..
tTURT LIBRARY
~
· A Publication of The Centre for Studies in Educational Leadership
·
Vol. 2, No. 5, December 1991
·
ISSNt036-98ffi
JUSTICE FOR WHOM? - A CRITIQUE OF THE
SOCIAL JUSTICE STRATEGY OF THE SOUTH
AUSTRALIAN EDUC~J]QN.DEPART~ENT.
Karen Starr
Introduction
r . . -····· ....·. ./
t;
. :~
\ .
l
\
;
I
l
~ l)i ~t~J~~{
·:~J:-)2 .
..·. ,:
1
~1_
~-
~~
·\
y ,. . . ,,,.,..~ ......... ,........... ~-"'~"' .. ,. . . .,. . . .,............ .:r~.,.,.,:c~...,;~,::,.~1.-.1·
In this paper I intend Lo do several things:
: a) to explore various meanings of social justice which differ
· · according to the ideological assumptions which underpin
. theit use. In this instance, I have aligned them with .
political thought from the left to the right
.· ·
b) to examine the South Australian Education Department's
draft Social Justice Stratcgy Action Plan
c) to locate this strategy in terms of the three positions I
· initially propose, and
d) to provide a critique of the strategy
This information and critique is offered constructively arid
in hope that it will eontribulc to the debate about social
· justice in South Australian education. Education has a . .
huge role to play in socially just society, However, the
problems which create and maintain disadvantage in
education are still wilh us. Discussion, critique and
. reflection are important processes in any serious ·
.
exploration of the various dimensions of inequality which
flaw education systems.
a
'11lerc is a crucial role for critical policy analysis in this
exercise. Very few people arc familiar wilh government
policies and even in education, policy is oflcn not critically
scrutinised. But, practitioners ignore policy to their peril. .
Policy is imposed and regulated; it specifics the values and
actions that are the organisation's stance and it is
·
non-negotiable. A critical policy analysis is overtly
AUTHOR: Karen Starr, lnbarendi College, Elizabeth_
EDITOR: Bruce Johnson
The Centre for Studies in Educational Leadership
University of South Australia
political, emancipatory in intent, and attempts to expose .
favoured values and SQCial arrangements, the sources of
power and control underpinning them and the hegemonic ·
technologies which are brought into play which restrain
human consciousness and einaQcipation. .
· ·
One key axiom of critical policy analysis is ihatwithin . ·
society, power is structured unequally and hence different ·
groups within society pursue their interests from . · •
positions of greater or lesser advantage in tenns of the·
structured power available to them. As education is a ·
central site on which inequalities of power and advantage
are reproduced and contested, education policy must reflect
or otherwise involve, the exercise of unequal power. · ·
Critical policy analysis brings ihe complex reality of · .
education squarely and overtly baclc. into the realms of the ·
political.
·
· ··
·
As Social justice is a contested concept, social justice
policies will be controversial in that they reflect · ··
particular definitions and interests; However, we can't
talk about social justice in education alone - in vacuo . It
can only be defined and described in ilS broader social, ..
political, economic and historical contexts: Yet lhere 1s
no dearly articulated Federal, State or Departmental .
definition or lheory, and no universally accepted ··
definition or theory of social justice that assists us in .
getting this broader view. So what is sodaljustice and
what does it mean in education? What follows are three . ·
positions on social justice. They fanned the basis ?f an
article which was published in Curriculum Perspective.,
in Seplcmbcr, 1991 (Starr, 1991)•. is my h~ th~t ~ _
political framework by which to cnuque the soc1alJuslice
.strategy will be an empowering tool for practitioners and
will aid discussion on the subjecL .
•!
THE CONSERVATIVE VIEW OF SOCIAL ..
JUSTICE
Description
The conservative view of social justice tends to be ·
aligned with right-wing political ideol~~Y· _Con5:rv~tism
as a basic attitude and as a form of pohlics m capitalist
democracies, defends and preserves existing social
conditions, arrangements, institutions, values and
established power relations and opposes structural
changes that would upset lhese ai:rangemenlS.
·
interpretation and implementation of social justice. Social "
Conservative social justice rhetoric speaks to libertarian
justice
is forced out of the mainstream and into the realms
doctrines, of individual freedoms, free will, independence,
of
'welfare',
ahhough philanthropic moral acts ought not -_
freedom from control, freedom from obligation,frecdom
·
be
synonymous
with social justice.
from restrictive conditions and freedom to act. It is a stance
which respects and bolsters competition between individuals.
Within capitalist societies there is an elemental inequality
Conservative individualism endorses what comes to
· · -between classes, between those who arc compelled to sell
individuals by chance associated with birth._ 'Birthright'
their labour power for their survival and those who own _
influences access to wealth, power, education and
the means of production and who are privileged to hire
opportunities, as well as chance associated with personal
labour power. This translates to a fundamental inequality
endowments, talents and abilities. The conservative stance
of worth, despite legislative rhetoric of 'equal worth', and
is incompatible with the notion of 'equality' amongst
produces profound social inequalities (suggestive of George
individuals in society in terms of power, status or
Orwell's 'Animal Farm' where 'all animals are equal but
livelih_ood, but it upholds the right of equality before the law
some are more equal than others'). In our society
and of recent times it espouses the 'equality of worth' of all
. -_individuals.
