preserve humanity. This imagining can give teachers a collective space to tear down education exclusion and collectively rebuild a schooling system that loves all children and sees schools as children’s homeplaces where they can bring their community’s cultural wealth, learn and achieve their aspirations (see for example Ober et al. 2021). Deep study and personal reflection on the history of Australia are important for CRP.

98

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

CRP and Meaningful Long-Term Sustainable Change Culturally Responsive Pedagogy begins when a teacher understands why meaningful, long-term and sustainable change is hard to achieve in education. They have become deeply aware of historical and contemporary antithetical forces to justice, love and equity—such as racism, sexism, housing discrimination, violence towards Indigenous people and those living in poverty, police brutality, segregation and the school-to-juvenile detention pipeline. More often than not, CRP is described by three broad markers: culture, teaching and the curriculum (Dore and McMurtrie 2021; Ladson-Billings 1995; Morrison et al. 2019; Snyder and Fenner 2021). But intersecting these markers of CRP are identity, language, history, community cultural wealth, mattering, humanity and love. These markers cannot be examined in isolation from one another because they all intersect. Intersectionality is not about listing and naming identities, languages or cultures, and it is about analysing the complexities and realities of discrimination and how they intersect with culture, teaching and the curriculum. Intersectionality, as Love (2019, p. 7) explains: allows educators to dialogue around a set of questions that will lead them to a better sense of their students’ full selves, their students’ challenges, the grace and beauty that is needed to juggle multiple identities seamlessly, and how schools perpetuate injustice. When teachers shy away from intersectionality, they shy away from ever fully knowing their students’ humanity and the richness of their identities.

Intersectionality provides a support for how we might think about and discuss CRP and juvenile detention centres in ways that are inclusive of how oppression intersects everyday lives in and outside of school, in and outside of juvenile detention centres. CRP brings together students’ knowledge and experiences of everyday contexts— learning that is life-related and life-inspired, culturally responsive teaching and a curriculum that builds social and community cultural capital. It makes visible students’ culture and their communities and draws on their cultural funds of knowledge and experiences to inform and guide teachers’ planning and instruction (see Moll et al. 1992, for a discussion of funds of knowledge). It allows for the integration and visibility of student knowledge and culture that is living and not one located in the past (Harrison and Skrebneva 2020; Ober et al. 2021). Kilila, a secondary maths teacher in the Centre, prioritises embedding Indigenous perspectives stating: I think it’s awesome that we’re embedding into just indigenous perspectives in maths and on the most recent work journal that I’ve worked on… Yeah, one of the assessment pieces about perimeter and area is the Aboriginal flag… And there’s a couple of questions in there where I’ve done my best to [include] Torres Strait Islands as well. I’ve got a map of the Torres Strait Islands where they’re doing map scales, working out the distance between different islands. I suppose for me embedding indigenous perspectives is one part of contextualising this for students so I want to contextualise the maths so that it makes sense for as many students as I possibly can and for our indigenous students, indigenous perspectives matter a lot, and for all of our students a map of Queensland is a context that they understand, that’s where we

CRP: Privileging Indigenous Voices, Identities and Role Models

99

are putting things in a context that makes it easier for the students to understand a simple concept instead of making it more difficult, I say bring it on, and indigenous perspectives is one of those contexts. (Kilila)

Kilila’s response to the types of strategies she used when teaching maths indicated a focus on cultural responsiveness. She affirms that she draws on a range of strategies to firstly identify some contexts that connect with the students’ knowledge and experiences, for example, the Aboriginal flag and a map of the Torres Strait Islands, and then to provide opportunities for students to make sense of their maths learning through focusing on perimeter and mapping. As she states, we “are putting things in a context that makes it easier for the students to understanding a simple concept”. This acknowledgement provides some weight to previous points that students’ cultural knowledge and experiences can play a role as they engage in non-routine tasks that are situated in contexts familiar to them (see, for example, Lewthwaite et al. 2014). Through coming to learn about students’ culture and knowledge, teachers are afforded opportunities to connect the maths curriculum with the experiences of students, making the appearance of learning maths visible within their own cultural understandings.

CRP: Privileging Indigenous Voices, Identities and Role Models CRP acknowledges and respects the importance of listening to and privileging Indigenous voices, identities and role models in collaborative decision-making processes. These processes are informed by cultural knowledges, perspectives and lived experiences of students—their worldviews and different ways of knowing and doing maths (Rigney et al. 2020; Sarra and Ewing 2021). CRP privileges the accumulation of transgenerational historical, cultural and political knowledge and skills of Indigenous people which has allowed them to continue teaching and passing down their cultural knowledges and practices to their children through Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. These ways are embedded in the rich cultural practices closely tied to the community to improve the engagement of parents and students in schooling (Ewing 2012). The bringing together of shared knowledge and communities’ voices and perspectives with western knowledge creates a both-ways holistic approach that engages the capabilities of the whole person and community through spirituality, mindfulness, body (physical) and heart (emotional) (Hill 1999; Ober et al. 2021).

100

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Indigenous Voices A key benefit of CRP is that it offers a both-ways learning approach that privileges Indigenous voices. CRP is underpinned by the RAMR Cycle which Matthews (2009) developed and recently renamed as Goompi Model. This explores the relationship between Indigenous culture and maths, contextualising life-related experiences with maths learning. As shown in Fig. 5.2, the four RAMR elements represent Reality, Abstraction, Maths and Reflection. They form an important cycle where maths and its knowledge are created, developed and refined (Matthews 2009, p. 48; RAMR Cycle 2018). As shown in the diagram, Reality relates to the students’ lived experience while Maths indicates their learning focus. CRP involves continuous cycling between Reality and Maths where the students engage in Abstraction and Critical Reflection. Creativity, Symbols and Cultural Bias all influence this process. In the RAMR Cycle (Goompi Model), the student’s life-related experiences and imaginings, culture and stories have the potential to prompt maths thinking. These experiences provide rich and meaningful contexts for identifying and doing maths that is informed by their culture. The student (represented by a grey circle in Fig. 5.2) finds a voice in what feels authentic and rooted in their experiences which may include a feeling of anxiety about maths (Frenzel et al. 2007; Stuart 2000). But rather than shield the students from such negative associations, we argue that maths is a vital part of CRP because it is a subject that connects students’ experiences and imaginings with the potential to counter mainstream curricula. All too often it is the failure to represent the perspectives and ways of knowing Indigenous students that creates anxiety rather than maths per se (Turner et al. 2012). With CRP, teaching supports this space and the students because it prioritises students’ experiences and community knowledge rather than targeting them as deficits to be overcome. As discussed in Chap. 4, the often decontextualised nature of maths taught in school and juvenile detention centres provides many students with little indication of how they or their communities will benefit from the content they learn. Whereas instruction grounded in students’ cultural experiences has been shown to strengthen maths learning of historically marginalised students such as those in this study (Ewing and Sarra 2018; Gutierrez 2007; Sarra and Ewing 2021). For example, a popular snack in the juvenile detention centre is salty plums. As part of the positive behaviour strategy students work on their behaviour and in doing so earn Fig. 5.2 RAMR cycle (Matthews 2009) (Reproduced with permission of the author who identified the recent change of name from RAMR Cycle to Goompi Model)

Indigenous Voices

101

points. These points are a ‘currency’ meaning they can use the points to ‘purchase’ a small bag of ten salty plums. The following poster example (Fig. 5.3) developed for the project provides some insights into how we used the students’ experiences to connect and make visible and relevant their experiences of salty plums. This example demonstrates how maths instruction that contextualises students’ cultural experiences has the potential to support students’ maths and cultural identities. Students come to see themselves as members of their communities as capable maths learners, and to see maths as relevant and potentially as a transformative tool in their lives (Turner et al. 2012). In the RAMR Cycle (Goompi Model), Abstraction can be defined in two ways: first as an activity whereby students with support from their teacher become aware of similarities among their life-related experiences, culture and stories, for example, the salty plums in Fig. 5.3 and second as a concept which is the result of abstracting which enables new experiences with similarities to previous experiences (Skemp 2002; White and Mitchelmore 2002, 2010). This process emphasises three characteristics of concept formation by abstraction (White and Mitchelmore 2002, p. 236): Its function is to allow more efficient classification of experience It depends on recognising similarities between different contexts It is qualitatively different from simply identifying patterns in a set of maths examples.