·
·
individuals who hold the most power have greater access to
civil liberties and social resources. For equal worth to
become reality it would have to be linked with equal social
Conservatism is tied to free enterprise capitalist economics.
Hence, the ownership of property and the accumulation of
and political power.
· wealth are regarded as rights (not privileges) which become
Social justice measures within the conservative paradigm
_the prizes on which social power is based. Heroes are made
are predominantly 'band-aid' welfare measures. A
_of individuals born 'on the wrong side of the tracks' who
necessary consequence of capitalism is that some people
'make good•. Stories of the 'self-made man' are revered and
will suffer at the hand of competition and at times of
·- ·_upheld as examples to show that we all have the opportunity
- cyclic blights in the capitalist economy such as at the
to acquire the advantages and status that society has to offer,
present time. Measures need to be instigated to 'rescue'
ifwe are industrious. (Women, however, have been
some people in hard times. The commitment to equal
conspicuously absent from this mythology because of (he
opportunities, positive discrimination and to aid in the
· patriarchal nature of our society.) Status and power are fonn of relief are safeguards; social justice as individual
rewards based on merit and the acceptance that some
worth functions to curb the potential worst excesses of ·
_- individuals will achieve greater rewards than others operates
as a fonn of desert or natural law.
capitalism..
_The conservative view of social justice accepts that there
·.-will be social ineqµalities, but that to be given a fair go,
there should be 'equal opportunities'. Inherent in this is the
acceptance that human beings can never be equal because we
are born with different endowments, but we should have ·
equal chances to capitalise on our talents and abilities. Capitalist democracies in affluent times often have
'affirmative action' and aid programs for those 'at risk' to
enhance the concept of equal opportunities as protection
_from suffering and encouragement for those in powerless _
positions to gain leverage out of their plight. 'Equal
opportunity' is about equal opportunity in competition..
From the conservative stance social injustice occurs when
the individual is repressed in capitalising on his or her
· abilities or when access to competition is curtailed. What is
-unjust is when people with natural attributes are
discriminated against. An argument for equality C:>f
opportunity inherently upholds structures of hierarchy and
elitism. This is in keeping with notions of liberty and
individualism since theoretically everyone has the
opportunity to scale the ranks of privilege and power.
Critique
~
The major problems with a conservative view of social
justice centre on the implicit inequality in the dogma of
competitive individualism and meritocracy, that some will
succeed at the expense of others. And any stance which
upholds the maintenance of an unjust status quo clearly
propagates problems when it also tries to embody an
THE LIBERAL VIEW OF SOCIAL JUSTICE
Description
Liberal theories of social justice emanate from the 18th
Century Enlightenment - The Age of Reason, with its
lynchpins of rationalism and 'natural justice' - justice that
responds to absolute fairness and logic.
·
The fundamental aims of classic liberalism are: political
freedom from despotic, oppressive governments, economic
-freedom in the free-enterprise market place and intellectual
freedom of speech, belief, religion, and freedom to achieve
one's full potential.
· The classic liberal stance claims to be politically neutral
because of the priority it gives to reason. It defines social
justice as 'fairness' and asserts that it is possible to
achieve within our current social and political structures.
In terms of social justice, liberals seek changes in public
values, legislation and institutional structures so that
everyone can achieve personal fulfilment and a voice in the
mainstream. The liberal ideal is full participation in
society for every individual.
The liberal stance takes the concept of individualism
further than the conservative stance through the belief that
social justice has more likelihood of being achieved if
individuals are valued intrinsically for themselves as well
as for their culture and heritage. Liberals emphasise the
2
need for individuals to develop a strong sense of self-esteem
and individual worth. With this social thinking, il is
believed, there will develop an ctl10s of tolerance,
acccpuince and a valuing of all people. Given time, new
altitudes, practices and values will pervade society
catalysing major alterations in society's deepest
psychological consciousness, leading to greater social
justice and cohesion.
Contemporary liberal social justice strategies aim to
overcome prejudice and to redress the marginalisation of
individuals and groups from mainstream discourses.
Liberals work for changes in the vital areas of exclusion
that is, in politics, the law, education, employment and
other avenues of cultural production such as various media.
They support the development of 'inclusive' practices
which in the case of schools involves the promotion of an
'inclusive curriculum', and preferential treatment or
'affirmative action' for disadvantaged groups.
politics. It denounces both conservatism and liberalism as
not only failing to address the fundamental causes of social
injustice, but in maintaining them and at times exacerl>ating
them. The socialist definition of 'equality' goes beyond the
conservative 'equal opportunities', 'equal access' and the
liberal 'inclusivity' stance. The socialist view of social
justice takes the notion of 'equal worth' to mean 'equal
power'. Socialist emancipation is not libertinism. It strives
for collective emancipation as a social reality, not for
competitive individual accomplishments. It does not
support the kind of social justice that incurs freedom, power
and privilege for some at the expense of the great majority of
others.
Critique
Socialists contend that approaches which are grounded in
economic rationalism and which work within the established
social order foreclose the possibility of transforming a
situation and reify authority and power relations which are
the source of inequality and oppression. This prevents the
manifestation in social life of values such as justice, equality
and the ability of groups to be self-determining.
The major problems associated with liberalism centre
around its stress on political neutrality and individualism.
Criticism of liberal's espoused neutral stance levelled by
conservatives from the right and socialists from the lcf~
stems from the opposite belief that there is no politically
neutral stance; meaning is always political.
Socialists accept that we are not born with 'equal' personal
endowments in terms of abilities but suggest that what we
do with individual strengths is more in line with holism,
that the collective good is superior to, and transcends,
individual and personal needs and acts. Natural abilities need
to be developed to the fullest potential in every human being
as common assets.
In capitalist society, different ways of thinking represent
different class interests and values, determined ultimately
by the conflict of interests between capital and labour.
Adherence to political neutrality fails to recognise the
connection between ideology and material interests and its
role in the reproduction of specific forms of unequal power .
relations in society. Radical views of social justice oppose
dominant liberal discourses of capitalist society which
represent the relationship between capital and labour as a
free contract between rational, sovereign individuals. They
see this as misrepresenting the oppression and ullimate
determining power of the relations of production.
Liberal social justice moves towards 'inclusivity' really
pose no threat whatsoever to the dominant elite value
system. Notions of engendering acceptance and tolerance
amongst peoples need to also address issues of power and
powerlessness and the marginalisation or exploitation of
some groups by others. Inclusivity being achieved within
the bounds of the status quo is an impossibility, a ruse.
Liberal ideology in social justice abides by the attributes of
goodwill and reason and cowers from the factuality and
inevitability of social conflict and the incontrovertible
discord between those oppressed and the beneficiaries of
oppression.
THE SOCIAL JUSTICE VIEW OF SOCIAL
A socialist view aims to uncover the historical and political
processes which have resulted in oppressive social
constructions and which have distorted communication and
understanding, and contributed to our 'false consciousness'.
It pursues questions about whose interests are served by
social structures and events and at whose expense. It views
social arrangements as temporal and capable of being
redefined and renegotiated. The current social structure is
only one of many social possibilities. Social reconstruction
requires that the social players learn of the ways in which
they have unwittingly participated in and perpetuated their
own oppression and frustration.
The socialist view of social justice focuses on the
inter-connectedness of 'truth', 'freedom' and 'justice' which
cannot be defined or analysed independently of each other.
Social justice from this perspective cannot be defined as a
transcendentally given series of principles or as something
tangible 'out there' which can be objectively discuss¢.
Rather since none of us have privileged access to 'truth',
'social justice' becomes an historical quest - a quest that is
continually the focus of critique and contestation. Socialists
do not define social justice; it is a concept of unknown
definition.
Social justice then, in the socialist sense, is about
participants in a social context taking reflective
emancipatory political action. It is not about 'the haves'
trying to make the lot of 'the have nots' more tolerable or
less disabling.
JUSTICE
Description
The socialist view of social justice aligns with leftist
3
For education this means giving students the skills to be
fully active in society. It means a lot of heavy traffic
between schools and their communities. It means
participatory decision making. It means getting involved
with learning projects that can have political and langible
outcomes. It m~s learning critical powers of analysis, of
working collectively, of critical reflection,
'problem~posing' ·and of having power in the learning
situation.
Critique
General criticisms of the socialist view tend to be based on
apprehensions about the ability of human nature to achieve
or even perceive a socially just society. There are
argwnents about power and leadership, fears that one
prevailing hegemonic elite could be overtmned for another,
which may tum out to be a kind of vestigial opposite;
equally oppressive and perhaps more so withliule chance
of individuals 'breaking through' into a better lifestyle
unless they are members of the ruling coterie (the 'Animal
Farm' scenario again). There are accusations that socialists
may operate as if they possess some kind of monopoly on
what is truth and justice.
Another aspect of this criticism is that when people are •
exposed to oppositional knowledge (confronlational,
'enlightening' information) they can accept or reject it or
do both. Not all people are eager to be emancipated from
oppression. The power of hegemony and the notion of ·
'false consciousness' are counter arguments, however, the
notion of 'false consciousness' and tools of enlightenment
themselves are criticised as being reifications of the
'believers'. This criticism embodies a scepticism about the
possibility of practical beneficence or of interrupting
motivations like personal power, authority and personal
interests. It is a view that holds human nature as incapable
of true philanthropy or universal benevolence.
Conclusion
These three 'positions' on socialjustice may serve as a
guide in determining what political assumptions are
embeoded within social justice strategies. The analysis
also helps explain the ideological origins of broad social
justice strategies and the particular social justice strategies
which schools are mandated to implement Being familiar
with the ideas and rhetoric of each of the three positions'
can also alert us to inconsistencies in strategies associated
with one position that can be substantiated by langu;ge and
concepts appropriated from another.
~
the way it is, there are some kinds of social justice that we
can never have.
THE ERA OF THE CONSERVATIVE
RESTORATION
What follows is a brief examination of the South Australian
Education Department's social justice strategy in light of
these three positions. However, before tackling this, it is
important to illustrate the context in which the Education
Department's document is embedded.