Skemp (1986) distinguishes between primary and higher-order concepts emphasising that high-order concepts are abstractions from earlier abstractions and so they progressively move away from the initial life-related experiences that students used. To explain this, White and Mitchelmore (2002) provide a useful example that the colour ‘red’ is a primary concept because it is formed from sensory life-related experiences and ‘colour’ is a secondary concept abstracted from red, blue, green and so on and encompasses wider experiences than does each primary concept. Abstraction then becomes a sequence that integrates life-related experiences (generalising), integrating this experience (synthesising) and abstracting. Each repetition of the sequence has a higher level of abstraction and further removal from primary concepts. Successive abstraction leads to the concept of abstract being seen as removed from life-related experiences and context-free. Taking the above example, if we provided the maths tasks before talking and reading about salty plums, the tasks are simply just tasks with no contextual or life-related information. Yet, the higherorder concepts are connected to all primary concepts in a complex hierarchy of abstractions, and they are dependent on life-related experiences (White and Mitchelmore 2002). The task of the CRP teacher is to keep these experiences visible, alive and active as student progress in their learning which is what we have attempted to do in the Salty Plum poster example in Fig. 5.3. Abstraction then can be used in two ways: abstract-general and abstract-apart. First, abstract-general depends on a range of life-related experiences and contexts which are recognised as similar and represented using multisensory experiences, materials, language and symbols. Second, for abstract-apart maths concepts are

Fig. 5.3 Salty plums (CRP poster developed through the project by Ewing and Sarra)

102 5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Indigenous Voices

103

formed by definition rather than through life-related experiences and contexts. In the second way, there are no links to students’ experiences. There is a sense that an “abstract-apart idea is meaningless and useless” (White and Mitchelmore 2002, p. 241). A common approach to teaching maths tends to follow an abstract to the concrete sequence. Starting with definitions this approach leads to definitions and abstract-apart concepts and does not fit with a culturally responsive approach to teaching maths. From the reality and abstraction phases, students are then supported with creating abstract representations of the real-life situation using a range of mathematical symbols and signs, which are put together to form a symbolic language—maths. The learner uses the maths in its symbolic form to explore particular real-life situations and to communicate these ideas to others. It is essential that students are provided with opportunities to critically reflect on their mathematical representation to ensure that it fits with their life-related experiences and culture. By Critical Reflection, we mean understanding the social, economic, cultural and political features within the contexts that teaching and learning maths takes place (Skovsmose and Godoy Penteado 2012). It is important to remember that while the research literature might present stereotypical classrooms, it seldom represents different real-life contexts for teaching and learning such as in juvenile detention centre schools. The critical reflection phase of the RAMR Cycle (Goompi Model) is influenced by the cultural bias within the abstraction phase and the learner’s perception of reality. Matthews (2009) identified in the RAMR Cycle (Goompi Model) three important elements that we argue are critical for CRP–Creativity, Symbols and Cultural Bias. Creativity which includes writing, drawing, acting, painting, composing and dancing is understood to be love, joy and resistance personified (Love 2019). Creative symbols can be objects and drawings for example that are familiar to students. Creativity provides more to students than symbolic equations and algorithms. It inspires a better world that is rich in design and research and is socially just. Creativity helps people including students like those in the juvenile detention centre to remember their dreams, hopes and imaginings for a better world. Maths is often viewed as culture-free, universal and the ‘truth’ that everyone should aspire to regardless of their cultural background (D’Ambrosio 2016; D’Ambrosio and Rosa 2008; Matthews 2020). In short, it is unbiased, objective and linked to finding the ‘truth’. As Matthews (2020) states, from this point of view: the beauty of mathematics comes from its precision, its unwavering logic and its power to solve “real world” problems (p. 4).

This view has resulted in students learning procedures and process for finding answers as discussed in Chap. 4. The beauty of maths can be seen in how different cultures visualise, create, draw and present maths. We advocate that a culturally responsive maths teacher recognises how different cultures represent maths from different perspectives and develop the aspirational and linguistic wealth of their students.

104

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Strengthening Indigenous Identity By addressing cultural bias CRP attends to Indigenous identity which is often contested and widely disputed in Australia. Within the context of this chapter, Indigenous identity refers to Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia. The approach we propose responds to the limited research and literature, as identified by Shay and Sarra (2021), that is concerned with how Indigenous identity is constructed and represented. It seeks to counteract the way identity is commonly perceived through a lens of Western political ideologies and epistemologies outside the domains of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander worldviews. Like Shay and Sarra (2021) who explored the meanings and significance of identity specifically among Indigenous young people, CRP seeks to privilege the voices of young people and their anecdotes across a range of sites in Australia. It recognises that identity formation is a key developmental task of adolescence (Erikson 1974) and the significant challenges facing Indigenous young people to navigate predominantly negative messages about their identity, which are reproduced in educational contexts (Groome 1995). CRP offers a pedagogical approach to counteract the historically negative perceptions of adult Australian Aboriginal peoples, such as being lazy’, ‘alcoholics’, ‘violent’ and ‘unreliable’ (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission 1997; Reynolds 1990; Sarra 2011; Sarra and Shay 2019; Smith 2021). These expressions showed some similarities to those described by young people in activities and discussions on racism and stereotypes. Although this work was conducted fifteen years ago, the pervasiveness of stereotyping and racism continues to permeate identity constructs for Indigenous young peoples, in spite of the positive associations identified in our study.

Positive Indigenous Role Models CRP that utilises positive Indigenous role models can make a difference in providing Indigenous representations across a range of areas to disrupt the negative stereotypes that are often represented across different platforms of communication and alternative media, including social media and other digital outlets (Shay et al. 2021). The inclusion of role models in CRP allows young Indigenous people to have a strong sense of belonging and an opportunity for them to be proud of their Aboriginal heritage and/or Torres Strait Islander heritage (Sarra and Ewing 2021). In our study, we focused on positive role models to support the young people to see that Indigenous people value and are very proud of their heritage and have a strong sense of belonging. By way of example, we created posters of positive role models for the students and their teachers. The poster of Jonathon Thurston in Fig. 5.4 portrays how proud he is of his culture, his people and his sport. Jonathon Thurston is an Aboriginal man of Gungarri heritage. He was not only an Australian National Rugby League player but is a man strong and respectful of

Fig. 5.4 Jonathon Thurston positive role model (CRP poster developed through the project by Ewing and Sarra. Images of Jonathon Thurston reproduced with his permission)

Positive Indigenous Role Models 105

106

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

his Aboriginal heritage. This is evident in the outreach work he does as an ambassador across a number of projects in the community to promote the importance of Indigenous health and education. Positive Indigenous role models can play a significant part in the perception of how young Indigenous people may perceive themselves in terms of embracing and acknowledging a positive sense of their Aboriginal identity (Sarra 2012) and/or embracing and acknowledging a positive sense of their Torres Strait Islander identity. For young people in the Centre, the featured Indigenous role models showed how others hoped, loved, fought, believed and dreamed despite obstacles prepacked and tightly wrapped in racism, discrimination and inequality. They highlighted for the students how they too can make a difference to improve and fight against injustices for their people in their communities.

CRP: Strength-Based Approach to Professional Development A critical component of CRP is the strength-based approach to Professional Development (PD) provided to the maths teachers at the Centre. The PD program was inclusive of Sarra’s (2011) Strong and Smart philosophy and Cross-Cultural Competence. His Stronger Smarter framework complemented the Indigenous frameworks and processes of Gorringe and Spillman named Engoori (Gorringe 2012; Gorringe and Spillman 2008).