In the federal and state government social justice sirategy
statements it is evident from the first sentences that social
justice is extricably linked with the economic imperative.
The nation is facing tough international and internal
economic challenges. In the government social justice
strategies education is viewed as a site for the nation's
economic recovery. The rhetoric is full of talk about
vocational training/industrial links, the dominance of
mathematics/science/technology in creating the 'clever
country' and the need for a more literate populace. The
mechanisms to be used to deliver these emphases include
common curriculums and common assessment and reporting
schemes an~ all of this is to be developed within parameters
consjstent with the efficiency and effectiveness measures of
corporate managerialism which is the administrative
philosophy driving economic rationalism. ·
The South Australian Director General of Education, Dr Ken
Boston, has argued that economic issues are a large part of
the social justice debate and that corporate management
structures are required to achieve social ju sticc principles in
our education system (Northern Area Convention, 14 March,
1990). To this end the role of central office is defined in
tenns of policy and program development and the evaluation
of outcomes. Area offices exist to support schools,
especially with regard to the implementation of corporate
plans/ systems objectives. The Education Review Unit
determines schools' performance and makes recommendations
to the central bureaucracy.
When strategies emerge such as the social justice strategy,
which are developro, monitored and controlled central!y and
when resource allocations are detennined centrally, then there
may be some concern that the exercise is undemocratic,
hierarchical and that it may serve bureaucratic or political
needs rather than student needs. The strategy and the
resources that may be attached to it, are the property of
central officers. Such a strategy could not be considered as
one that really belongs to the education community.
The education/economy connection has heralded a new
hegemonic agreement in which education policy is
redescribed around the tenets of the New Right. Writers like
Shor, Apple and Giroux describe this as 'the era of the
conservative restoration'.
Social justice is always controversial in theory and
imperfect in practice. Issues of social justice are bigger
than an education system alone can ever address and yet we
talk about things like 'equality of learning outcomes'. To
think that an education system could singl~handedly
achieve this without dismantling existing power structures
is naive. Some kinds of social justice are just not
achievable because they are at odds with the political and
economic forces which shape our society. If society stays
The cmporate management notions of efficiency and
effectiveness arc based on economic efficiency, a concept
which involves both productive and allocative efficiency.
Outputs are expected to be produced at the lowest possible
4
structural problems which are intrinsic by-products of our
political and economic system - are ignored (Apple, 1989).
cost, and outcomes are expected to be improved But .
education can hardly be reduced to a cost-effective equation of
systematised inputs and outputs to demonstrate effectiveness
within restricted, and usually declining, budgets.
It is not very socially just to blame schools and to bash
teachers and school leavers when there are structural issues ·
that are not addressed and when there is no proof that what
schools are going is in decline. To what time or standard or
data are we being compared?
The corporate management stance unproblematically accepts
the existing structures of our social and political system,
reconfirms social stratifications and accepts the resultant
inequalities that are produced. Basically, this is a recipe for
social reproduction. Acceptance of this position is promoted
through arenas such as the media which manufactures public
consent. The media is currently beset by reprobations from
dominant groups which suggest that the current economic
and social crisis experienced by advanced capitalist societies
is the fault of schools/the education system. From a critical
perspective, however, we must ask 'whose problem is this?'
and 'whose interests are being served by resultant
responses?' No allegation that defames schools should be
exempt from such scrutiny. Otherwise, the suggestion that
attention is being directed from the 'true' causes of the
current crisis is correct and in the process these 'true' causes
remain unexamined. Apple suggests that the crisis of the
political economy of capitalism involves an exportation of
the crisis downwards, from the economy, to the State and on
to schools (Apple, 1982). Examples of this are reflected fo
themes that have appeared this year in our daily newspapers
and current affairs publications; rightist themes which get
· regurgitated in tough economic times which suggest:
In South Australia then, like elsewhere, there are moves to ·
make schooling more efficient and equitable, but the
compatibility of these aims may be implausible.
Conservative corporate managerialism is not an ·
emancipatory stance.
AN EXAMINATION OF THE EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT'S SOCIAL JUSTICE
STRATEGY.
a) What construction of social justice is
employed?
- that standards are under assault
- a scepticism about 'dubious' new subjects (which are not
'proper' subjects) appearing in the curriculum at the
expense of more fundamental ones
• that the demise of examinations, testing and streaming is
retrograde
- that mixed ability or vertically grouped classes are ·
anti-intellectual and disadvantageous to gifted children
- that kids these days cannot read, write or add up
- that Australia's mathematics, science and technology skills •
base is too low
- that schools no longer pursue acceptable standards of
discipline
-that cuts in education spending have been self-imposed
because teachers have disregarded concerns about academic
and behavioural standards and have often held extreme and
controversial views
- that traditional social and cultural values 'are under threat
- that schools are teaching 'low level crap' (South Australian
teachers understand the context of this claim!) ·
The following comments relate to the draft document,
·social Justice Strategy Action Plan 1992-4' produced and
distributed widely by the Education Department of South .
Australia. This draft is currently being revised. The
1992-94 statement is practically the same as the 1991a93
draft •As the changes are minor, often editorial, this c:dr.ique,
is based on infonnation that has been promulgated .
throughout the system for some time. Although the , ,
document is in draft, when I questioned its status for the
purposes of this paper, I was assured that it was to be
followed as policy, since no other substantive document on
social justice exists in the Education Department. The
primary concerns addressed by the sttategy are also on the
Education Department's Three Year Plan. I believe
therefore, that the document embodies the system's values·
and stance on social justice.
Not much is written or published on the broad area of social
justice in the Education Department, although issues ·
concerning specific groups are well documented Hence,
some of the infonnation I cite comes from speeches or
papers by senior bureaucrats, as well as from the Draft
Social Justice Action Plan.
The Social Justice Strategy Action Plan defines what social
justice is in four sentences:
Social justice is an idea which embodies
the belief that everyone has the right to
participate equally in society.
Focusing on these educational practices reinforces the
hegemonic strategies of the powerful - the 'taken-for-gnµited
beliefs, the media cliches and the comfortable half-truths by
which the system works' (Connell, 1990). Such messages
create the right climate for dominant groups to act to
preserve and enhance the status quo in order to maintain their
own interests.
The idea in educational tenns means that
education should be equally good for all
students.
This will only occur if all sectors of the
Education Department review traditional
practices which have been responsible for
creating and maintaining educational
disadvantage. .
While the focus is on schooling, the 'world of capital flight,
unemployment, the degradation of labour, disintegrating
~ cities and communities', systemic racism and sexism - the
5
In the past, most activities aimed at
overcoming educational disadvantage have
been personnel or curriculum based and
have been the responsibility of those with
the specific task of addressing
disadvantage.
specific 'problem' areas. Unless such information is
forthcoming, targeting some groups to specific 'problem'
areas could be construed as offensive labelling.
We may question whether the strategy represents the
problems or solutions that the targeted groups themselves
would advise. We may question whether they were ever
involved in the preparation of the document especially since
a key principle of the overarching South Australian
Government strategy is that all members of society should
have opportunities to participate in decision making which
affects their lives. Otherwise the Education Department's
strategy could be criticised for suffering from a form of class
reductionism.
Like the Federal and State government social justice .
strategies, a more thorough definition is not forthcoming.
The Education Department's position is not justified or
defended. The statement does not reveal why other positions
on social justice were rejected. As a result, it appears to be
ahistorical, under-theorised and under--defmed.
Basically the main two tenets of the Education Department's
definition are 'that everyone has the right to participate
equally in society' and that 'in educational terms this means
that education should be equally good for all students'. As
stated earlier, given our inequitable status quo, these might
be impossible aims - the kind of social justice that we ean
not have.
The definition refers to 'traditional practices' which have
been responsible for creating and maintaining educatiorutl
disadvantage'. This is a statement worth keeping in mind
whilst considering the strategies that this document
proposes: they are traditional and conservative and could be
subjected to some of the criticisms iterated earlier.
b)
Under each KRA comes a list of strategies which are
supIXJsed to achieve the desirable outcome. For example:
- In order to increase the attendance of Aboriginal students, a
strategy is to 'improve the follow~up mechanisms for
absentee Aboriginal students' (p. 23)
, - In order to increase the attendance of pregnant girls and
· teenage mothers-a strategy is to 'increase the accessibility
of childcare' (p. 27)
- In order to increase the participation of school card
recipients in the full range of the required areas of study
(R-10) a strategy is to 'establish improvement targets in
schools' (p. 29)
The 'problems' that are articulated as Key Result Areas are
not looked at problematically. The 'solutions' are
statistical. What is inherent in the way the problems are
defined and the way they are to be solved, is that change will
occur within the current inequitable status quo.
What Strategies Are Proposed?
The Education Department's social justice strategy targets
specific groups which are aligned with specific objectives
(called Key Result Areas.) The Key Result Areas relate to
student attendance, participation and retention, attainment
and monitoring procedures.
Not only are we not given the information by which these
particular KRA's were chosen, or the information which
indicates why change is necessary (although we might
concur that change must occur), we are also given no
rationale as to why the stipulated solutions are the most
appropriate. The document also offers no advice as to how
to achieve the strategies. Certainly the strategy statements
themselves are too vague to be helpful to schools in
achieving the desired result, as evinced in the examples
above.
There is no indication in the strategy Action Plan as to how
theseKey Result Areas were chosen or of how certain target
groups were tied to them. The targeted groups are:
- Aboriginal students, transient students, new arrived
students from non-English speaking backgrounds, students
with disabilities, pregnant girls and teenage mothers.
These are the targeted groups for the strategies relating to
attendance at school
- school card recipients and students at risk of early school
leaving are the targeted groups for strategies relating to
participation and retention
- school card recipients and Aboriginal students are the
targeted groups for strategies relating to educational
attainment
- as well as the above groups, students in poverty and
victims of abuse are cited as 'those in greatest need'
- as well as these groups, the document cites its relationship
with the Three Year Plan which includes the above groups
as well as students in rural areas and remote locations
As Connell (1990b) says:
Management by objectives ...broadly
presupposes that top management knows
in principle how problems are to be
solved. But in an area like educational
disadvantage this presumption is
manifestly untrue. No-one actually
knows how to eliminate class differences
in school performance, how to change the
relationship of poor communities to
. schools. Many people are working on it
in different ways, and their work is
creative improvisation - corrigible in the·
light of experience, assisted by research
and debate, but always and necessarily
The document states that 'experience demonslrates' that
these groups are the most educationally disadvantaged (p.