Strong and Smart The Strong snd Smart philosophy (Sarra 2011) seeks to acknowledge and promote a positive sense of what it means to be Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander in today’s society. The key to embracing a student’s Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander identity and culture, whether in an educational setting in a detention centre or in a mainstream schooling environment, is to ensure it is visible and seen as a priority by leaders and teachers in the overarching philosophy of the school within a whole school agenda. The intent of this philosophy is to provide an inclusive and supportive school and learning environment that values and respects the cultures of Australian Indigenous young people and other diverse minority young people. It enables them to consider how they might accept responsibility for the choices they make in their lives using culturally appropriate ways, thus encouraging them to become positive thinkers and problem solvers with a positive attitude to learning. Shared values, which are inclusive and respectful of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander worldviews and acknowledge and embrace Indigenous epistemologies and ontologies, display to students that who they are, and their cultures are respected,

Crossing Cultures: Hidden History Posters

107

valued and important in the school and juvenile detention centre. Using this strengthbased approach sets up and enhances positive communication and teacher and student relationships as discussed in Chap. 1.

Crossing Cultures: Hidden History Posters Cross-cultural competence training was an essential component of the PD for educators in the Centre. In one of the first professional development workshops, we incorporated the Crossing cultures: Hidden history posters developed by the Queensland Department of Education, Training and the Arts (2007). This seven-poster series proved an effective teaching resource to provide historical background knowledge of government policies, practices and legislations that have contributed to the intergenerational trauma of Indigenous people today. They highlight the impacts of colonisation through intergenerational trauma that can be observed in some of the young Indigenous people in the Centre. The whole series outlines the Aboriginal occupation of Australia and the shared history of colonisation which ranged from aspects of precontact, contact, post-contact and contemporary issues for Indigenous Australians. Each of the seven posters uses colourful imagery and illustrations to represent a specific time in history which included: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Pre contact—pre 1700s: Aboriginal Traditions and Lifestyle Contact—1770s to 1890s: European Invasion and Settlement Contact—1890s to 1950s: Protection and Segregation Post Contact 1950s to 1960s: Assimilation Post Contact 1960s to 1972: Integration Contemporary 1972–2000: Towards Self-Determination Contemporary 2000 to present: The New Millenium

As part of the cross-cultural competence training, the posters enabled the teachers to challenge their assumptions and beliefs of Indigenous Australians. The intention was to enact positive personal changes and to create improved changes in their teaching practices. In addition, the posters were used as an example of a teaching resource that could be adapted and used to teach mathematical concepts, for example, learning about duration and point in time. This approach led to collaboration in the design of culturally rich posters, such as those provided earlier in this chapter, that embed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives in maths.

108

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Engoori The Engoori framework (Gorringe 2012; Gorringe and Spillman 2008) was incorporated in the teachers’ professional development workshops for cross-cultural competency to develop understandings of CRP and perceptions of Indigeneity and to reinforce positive Indigenous identity that can contribute to engaging young people’s potential to learn. Engoori is a three-phase, conversational process offered by the Mithaka, Tjimpa people to address complex intercultural challenges. This framework was developed as a process to discuss local leadership for cultural renewal through honouring and acknowledging the past of Indigenous people and to consider ways of moving forward into the future using three areas in a cyclic process as shown in Fig. 5.5. We adapted Engoori to use in the PD to reinforce how maths can be contextualised into the culture and related to the home language. It was used to support the teachers with consideration of the cultural implications of Western maths. Instead of positioning local leadership as the focus area, it was adapted to consider maths for cultural renewal by identifying the strengths and limitations in the teaching pedagogy and learning. The Engoori three-cycle process includes six elements that we used to engage educators to critically reflect on their individual and collective identities within their school and to consider what patterns, behaviours and practices needed to be changed by re-examining their present pedagogical practices and maths curriculum. Re-learning productive and positive ways to engage young people in learning was critical to this process. The six Engoori elements, and the focus of each one, are as follows: . Identities, Relationships and Diversity—Who you are? How you are and how you behave and valuing and embracing diversity. . Multiple Perspectives—Getting a variety of different ideas and valuing the ideas not denigrating or putting them down.

Fig. 5.5 Engoori cycle (Gorringe and Spillman 2008) (Reproduced with the authors’ permission)

CRP: Collaborative Development and Resource Design

109

. Collective Sense Making and Buy In—People who are going through the challenges are the people who know what is going on. Run a process that is collaborative for change to occur. . Narratives and Stories—Best way to bring out diversity and create relationships and understanding is through people telling their stories. . Challenging Assumptions—Challenge the way we think about the way we THINK. Trying to think differently and not make the same assumptions that have been done in the past. . Multiple Initiatives—There is no silver bullet or one answer. (Gorringe and Spillman 2008)

Due to strict protocols around access to the Centre school, bringing in Elders and community members presented some challenges. To address this, we used digital media and YouTube clips that privileged Indigenous voices from some of the Indigenous communities of the young people, for example, Engoori. The integration of local community knowledges and voices into maths teaching was to support the culture of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people to assist in empowering positive teacher attitudes towards building relationships with their students.

CRP: Collaborative Development and Resource Design An underlying strength of CRP is that its whole development and application at the Centre drew upon the findings of the study which was outlined in Chap. 1. Through a collaborative process, with teachers, students and researchers working together, we explored and addressed current learning and teaching practices and development needs at the Centre school including culturally responsive resources related to Indigenous perspectives. This stepped collaborative approach involved the following: . Observations of teachers teaching maths to identify the pedagogy adopted, students’ engagement and inclusion of Indigenous perspectives; . Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with teachers to identify the extent of their cultural awareness and knowledge of embedding Indigenous perspectives into the maths curriculum; . Focus group discussions with students to identify their preferences for how they might learn maths; . Poster development which adopted a reading to learn strategy (Rose 2016) combined with Indigenous perspectives and engaging maths tasks; . Poster presentation to teachers to collaborate and gather feedback in order to refine further; . Trial in classrooms involving teachers and students to gather feedback and refine posters; . Refined posters presented to teachers to trial in classrooms and feedback provided; Posters refined for a third time in preparation for graphic design work and publishing (see Fig. 5.6 for an example).

Fig. 5.6 Turtle tagging (CRP poster developed through the project by Ewing and Sarra)

110 5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

References

111

Chapter Summary Based on the study’s findings, we developed CRP as a culturally appropriate way to support Indigenous students’ maths learning while in juvenile detention. However, the application of CRP was limited by teachers’ struggle to know how to be culturally responsive. It is important to note that teaching in the Centre was found to be highly complex because of the nature of the school, the different backgrounds from which the students came, their diagnosed and undiagnosed disabilities and learning difficulties and their lived experiences beyond the Centre walls. In response to these challenges, we designed and implemented the PD program, detailed above, for teachers in the Centre school through the overarching strategy of CRP. As outlined in this chapter, our study was positioned to strengthen the evidence pertaining to maths education in juvenile detention centres in Australia. Its findings show that a strength-based approach, a critical aspect of CRP, is vitally important to building positive identity development for young Indigenous people. Currently, there is limited research about CRP and its important components for teaching maths to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The study demonstrated that while teachers were actively engaged in the process of planning for instruction and had high expectations of students, there was limited evidence of interconnecting students’ cultures. Therefore, in the final Chap. 6, we identify and discuss the continuing need for reform of the education provision in Australia’s juvenile detention centres.

References Australian Government. (2020). Closing the gap report 2020. https://ctgreport.niaa.gov.au/ove rview. Bin-Sallik, M. (2003). Cultural safety: Let’s name it! The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 32, 21–28. D’Ambrosio, U. (2016). Ethnomathematics: A response to the changing role of mathematics in society. In P. Ernest, B. Sriraman, & N. Ernest (Eds.), Critical mathematics education: Theory, praxis and reality (pp. 23–34). Information Age Publishing. D’Ambrosio, U., & Rosa, M. (2008). Um diálogo com Ubiratan D’Ambrosio: Uma conversa brasileira sobre etnomatemática. A dialogue with Ubiratan D’Ambrosio: A Brazilian conversation about ethnomathematics. Revista Latinoamericana de Etnomatemática, 1(2), 88–110. http:// www.etnomatematica.org/v1-n2-julio2008/DAmbrosio-Rosa.pdf. Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction (Vol. null). Delgado Bernal, D. (1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in educational research. Harvard Educational Review, 68(4), 555–583. Delgado Bernal, D. (2002). Critical Race Theory, Latino Critical Theory, and Critical RacedGendered Epistemologies: Recognizing Students of Color as Holders and Creators of Knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040200800107. Deloria, V. (1969). Custer died for your sins: An Indian manifesto. New York: Macmillan. Dore, E. D., & McMurtrie, D. H. (2021). Our diverse middle school students: A guide to equitable and responsive teaching. Routledge.

112

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Drinan, C. H. (2018). The war on kids: How American juvenile justice lost its way. Oxford University Press. Erikson, E. H. (1974). Dimensions of a new identity: The 1973 Jefferson lectures in the humanities. Norton. Ewing, B. (2012). Mathematics funds of knowledge: “Sotmaute” and “Sermaute” fish in a Torres Strait Island community. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 52(1), 134–152. Ewing, B., & Sarra, G. (2018). Working with incarcerated indigenous and low socioeconomic status youth and their teachers to improve learning outcomes in mathematics. Curriculum Perspectives, 38(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-018-0056-8 Flores, J., & Barahona-López, K. (2021). Correctional education and the impact on educators’ lack of training. Curriculum Perspectives, 8(2), 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-02100147-3 Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, Seabury Press. Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury Press. Freire, P. (2004). Pedagogy of indignation. Routledge. Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., & Goetz, T. (2007). Girls and mathematics—A “hopeless” issue? A control-value approach to gender differences in emotions towards mathematics. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22(4), 497–514. Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. Gilbert, M. J. (1982). Los parientes: social structural factors and kinship relations among second generation Mexican Americans in two southern California communities, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Giroux, H., Purpel, D. (Eds.). (1983). The hidden curriculum and moral education: Deception or discovery. McCutchan Publishing Corporation. Gorringe, S. (2012). Engoori: A strength based approach to complex intercultural challenges [DVD]. MurriMatters. Gorringe, S., & Spillman, D. (2008). Creating stronger smarter learning communities: The role of culturally competent leadership. In World Indigenous Peoples Conference: Education. Conference Proceedings 7–11 December 2008. Melbourne. Gray, J., & Beresford, Q. (2008). A ‘formidable challenge’: Australia’s quest for equity in Indigenous education. Australian Journal of Education, 52(2), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494410 805200207 Groome, H. (1995). Towards improved understandings of Aboriginal young people. Youth Studies Australia, 14(4), 17–21. Gutierrez, R. (2007). Context matters: Equity, success, and the future of mathematics education. In T. Lamberg & L. Wiest (Eds.), Proceedings of the annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Lake Tahoe, Nevada) (pp. 1–18). University of Nevada. Gutstein, E. (2012). Using critical mathematics to understand the conditions of our lives. In T. Wrighley, P. Thomson, & B. Lingard (Eds.), Changing schools: Alternative ways to make a world of difference (pp. 181–193). Routledge. Harrison, N., & Sellwood, J. (2016). Learning and teaching in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education. Oxford University Press. Harrison, N., & Skrebneva, I. (2020). Country as pedagogical: Enacting an Australian foundation for culturally responsive pedagogy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 52(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00220272.2019.1641843 Hill, D. L. (1999). Holistic learning: A model of education based on Aboriginal cultural philosophy. Masters dissertation, Saint Francis Xavier University. Hokowhitu, B., Moreton-Robinson, A., Smith, L. T., Andersen, C., & Larkin, S. (2020). Routledge handbook of critical Indigenous studies. Routledge. Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress. Routledge.

References

113

Howard, T., & Rodriguez-Scheel, A. (2017). Culturally relevant pedagogy 20 years later: Progress or pontifcating? What have we learned, and where do we go? Teachers College Record, 119(1), 1–32. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (1997). Bringing them home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families. https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/bringingthem-home-report-1997. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163320. Lewthwaite, B., Owen, T., Doiron, A., Renaud, R., & McMillan, B. (2014). Culturally responsive teaching in Yukon First Nation settings: What does it look like and what is its influence? Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 155, 1–34. Lopez, F. A. (2016). Culturally responsive pedagogies in Arizona and Latino students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 118(5), n.p. Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press. Matthews, C. (2009). Stories and symbols: Maths as storytelling. Middle Years Education, 6(3), 45–50. https://www.aeuvic.asn.au/sites/default/files/PV_6-3.pdf. Matthews, C. (2020). Issues in the teaching of mathematics: Teaching mathematics from a cultural perspective. State of Victoria. Department of Education and Training. https://www.education.vic. gov.au/Documents/school/teachers/teachingresources/discipline/maths/MTT_teaching_maths_ cultural_perspective.pdf. McLaren, P. (1998). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (3rd ed.). Longman. Miller, L., & Steele, C. (2021). Teaching and learning: There is no one right way, but there are right things to do. In M. S. R. Oliver (Ed.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 112–132). Routledge. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543534 Morrison, A., Rigney, L-I., Hattam, R., & Diplock, A. (2019). Toward an Australian culturally responsive pedagogy: A narrative review of the literature. University of South Australia. https:// apo.org.au/node/262951. Ober, R., Bulsey, N., Pearson, N., & Bartlett, C. (2021). Weaving Torres Strait Islander language and culture into education. In M. S. R. Oliver (Ed.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 76–85). Routledge. Oliver, R., & Forrest, S. (2021). Supporting the diverse language background of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. In M. Shay & R. Oliver (Eds.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 97–111). Routledge. Pirbhai-Illich, F., Pete, S., & Martin, F. (2017). Culturally responsive pedagogies: Decolonization, indigeneity and interculturalism. In F. Pirbhai-Illich, S. Pete, & F. Martin (Eds.), Culturally responsive pedagogy: Working towards decolonization, indigeneity and interculturalism (pp. 3– 25). Palgrave Macmillan. Queensland Department of Education, Training, and the Arts. (2007). Crossing cultures: Hidden history [posters]. RAMR Cycle. (2018). QUT [Slides]. https://research.qut.edu.au/ydc/wp-content/uploads/sites/181/ 2018/04/RAMR-with-Matthews-framework-2018-PDF.pdf. Reynolds, H. (1990). The other side of the frontier: Aboriginal resistance to the European invasion of Australia. Pelican. Rigney, L., Garrett, R., Curry, M., & MacGill, B. (2020). Culturally responsive pedagogy and mathematics through creative and body-based learning: Urban Aboriginal schooling. Education and Urban Society, 52(8), 1159–1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124519896861 Rose, D. (2016). Reading to learn: Accelerating learning and closing the gap. Reading to Learn.

114

5 Culturally Responsive Pedagogy for Indigenous Students in Juvenile …

Sarra, C. (2011). Strong and smart—towards a pedagogy for emancipation: Education for first peoples. Routledge. Sarra, C. (2012). Good morning, Mr Sarra: My life working for a stronger, smarter future for our children. University of Queensland Press. Sarra, G., & Ewing, B. (2021). Culturally responsive pedagogies and perspectives in mathematics. In M. Shay (Ed.), Indigenous education in Australia (pp. 148–161). Routledge. Sarra, G., & Shay, M. (2019). Indigenous Education, Critical Perspectives to Enhance Learning Practices. In: Peters, M. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Teacher Education. Springer, Singapore. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1179-6_195-1. Shay, M., & Sarra, G. (2021). Locating the voices of Indigenous young people on identity in Australia: An Indigenist analysis. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Education, 15(3), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/15595692.2021.1907330 Shay, M., Sarra, G., & Woods, A. (2021). Strong identities, strong futures: Indigenous identities and wellbeing in schools. In M. Shay & R. Oliver (Eds.), Indigenous education in Australia: Learning and teaching for deadly futures (pp. 63–75). Routledge. Skemp, R. (1986). The psychology of mathematics learning. Penguin. Skemp, R. (2002). Instrumental understanding and relational understanding. In D. Tall & M. Thomas (Eds.), Intelligence, learning and understanding in mathematics: A tribute to Richard Skemp (pp. 1–17). Post Pressed. Skovsmose, O., & Godoy Penteado, M. (2012). Concerns of a critical mathematics education. In J. M. B. S. L. Jaconsen (Ed.), Mathematics teacher education in the public interest (pp. 65–82). Information Age Publishing. Smith, L. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (3rd ed.). Bloomsburh Publishing PLC. Snyder, S., & Fenner, D. S. (2021). Culturally responsive teaching for multilingual learners: Tools for equity. Corwin. Solórzano, D. G., & Bernal, D. D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a critical race and LatCrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085901363002. Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. Teachers College Press. Stuart, V. (2000). Math curse or math anxiety? The Mathematics Teacher, 6(5), 330–333. Turner, E., Gutierrez, R., Gutierrez, M. (2012). This project opened my eyes: Preservice elementary teachers learning to connect school, community and mathematics. Information Age Publishing. White, P., & Mitchelmore, M. (2002). Teaching and learning mathematics by abstraction. In T. D. Tall & M. Thomas (Eds.), Intelligence, learning and understanding in mathematics: A tribute to Richard Skemp. PostPressed. White, P., & Mitchelmore, M. (2010). Teaching for abstraction: A model. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(3), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986061003717476. Yosso, T. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.