15). We may question whose experience and what
information led to these particular groups being aligned with
.6
improvised in the face of changing
circumstances.
Clearly, though, these 'reassessments' have taken place
within the context of 'the era of the conservative
restoration'. The nco-classical curriculum looks more
entrenched than ever. New programs are the traditional ones
revamped.
Connell highlights the problem of statewide objectives with
stipulated solutions. Simply, tl1cy may not be useful or
appropriate in the local context.
The Education Department's strategy alludes to 'aspects of
schooling which are most valued and valuable'. Tltis is
stated in terms of 'achieving quality learning outcomes'
(1992-94 Action Statement, p. 15). Elsewhere, then, is talk
about the 'valued' curriculum and the 'value-added
curriculum which is the powerful knowledge' but, as is the
case in Wallace's paper, these are not defined. Connell
(1989, p. 124.) succinctly sums up the role of 'valued
knowledge'.
Implicit in the Social Justice Action Plan's Key Result
Areas are assumptions about what constitutes 'educational
disadvantage', and the assumptions do not include discussion
about the real causes - causes which invariably go beyond
the school. Monitoring attendance, retention and attainment
statistics for targeted groups and implementing strategies to
raise them can not be called social justice. Targeting social
justice in a few key result areas must be seen as a base or
minimal position - the kind of social justice we get in hard
times. Schools have always done these things. Such
exercises do not alleviate or address social injustice in
education.
The mainstream curriculum is hegemonic
witltin the educational system in the sense
that it marginalizes other ways of
organizing knowledge, it is integrated
with the structure of orgartized power and
occupies the high cultural ground.
The Education Department's central bureaucracy has
publicly given credence to the now-<lefunctbmer London
Education Authority's Improvement Targets model, as a
way of meeting 'social justice targets' (Wallace, 1990). The
example given is that of attendance and punctuality
'compacts' that were developed by schools and employers
which, when implemented with a monitoring process,
achieved 85% attendance and 90% punctuality in an inner
London school. Unfortunately students had no say in this.
Their fate was determined by others in terms of percentages
of time on task. This form of control may actually hide
unjust practices and the curriculum may still have been
shocking. If improvement targets are only on about getting
statistics up, then we really have to consider our
commitment to social justice.
c)
If one looks at tl1c curriculum strategies and programs that
are given most prominence at the moment, we must assume
that the most valued learning is in Mathematics, Science
and Technology and in vocational education or in supposed
'problem' areas like literacy. These programs allude to the
role schools play as a state apparatus which is inexorably
bound with processes of capital accumulation and
legitimation.
Connell (1989, p. 122) suggests that we are
seeing considerable evidence of the ability
of the holders of power and privilege to
mobilize in their own defense... New
Right programs feed into mainstream
conservative and labour agenda setting.
And it is no accident that one of the major
campaigns has been in education, to
discredit democratic public education and
impose a freshly narrowed definition of
common learnings.
Common Curriculum
An undercurrent that runs through South Australian
educational social justice rhetoric is the merits of a common
curriculum. At a major conference in 1990, the Education
Department's Assistant Director ofEducation (Social
Justice), Margaret Wallace, stated that 'most current
writings point to the notion of common curriculum as
central to the public education's role in social justice'
(Wallace, 1990). This all depends on which current writings
you read. Many current writings question the wisdom of a
common curriculum in that it can be manipulated to meet
the needs of the dominant culture (cg Apple, 1989;
Aronowitz & Giroux, 1987; Connell, 1990b; Davies, 1990;
Wren, 1986).
Whilst this is nco-classicaVvocational focus is happening
there is a lowered emphasis on 'ernotionaVexpressive' areas
in comparison with 'cognitive/intellectual' areas of the
curriculum.
The arts and humanities areas of the curriculum are those
that have the potential to critically portray or reveal the
pas~ the present and to construe alternative, more liberating
fuwres. These areas of the curriculum have some
independence from the economic sphere. Naturally the arts
and humanities, like other areas of social life, are embedded
in historical and social contexts. However, as problematic
as the concept of 'truth' is, the arts and humanities can
depict the 'truths' of the day, including issues of social
justice. These curriculum areas have the potential to be
subversive and counter-hegemonic, important in exposing
injustice and prevailing interests.
Wallace states that 'while tl1erc is a lot of debate about the
balance and organisation of these commonalities [common
curriculum] consensus is growing. It is the job of schools
to enable all students to participate effectively in what is
commonly valued' (Wallace, 1990). Since common values
are usually elitist values, we might ask who decides these.
Wallace docs make the point that' .... what is currently
valued is ... under scrutiny. Whose knowledge is taught and
why it is taught in particular ways have been the questions
which have led to the reassessments of the curriculum'.