Chapter 6

Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles

Abstract This Chapter draws together the lived experiences of the authors as they worked with juvenile justice maths teachers, and children and young people children who have been marginalised and excluded and caught in the cycle of disadvantage resulting in making decisions that have led to juvenile detention. We critically review the provision of education in juvenile justice centres, the criminal age of responsibility and the proposed plan to introduce GPS trackers for recidivist children and young people. We reflect on the idea of proximity, that is, getting close to the children and their families to understand the nature of their challenges, and their problems. We highlight the importance of humanising a child who breaks the law and caring about this child. Coming to hear about and understand the stories of former incarcerated children and young people offers proof that children are not born bad but have incredible capacity for growth, strengthening their identities and rehabilitation to go to live productive and rich lives. We conclude by emphasising the need for reform in justice and education to ensure the present and future learning and well-being of young people caught up in the juvenile detention system.

Our ongoing research and pedagogical work with young people and their teachers in juvenile detention prompt us to question: Are we a nation that has criminalised and continues to criminalise children and young people who are Aboriginal and or Torres Strait Islander and/or from low socioeconomic families? We share the view with Dolan and Carr (2015) that criminalizing poverty—racial profiling and targeting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people—is a relatively familiar reality. Less well-known are the new and growing trends which increase this criminalisation of being poor that affect or will affect hundreds of children and young people in Australia. For the project described in this book, we initially set out to investigate maths education for children and young people in juvenile detention and to identify ways to unlock their learning potential in the subject. Once we began fieldwork at the Centre, however, we gained new understandings of the complexities of providing education in juvenile detention centres related to teaching approaches, curriculum and learner engagement and incarceration. Unravelling these complexities will take significant bipartisan effort. Today, there are the science, laws and policies to facilitate that effort, but the question remains: is there the will? (Bronwyn and Grace)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0_6

115

116

6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles

Conflicting Policy On the one hand, the Australian state and federal government and international efforts in recent years have recommended a climate conducive to juvenile detention reforms (Queensland Attorney-General’s Department 2021; Courts 2021). The catalysts for some of these reforms have been incidences that have captured national and international attention, in particular the need for youth justice detention to be a measure of last resort. Detaining children and young people who have been victims of abuse, neglect, poverty and homelessness or who have mental illness and intellectual disabilities is detrimental and has limited benefit in reducing juvenile crime. That children and young people live in poverty in Australia is a result of public policies that produce and reinforce social and economic inequalities. Child poverty and disadvantage are the root cause of juvenile crime and violence (Morris 2016). They in turn derive from social and economic inequalities, concentrated disadvantage, unemployment and limited community cultural wealth and capital. Youth justice systems in Australia are a state and territory responsibility. Almost all states and territories have in recent years undertaken extensive reviews of their youth justice systems (Clancey et al. 2020). For example, the Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory (2017) made 227 recommendations in relation to preventing children from coming into care or detention, reforming judicial processes and improving the quality of both out-of-home care and juvenile detention facilities. Recommendation 27.1 of the Inquiry’s report states that Section 38(1) Criminal Code Act 1983 of the National Territory should be amended “to provide that the age of criminal responsibility be 12 years”. In addition: Youth under the age of 14 years may not be ordered to serve a time of detention, other than where the youth: • has been convicted of a serious and violent crime against the person; • presents a serious risk to the community, and • the sentence is approved by the President of the proposed Children’s Court. Recommendations 16.4 and 16.5, which focus on the provision of education, respond to the finding that classes based on security classification rather than ability level and age compounded inadequate identification of, and planning for, individual learning needs: “The classification grouping made ability targeted education delivery difficult for teachers and made children and young people uncomfortable to engage” (p. 398). The Board of Inquiry also found that children and young people did not receive the education that they were entitled to while in detention (p. 418). This was caused by a number of factors, including: • the subordination of education goals to security considerations, including organising classes using the discipline classification system; • the over-use of excluding children and young people from the classroom;

Conflicting Policy

117

• the under-utilisation of individualised special education support services and supports; and • the transient population, partly caused by the high rate of children and young people on remand or sentence for short periods. Several states, including Queensland, have been reconsidering the current mandatory minimum age of criminal responsibility and time serving in juvenile detention (Community Support and Services Committee 2022; Queensland Family and Child Commission 2017, 2021; Queensland Government 2017a, b). With the aim of addressing the need for reform in the youth justice system and reducing youth crime in the state, the Queensland Government (2018c) issued Working together changing the story: Youth justice strategy 2019–2023. The subsequent Youth justice strategy action plan 2019–2021 (Queensland Government 2019) outlines the practical implementation of the proposed reforms. It acknowledges that sentencing schemes have been unfair to children as well as costly and unnecessary: Where possible, we will divert children from court, ensuring children and young people with early or low-level offending have positive family and community influences, are engaged in education, training and activities, and get support to address their behaviours. There is consistent evidence that many children who offend for the first time will not re-offend and that providing support and diverting them away from court is the most effective and efficient response. These actions provide options for diversion with interventions suitable for children who are at higher risk of offending, including for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. (Queensland Government 2019, p. 6)

Despite the intentions of the Action Plan, recent Queensland Youth Justice moves include trialling the use of GPS trackers (Department of Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs 2021). A ministerial media statement announced that this measure would target “hardcore … recidivist” juvenile offenders: Courts will be able to order 16 to17-year-olds to wear GPS devices if they are given bail, providing an extra layer of security and increased safety for the community. The devices will be monitored around the clock by Queensland Corrective Services who have extensive experience with this technology. (Queensland Government 2021)

The purpose put forward in the Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill (2021) for this significant limitation on the rights of children is: • To deter the child from committing further offences on bail, knowing they are being monitored, and thereby keeping the community safe; • To allow police to investigate whether the child has or has not complied with their bail conditions and/or committed a crime, if an alert is reported to them; and • Overall, to lower rates of reoffending of children while on bail. Undoubtedly, seeking to prevent or reduce crime to protect community safety is a legitimate purpose to be achieved. This development is problematic according to the Queensland Human Rights Commission (2021, pp. 7–8) which argues that the use of GPS trackers is “a serious incursion into the rights of children and families, is not evidence-based, and may create more harm than good”. The Commission challenges the use of GPS trackers

118

6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles

on the basis that the evidence-base has not been well established to justify their use. It acknowledged that the trackers were intended for high-risk recidivist sixteen-to seventeen-year-old juveniles, and that communities should be protected. However, emotional responses should not override the mapping of data to provide a strong evidence-base for their use. Further, the use of GPS trackers may undermine the Government’s efforts with the Working Together: Changing the Story: Youth Justice Strategy 2019–2023 (Queensland Government 2018c) and the Changing the Sentence (Queensland Family and Child Commission 2021) for youth justice and in some instances may increase risks to community safety. The GPS trackers may announce to the community the young person’s status as a delinquent, thus making the community more fearful. Not only is the visibility of the GPS stigmatising but also the device undermines the confidentiality of the juvenile court proceedings (Weisburd 2015). The consequences for GPS tracking violations may reflect the way that the monitoring fails to rehabilitate. As mentioned in Chap. 1, the cognitive capabilities of children and young people are still developing, and they may often violate without the intention to do so. Punishing children and young people for not comprehending their probation conditions is incompatible with rehabilitation. While the Queensland Government’s (2018c) Working Together Changing the Story: Youth Justice Strategy 2019–2023 focused on prevention, early intervention and collaboration to address the causes of juvenile crime, it did not provide strategies for monitoring initiatives that emerged from it. To address Youth Justice requests, in 2020 the Government released its Oversight Strategy (Queensland Family and Child Commission 2020) from which two key questions were proposed: • Are youth justice reforms ensuring there is a reliable, trusted system built on share connections and commitments? • Are youth justice reforms ensuring children’s rights, well-being and safety are being upheld and protected? To respond to these questions, in 2022 the Government released the report Changing the Sentence (Queensland Family and Child Commission 2021) to monitor reform activity and program initiatives linked to juvenile justice. The report identified two pillars from the Working Together Changing the Story strategy: • Keep children out of court • Keep children out of custody The report provided eight findings to the first question (see p. 7 of report), for example, 45% of children and young people never return to the juvenile justice system once their court matter is finalised and there are moves to work more strongly with families of children in the juvenile justice system. There are areas that are of concern particularly within the context of this book. For example, the over-presentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in juvenile justice continues with insufficient responses to the needs of these children and their families, and the data linkages between juvenile justice, health, education and housing remain problematic. We also

Continuing Concerns and Way Forward

119

argue that child protection, accommodation and housing assistance services, education, employment, family and community services and health are failing these children. Given the intersectionality of these critical policies, it heightens concerns about whether policy properly addresses children’s involvement with juvenile justice. They cannot be examined in isolation from each other because they all intersect. It is about analysing the complexities and realities of policy and how they intersect with race and poverty from which these children come. Other Australian states have enacted juvenile justice reform measures grounded in science and social science that tell us detaining children does not deter crime; rather, they inhibit children’s capacity to re-join society and are crushingly expensive for states. It costs $1500 a day or $547,500 a year to hold a child in detention in Queensland (Queensland Government 2018c). Recent efforts at a federal government level have been mixed. In July 2021, former Prime Minister Scott Morrison refused to accept the calls from a number of countries to stop imprisoning children under the age of 14 years old, and to raise the age of criminal responsibility (Human Rights Law Centre 2021). The Government talks about ‘closing the gap’ (Australian Government 2020) on the one hand but continues to fund the building of new juvenile detention centres and locking up tenyear-old children who are predominantly from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures (Human Rights Law Attorney-General’s Department 2021; Centre 2021). This detention is facilitated in large part by the juvenile justice system, with disadvantaged Indigenous families and communities paying the greatest price for punitive practices, and the Australian general public telling themselves that this is ‘their’ problem. This occurs although youth offending has fallen across most Australian states and territories in the past decade. Clancey, Wang and Lin (2020, p. 2) report that “over a period of 10 years the rate of young people proceeded against by police declined by 36%”. Other countries across the world have also experienced similar declines. For example: In Canada between 2008 and 2018, the number of young people (aged 12–17) committing offences reported by police fell by 48% (Moreau 2019: 31). In England and Wales between 2008 and 2018, the number of young people (aged 10–17) entering the youth justice system for the first time fell by 86% and the number of total proven offences fell by 75% (Ministry of Justice United Kingdom 2019: 12, 20). In the United States between 2009 and 2018, the number of young people (under 18) arrested fell by 60%. (United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2020 cited in Clancey et al. 2020).

Continuing Concerns and Way Forward Although some headway is being made towards reform in the juvenile justice system, the findings of our project and the work of other commentators continue to raise serious concerns about the Federal and State Governments’ decisions about juvenile detention. In particular, it is evident that

120

6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles

• Children’s involvement in the juvenile justice system is affected by the intersection of government policy developments in areas such as child protection, accommodation and housing assistance services, education, employment, family and community services and health. These developments need to be considered when looking at the offences of children. • Decades of scientific research have proven that children are different and deserve a system of justice that not only holds them accountable but also protects and nurtures those who can learn from their mistakes that may have been borne out of policy developments. • Children require the support to discover their potential and their destiny and then nurture it, so that they achieve their possibilities. • The juvenile justice process can play an important role in socialising children by viewing children’s transgressions as an opportunity to socialise and educate. This, in turn, presupposes that education in juvenile justice systems has a fair opportunity to provide an education that exposes children to acceptable standards of education. • Letting children know they matter and not being ignored because of their cultural or socioeconomic background. Children can feel they do not matter yet all the while are experiencing poverty, sexual abuse, emotional numbing, disabilities, low self-esteem, mental health issues, gender transitions or the trials of being Black and a young girl or boy trying to navigate adolescence. As advocates for children and young people continue to work for reforms, it is critical to acknowledge and address the emotional dimension before any work on reform measures can be addressed. Resorting to the rhetoric of those who cry that children and young people today have an equal opportunity to succeed just as we did does not answer the intersectionality of challenges they are confronted with from day to day. It just is not that simple. Getting tough on children and young people is not about legal and policy questions. It is about how children caught up in the juvenile justice system can be persuaded to believe that they have the power to change the circumstances of their lives through the development of their talent. That it is still possible for them to realise their dreams of becoming a contributing member of society—that they matter. The relationship between the belief in the possibility of attaining one’s dreams and crime is inescapable. There is an inverse relationship between belief and hope, on the one hand, and crime and violence, on the other. As belief and hope diminish, crime and violence increase. Despair in the lack of a future falls most heavily on juvenile populations of cities, rural and remote locations in Australia. How can they be offered a vision of inclusion and redemption? How can we advocate movement towards that end? Lawyer and juvenile justice advocate in the US Bryan Stevenson argued in an address at John Hopkins University (2018, n.p.) that the process begins with proximity. He explained that for change to occur, four key points need to be considered if we care about children and young people in juvenile justice systems. First, we’re going to have to get close enough to those who are poor and excluded and neglected,

Continuing Concerns and Way Forward

121

addicted and dependent to understand the nature of that problem. Second, the narrative has to change, to overcome “the politics of fear and anger” that cause us to “tolerate things we’re not supposed to tolerate”. Third, it is essential to stay hopeful as our hope is vital to our capacity to change the world. And finally: We’re going to have to do things that are uncomfortable and inconvenient, because we do not change the world by only doing the things that are comfortable and convenient. And that means that we’re going to have to make a choice to do uncomfortable things to change things.

When children and young people have contact with the juvenile justice system, we tend to think of them as ‘criminals’ as ‘other’, different and inferior. This emotional distancing is facilitated largely by the discriminatory practices of the juvenile justice system: disadvantaged Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds are paying the highest prices for our increasingly punitive practices, with the majority of Australians telling themselves that this is ‘their’ problem. Addressing the incarceration of children and young people, then, must begin by humanising the image of a child who breaks the law (Drinan 2018; Stevenson 2015). To care about these children, Australians have to be proximate enough to the problem or the child. Names and faces are the first step towards proximity because it is too easy to write off a child when she/he is known as a number or by a misspelled name. When we hear about a child’s story—fears, disappointments, trauma and abuse, their hopes and dreams and healing over time—we see a person who has made the best of adversity and some bad choices as a child and/or young person. In addition to the names and faces of children in juvenile detention centres, Australia needs to hear about the stories of former incarcerated children and young people who are living proof that children are not born bad—that they have incredible capacity for growth and rehabilitation. They need to hear stories like Keenan Mundine a Biripi and Waka Waka man who grew up in Redfern and lost both of his parents when he was eight years old (Deadly Connections 2021; Deep-Jones 2018). Within six months of leaving school and the house he lived in, Keenan was homeless. This instability led to a cycle of crime which led to incarceration as a fourteen-year-old and recidivism for the next ten years. After spending most of his twenties in prison, Keenan has become a role model and an aspiring Aboriginal leader who has started his own Aboriginal justice consulting service, Deadly Connections. This service seeks to “positively disrupt intergenerational disadvantage, grief, loss and trauma by providing holistic, culturally responsive interventions and services to First Nations people and communities, particularly those who have been impacted by the child protection and/or justice systems” (Deadly Connections 2021). He is determined to change the lives of young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders struggling to stay out of the criminal justice system. He has travelled to Geneva with the Human Rights Law Centre to speak at the UNHCR refugee agency where he called on Australia to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14 (NITV 2018). Keenan’s passion is “giving back to his community and working with people who have similar experiences to him”.