7
promote cooperation in groups. They arc hegemonic
instruments. A more expansive view will be required to
really educate for social juslicc - but lhc stralcgy docs nol
cover tl1is crucial aspect of social jusLicc in education.
Furthermore, Apple adds that the development of critical
understanding, political literacy, personal development,
self-esteem and self-confidence, and shared respect, arc being
devalued, considered 'beside the point' or 'too expensive•
(Apple, 1982).
Education fails some groups because it docs nol recognise
their experience, their language or mode of speech or values
and because in the process, it excludes their active
participation in the system's rewards. Education for some
groups is a disempowering experience.
The Education Department's Social Justice Strategy does
not question or challenge the notion of a common
curriculum. It does not ask whose interests are really being
served or whether education is 'equally good for all
students', even though it is stated that such 'reassessments'
are occurring. It is the selective tradition in curriculum
which needs ID be challenged if a more emancipatnry
curriculum is to be achieved.
e)
Many people question the emancipalDry potential of a
project like the attainment levels project because, amongst
other things, it has the capacity to become a labelling
device, because it necessarily focuses on individualism and
because it may actually promote competition between
schools.
Indicators of Success • Attainment Levels
The Social Justice Action Plan states that levels of
attainment and the South Australian Certificate of Education
(SACE) will be the indicators of 'success' for schools.
However, since these programs will not be fully
implemented until 1994, the system will have some time to
wait for these indicators of a school's success in addressing ,
social justice issues.
Attainment levels and the new senior secondary SACE when
constructed around the competitive academic curriculum, are
likely to indicate what is already evident; that working class
or social welfare class students will not fare as well as their
more ?dvantaged counterparts. As Davies (1990, p. 40)
states, 'sociological analyses from virtually every country
will produce the not unsurprising finding that children from
'good' homes tend to do better at school than children from
'poor' homes.'
Any external set of rules or requirements, despite
justificalDry statements of the benefits of standardisation,
may limit creativity if they are imposed instruments of
control. It could be posited that a project such as the
attainment levels project presumes that local schools cannot
be trusted ID make curricula and organisational responses ID
their own contextual needs, and that what schools arc
currently doing is not good enough.
Over and above these corporatist developments is the
introduction of National goals for schooling, the
development of National Curriculum S.tatcments, the
development of National Profiles (the National equivalent to
South Australia's attainment levels project) and a National
framework for post-compulsory schooling.
Ball (1990, P. 214) maintains that the move towards
standardised curriculum is
Attainment Levels are justified by overseas and national
developments and the need to ' .... provide a curriculum
appropriate ID the twenty-first century', an increasingly
heard but meaningless throw-away justificatory line.
not just about control over the definition
of school knowledge. It is also about
control over teachers and teachers' work.
It rests upon a profound distrust of
teachers and seeks to close down many of
the areas of discretion previously available
to them.
Teachers are aware of the many structural and social causes
which hinder educational attainment and which create
educational inequalities. However, since AttaimncntLevels
do not strike at the structural causes of inequality, they may
simply perpetuate a curriculum that adheres to dominant
value systems and add mdre to the workload of teachers in
order ID determine what they already know.
Conclusions
The South Australian Education Department's Social Justice
Action Plan can be located primarily in the conservative
paradigm articulated at the beginning of this paper. Some
aspects are to the far right of that position.
It is claimed that the 'development of Attainment Levels
stands ID make a significant contribution ID the achievement
of social justice in education, by making the valued
knowledge, 'skills and understandings explicit, and by
making what is valued in the curriculum inclusive of all
students' (The Attainment Levels Teachers Newsletter, May,
1991). These 'valued' learnings are not questioned or viewed
as being those determined by those already advantaged. It is
likely that they will exacerbate the likelihood of didactic
teaching and learning; that they will make schools more
rigid, not more flexible an that they will make the
curriculum more standardised with less scope for
specialisation or the fostering of particular interests or
talents. They promote individual attainment and do not
The Education Department's strategies do not suggest
structural changes which would upset current social
arrangements or an education for justice. They do not
challenge dominant elite value systems, but rather, work
within the status quo and established power.relations.
The social justice strategies support an equal
opportunities/equal access stance which absolves the
education system from inequalities that result Curriculum
'reform' measures instigated in the name of social justice
8
have the potential to reinforce competitive indiVIdualism.
it is what education for justice is about.
Giroux and Aronowitz (1986, p. 212) scale that,
The question that must be asked of social justice strategics
is •Justice for Whom?•
.
.
.
Any education plans or strategics need to be scrutinized in
this regard: What is the problem these strategies intend to
address? Whose problem is it? Why is il a problem?
Whose interests are served by the resultant strategy?
nco-conscrvative ideology scparatcs public
education from the discourSc of
self-empowerment and collective freedom.
Thal ... rather than confronting the
inequalities and real failures of public
education, neo-conservative policy .•••
views public education within a model of
reason that celebrates narrow economic
· concerns, private interests, and strongly
conservative values..... The principles
being espoused ... are self-interest and
individual mobility, principles heavily ·
weighted in favour of those groups who
exercise an inordinate amount of power
and influence in a society characterized by
deep racial, gender, and class inequalities.