122

6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles

Keenan presents a heart-wrenching story. His experiences are not outliers, and neither is the path of growth and redemption. In Chap. 1, we discussed the deleterious effect of juvenile detention on children and young people and that it is not reserved for serious crimes. Children and young people may be in juvenile detention centres for a number of reasons. They could be on remand and awaiting a court appearance and as such have not been sentenced or alternatively sentenced for an offence. This is highlighted by Forgotten Australians: A report on Australians who experienced institutional or out-of-home care as children: Children could be placed in juvenile detention centres despite not having committed a criminal offence…the mixing of welfare and criminal cases in detention centres became a hallmark of dealing with young people in the juvenile system…the by-product of such indiscriminate mixing of children in detention centres ‘bred’ criminals. (Parliament of Australia 2004, p. 38)

Submissions to the Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory (2017) document that children and young people continue to be placed in juvenile justice centres because there is nowhere else for them because of system failure. In its 2021 report, the Australian Institute for Health and Welfare (2021, p. v) identified that 68% of young people in detention across Australia were unsentenced, that is, awaiting the outcome of their legal matter or sentencing. This practice is misguided in its own right, but to make matters worse many of the young people have experienced trauma defined as physical abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence, community violence and/or disease (Drinan 2018). Putting vulnerable children and young people who need trauma therapy and support into correctional facilities exacerbates their underlying psychological and emotional issues. Drinan (2018, p. 160) argues that it is “poor policy, and morally inexcusable—especially today in light of the scientific evidence of the capacity of youth rehabilitation”. Entering the juvenile justice system does not happen in a vacuum. Children and young people have not ended up in juvenile detention because they were born bad, rather bad things have happened in their lives. It is the reality of intergenerational disadvantage which plays out in Australia’s welfare and justice system. In addition to getting proximate and understanding incarcerated children and young people, we need to get proximate to the families and communities from which these children and young people come. They too are impacted by the actions of their children and the correctional experience. A second transe of Working Together reforms by the Queensland Government (2018c) saw the roll out of the Transition 2 Success (T2S) program (Queensland Government 2018b) which aims to change the story for young people in youth justice through learning and job and life skills. It gives young people a chance to work towards a future that is not defined by their past. T2S is delivered in a community setting with the program tailored to match the local community and its young people involved in the juvenile justice system, with the aim of getting young people back on track. We also need to get proximate to the experiences of teachers of children and young people in the juvenile justice system. These teachers shared some of their experiences

Conclusion

123

of watching and engaging with their students in the detention centre throughout this book. They too are concerned about the children’s actions, their education, their futures and the impact of the correctional experience. The way forward to more equitable and culturally appropriate education for young people in detention depends upon a shared commitment among teachers to recognise our privilege and racism and to adopt approaches such as Culturally Responsive Pedagogy that embrace Indigenous ways of knowing. Continuing professional development, as suggested in Chap. 5, is essential to supporting individual teachers in our collective cultural learning journey. The need for the kinds of reform in justice and education explored in this chapter is vital to ensuring the learning and well-being of young people caught up in the juvenile detention system. The replication of traditional schooling cannot generally save Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds. This is particularly problematic when a school’s foundational aim to support and re-engage children and young people risks being thrown aside for standardised testing accountability measures, and stringent procedures that confine creativity for students and teachers. Alongside knowledge and skills, students in detention need support in developing their own well-being and opportunities to overcome the personal, social and cultural barriers that they face. As Love (2019) argues, for schools and therefore the children in them to be well, more importance must be placed on students’ mental, physical and spiritual health than on tests. If students are unwell, test scores are not going to matter. Test scores are unlikely to improve until students are healing from trauma and or mattering to themselves, their families and communities. In addition, for schools in juvenile justice centres to be well, teachers need to be well to create a learning environment that protects students’ potential. Therefore, love and compassion towards and among teachers are critical to their own wellness. For detention centre schools to realise their potential as sites of cultural healing, teachers, students and their parents and communities need to actively follow a path to wellness together.

Conclusion Chapter 1 opened with a discussion of the nexus between children and young people progressing deeper into the juvenile justice system and the likelihood of them experiencing abuse, neglect, mental health challenge, disengagement from school and intellectual disability (Cashmore 2011; Feld 2019; Humes 2015). It was evident that the children and young people we worked with in the centre had disengaged from school, and for some this disengagement was for more than two years. It was also evident that they had limited knowledge and understandings of their identities as maths learners, positive identities and role models. Culture, history and language closely intersect with each of these factors. This book and the project from which it emerged provide a way forward for the provision of education in juvenile justice systems. If such systems and the schools

124

6 Reform of Education in Juvenile Justice: Opportunities and Obstacles

within them continue to exist, there need to be changes to how they recognise and acknowledge the criminalisation of race and poverty and how it fuels the incarceration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

References Attorney-General’s Department. (2021). Universal periodic review—National report of Australia— 2020. https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/human-rights-and-anti-discrimination/uni ted-nations-human-rights-reporting/australias-universal-periodic-review. Australian Government. (2020). Closing the gap report 2020. https://ctgreport.niaa.gov.au/ove rview. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2021). Youth justice in Australia 2019– 20. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2019-20/contents/ summary. Cashmore, J. (2011). The link between child maltreatment and adolescent offending: Systems neglect of adolescents. Family Matters, 89, 31–41. Clancey, G., Wang, S., & Lin, B. (2020). Youth justice in Australia: Themes from recent inquiries. In Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice (Vol. 605). Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.52922/ti04725. Community Support and Services Committee. (2022). Criminal law (raising the age of responsibility) amendment bill 2021. Report No. 16, 57th Parliament. https://documents.parliament.qld. gov.au/tp/2022/5722T275-5736.pdf. Criminal Code Act 1983 (NT). https://legislation.nt.gov.au/en/Legislation/CRIMINAL-CODEACT-1983. Deadly Connections. (n.d.). Community and justice services. https://deadlyconnections.org.au/abo ut-us/. Deep-Jones, L. (2018, August 10). Dream of Mandela inspires Indigenous justice campaigner. NITV. https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/nitv-news/article/2018/08/09/dream-mandelainspires-indigenous-justice-campaigner. Department of Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs. (2021). Changes to the Youth Justice Act 1992: 2021 amendments. https://www.cyjma.qld.gov.au/youth-justice/reform/cha nges-youth-justice-act-1992. Dolan, K., & Carr, J. L. (2015). The poor get prison: The alarming spread of the criminalization of poverty. Institute for Policy Studies. https://ips-dc.org/the-poor-get-prison-the-alarming-spreadof-the-criminalization-of-poverty/. Drinan, C. H. (2018). The war on kids: How American juvenile justice lost its way. Oxford University Press. Feld, B. C. (2019). The evolution of the juvenile court: Race, politics, and the criminalizing of juvenile justice. New York University Press. Human Rights Law Centre. (2021, July 8). Australia rejects UN call to raise the age of criminal responsibility. https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2021/7/8/australia-rejects-un-call-to-raise-the-ageof-criminal-responsibility. Humes, E. (2015). No matter how loud I shout: A year in the life of juvenile court. Simon & Schuster. Johns Hopkins University. (2018, May 25). A blueprint for how to change the world. Hub. https:// hub.jhu.edu/2018/05/24/commencement-2018-stevenson/. Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.

References

125

Ministry of Justice United Kingdom. (2019). Youth justice statistics 2017/18 England and Wales. London: Ministry of Justice UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-justice-statis tics-2017-to-2018. Moreau, G. (2019). Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2018. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2019001/article/00013-eng.htm. Morris, M. (2016). Pushout: The criminalization of black girls in schools. The New Press. NITV. (2018, July 3). From life behind bars to United Nations speech. https://www.sbs.com.au/ nitv/nitv-news/article/2018/07/03/aboriginal-australia-detention-united-nations. Parliament of Australia. (2004). Forgotten Australians: A report on Australians who experienced institutional or out-of-home care as children. Senate Community Affairs References Committee. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_ Affairs/Completed_inquiries/2004-07/inst_care/report/index. Queensland Courts. (2021). Youth justice benchbook. Department of Justice and Attorney-General. https://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/659977/cc-bb-youth-justice.pdf. Queensland Family and Child Commission. (2017). The age of criminal responsibility in Queensland. https://www.qfcc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/For%20professionals/policy/minimum-agecriminal-responsibility.pdf. Queensland Family and Child Commission. (2020). QFCC oversight strategy 2020–2022. https:// www.qfcc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-07/QFCC%20Oversight%20Strategy%2020202022.PDF. Queensland Family and Child Commission. (2021). Changing the sentence: Overseeing Queensland’s youth justice reforms. https://www.qfcc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-06/QFCC% 20Changing%20the%20Sentence%20lo%20res%20spreads.pdf. Queensland Government. (2017a). Government response to the independent review of youth detention. http://www.youthdetentionreview.qld.gov.au/governments-response-to-the-report.pdf. Queensland Government. (2017b). Independent review of youth detention. http://www.youthdetenti onreview.qld.gov.au/. Queensland Government. (2018b). Transition 2 success. https://www.qld.gov.au/law/sentencingprisons-and-probation/young-offenders-and-the-justice-system/youth-justice-community-pro grams-and-services/t2s. Queensland Government. (2018c). Working together changing the story: Youth justice strategy 2019–2023. https://www.cyjma.qld.gov.au/resources/dcsyw/youth-justice/reform/strategy.pdf. Queensland Government. (2019). Working together changing the story: Youth justice strategy action plan 2019–2021. https://www.cyjma.qld.gov.au/resources/dcsyw/youth-justice/publicati ons/yj-strategy-action-plan-2019-2021.pdf. Queensland Government. (2021, May 14). GPS devices to tackle juvenile crime. The Queensland Cabinet and Ministerial Directory. https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/92097. Queensland Human Rights Commission. (2021). Youth justice and other legislation amendment bill: Submission to legal affairs and safety committee Queensland parliament. https://documents. parliament.qld.gov.au/committees/LASC/2021/YJandOLAB2021/submissions/048.pdf. Royal Commission and Board of Inquiry into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory. (2017). Final report. https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/child-detention/ final-report. Stevenson B. (2015). Just mercy: A story of justice and redemption. Scribe. Weisburd, K. (2015). Monitoring the youth: The collision of rights and rehabilitation. Iowa Law Review, 101(1), n.p. https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-101-issue-1/monitoring-the-youththe-collision-of-rights-and-rehabilitation/. Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021. (Qld). https://www.legislation.qld.gov. au/view/html/bill.first/bill-2021-007.

Appendix A

Teacher Demographic Survey

ARC IN 150100045 Unlocking the learning potential of incarcerated and low SES young people

This questionnaire asks about you. The information you provide will be confidential and de-identified. The information will be used to assist the project team with understanding a little about you as a teacher and/or teacher aide. Profile Name: Current Role/s: Email Address:

1. Level of Teaching experience (prior) Please indicate in which levels of schooling you have taught maths lessons ◻ 1. Early Childhood (Prep-2) ◻ 2. Primary (3–6) ◻ 3. Middle School (lower secondary Years 7–9) ◻ 4. Senior School (senior secondary Years 10–12) ◻ 5. Adult education (e.g. TAFE) ◻ 6. Tertiary education

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0

127

128

Appendix A: Teacher Demographic Survey

2. Level of Teaching experience (current) Please indicate in which levels of schooling you have taught maths lessons ◻ 1. Early Childhood (Prep-2) ◻ 2. Primary (3–6) ◻ 3. Middle School (lower secondary Years 7–9) ◻ 4. Senior School (senior secondary Years 10–12) ◻ 5. Adult education (e.g. TAFE) ◻ 6. Tertiary education

3. Level of Teacher Aide experience (prior) Please indicate in which levels of schooling you have supported the teacher, with maths lessons ◻ 1. Early Childhood (Prep-2) ◻ 2. Primary (3–6) ◻ 3. Middle School (lower secondary Years 7–9) ◻ 4. Senior School (senior secondary Years 10–12) ◻ 5. Adult education (e.g. TAFE) ◻ 6. Tertiary education

4. Level of Teacher Aide experience (current) Please indicate in which levels of schooling you have supported the teacher, with maths lessons ◻ 1. Early Childhood (Prep-2) ◻ 2. Primary (3–6) ◻ 3. Middle School (lower secondary Years 7–9) ◻ 4. Senior School (senior secondary Years 10–12) ◻ 5. Adult education (e.g. TAFE) ◻ 6. Tertiary education

5. Teaching history Years of teaching experience

Year levels taught

Years of teaching in Special Education

6. Teacher Aide history Years of teacher aide experience Years as a Teacher Aide in Special Education

Year levels supported

Appendix A: Teacher Demographic Survey

129

7. Educational Background Highest University Qualification (Please circle one number only)

1. BA, Grad Dip Education 2. Bachelor of Education 3. Bachelor of Education Early Childhood 4. Bachelor of Education—Special Education 5. Bachelor of Arts/Postgrad Cert in Special Ed (Autism) 6. Bachelor of Education, Post Graduate in Education, Post Graduate in Autism Studies (currently) Bachelor of Science; Graduate Dip in Education; Graduate Certificate in Autism Studies 7. Degree 8. Degree—B Learning Management 9. Degree—B Learning Management—nearing completion of Graduate Certificate 10. Graduate Certificate 11. Graduate Diploma 12. Graduate Diploma Special Education—Intellectual Impairment (Honours) 13. Master of Education 14. Master of Indigenous Education 15. Master of Educational Studies in the field of special needs and behaviour management 16. Master of Educational Management (Administration) 17. Master of Special Education

Year of completion of highest university qualification List university qualifications related to mathematics, for example, 2 units in BEd; 5 units in BSc, etc. Qualifications—other than university qualifications

8. Experience working with equity groups Please circle any/all numbers for the groups you have worked with

1. Socioeconomically disadvantaged 2. Indigenous children (Birth-5 years) 3. Indigenous children (6–12 years) 4. Indigenous youth (13–17 years) 5. Homeless children (0–17 years) 6. Foster Children 7. Children with a disability 8. Children from a refugee background

Number of years worked in this area

1. 0–5 years 2. 6–10 years 3. 11 years or more

Cricos: 00213J

Appendix B

Teacher Efficacy Survey

IN 150100045 BYETC: Unlocking the learning potential of incarcerated Indigenous and low SES young people. Ethics Approval No. 1500000515. This questionnaire is designed to help us gain a better understanding of the kinds of things that create challenges for teachers. Your answers are confidential. Directions: Please indicate your opinion about each of the questions below by marking any one of the five responses in the columns on the right side, ranging from (1) “Strongly Disagree” to (5) “Strongly Agree” as each represents a degree on the continuum. Please respond to each of the questions by considering the combination of your current ability, resources and opportunity to do each of the following in your present position.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 B. Ewing and G. Sarra, Educating Indigenous Children in Australian Juvenile Justice Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8684-0

131

132

Appendix B: Teacher Efficacy Survey 1 2 3 4 5

1. I can get through to the most difficult students 2. I can help my students to think critically 3. I am able to control disruptive behaviour in the classroom 4. I can motivate students who show low interest in schoolwork 5. I can make my expectations clear about student behaviour 6. I can get students to believe they can do well in schoolwork 7. I can respond to difficult questions from my students 8. I can establish routines to keep activities running smoothly 9. I can help my students value learning 10. I can gauge student comprehension of what I have taught 11. I can craft good questions for my students 12. I can foster student creativity in my classroom 13. I can always get children to follow classroom rules 14. I can improve the understanding of a student who is failing 15. I can calm a student who is disruptive or noisy 16. I am able to establish a classroom management system with each group of students 17. I can adjust my lessons to the proper level for individual students 18. I can use a variety of assessment strategies in the classroom 19. I can keep a few problem students from ruining an entire lesson 20. I can provide alternative explanations or examples when students are confused 21. I can respond appropriately to defiant students 22. I can assist families in helping their children do well in school 23. I can implement alternative strategies for students in the classroom 24. I can provide appropriate challenges for very capable students Cricos: 00213J