Furthermore, what is being systematically
rejected in this proposal is any
commitment to defending schools as sites
thal have a fundamental connection· to the
idea of civic courage and human
emancipation.
every
When practically
new •initiative' or directive in
education is described as a. social justice strategy we can see. ·
· that it is possible that some are not socially transforrnative
but are instead an appropriation of social justice language to . ·
suit ulterior purposes.
·
·
References
Apple, M.W., (1982) Education and Power. Boston~
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Apple, M.W., (1982a) Cultural and Economic
Reproduction in Education, Essays on .
class. ideology and the State. London,
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Appl~. M.W., (1989) Teachers and Texts. New York,
Routledge and Kcgan Paul.
·
Aronowitz, S. & Giroux, H.A. (1987) · Education Under
Seige. The Conservative, Liberal and
. Radical Debate over Schooling. London,
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Commonwealth of Australia (1989) Towards Social Justice •
For Young Australiarui. 1989-90 Budget
StatemenL Canberra, Australian
Government Publishing Service.
Commonwealth of Australia, (1988) ·Towards a Fairer
Austtalia. Canberra, Australian
Government Publishing Service.
Commonwealth of Australia (l988a) Towards a Fairer
Australia; A Summa()' Canberra,
Australian Government Publishing
Service.
.
.
Commonwealth of Australia (1990) Towards a Fairer
Australia; Social Justice Strategy
.
Statement 1990-9l, Canberra, Australian ·
Government Publishing Service. ..
Connell, R.W. (1989) 'Curriculum Politics, Hegemony,
and Strategics of Social Change', irl,
Popular Culture, Schooling and EvcQrda.v ·.
Life, edited by H.A. Giroux & R.I.
Simon. MassachusetlS, Begin and Gervcy
Publishers, Inc.
Connell, R. w. (1990) Curriculum and Social Justice.
Directors of Curriculum Conference, ·
Brisbane, 28/6f)0.
Connell, R·.w. (1990b) Measuring U,p: An Evaluation of
the Disadvantaged Schools Program.
Unpublished paper for the Schools
Council.
Davies, L. (1990) Equity and Efficiency? School
. . .·
Management in an International Context
East Sussex, Palmer Press.
· Department of Premier and Cabinet, Social Justice Unit ·
(1989) South· Australia's Social Justice .·
So itis possible that conservatively defined socialjusticc
strategies can actually exacerbate oppression in education
rather than alleviate or reduce it. Rawls (1972) suggests that
social justice strategies should Lake the standpoint of the
least advantaged. Connell (1989, p. 126) concurs:
.... the position of those who carry the
burdens of social inequality is a bcu.cr
starting poinl for understanding the
totality of the social world than is the
position of those·who enjoy its
advantages.
As educators we need to find our collective voice and to help
dispossessed peoples find theirs. For schools this means
equipping students with the more expansive skills of
critiquing and reflecting on the way their society is and on
proposed changes and to conceive of alternative, more
emancipatory futures. Sometimes as a teacher I reflect on
how much I want to develop these abilities in my students.
When I hear them say things like 'I've never even thought
about it in that way', when I see the quizzical looks which
contain glimmers of excitement and recognition thal there
may be something more lurking undcmcalh 'commonsense'
assumptions than they first realised, whenever I feel their
urgency at wanting •to do something about it', I feel excited
about the possibility that they may be ,developing the
capacity always to question life and to respond in this way.
But, also, when I look at their fresh-faced youthfulness, at
lives which are so much less experienced, I feel that my
aims are tantamount to a corruption of their innocence, an ·
upsetting of their applecarts in that if they continue to do as
I would wish and to question their world, then they will
never again have such an easy time of it. And yet in my
head, heart and gut, I know just how important this is, that ,
9
Strategy, Building a Brighter Future.
Adelaide, Government Printer.
Education Department of Soulh Australia (1990), ~
Justice in Northern Area Education.
Northern Area Education Convention Report, 14-15 March, 1990.
Education Department of Soulh Australia, (1990), ~
. Justice Strategy, 1991-93. Adelaide.
Education Department of Soulh Australia, (1991), ~
Justice Strategy Plan, 1992-94. Adelaide.
• Education Department of Soulh Australia, (1991), The At-·
tainment Levels Teachers Newsletter, May
1991.
.
Jencks, C., Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M., Cohen, D.,
Gintis, G., Heyns, B., and Michelson, S.,
(1972) Inequality: A Reassessment of the
Affects of Family and Schooling in Amer. k.a. New York, Basic Books. . .
Jones, K. (1989) Right Tum; The Conservative Revolution "in Education. London, Hutchinson
.
.
Radivs.
.
.. . .
Little, A. {1986) 'Educational Inequalities: Race and Class',
in Education and Social Class. edited by
P. Rogers. Lewes, Palmer Press.
Pninty, J. (1987) A Critical Reformulation of Educational
Policy Analysis. 2nd edition, Geelo.ng, .··
Victoria, Deakin University Press.
Pusey, M. (1991) Economic Rationalism in Canberra
Rawls, J. (1972) A Theory of Justice. Oxford, Clarendon
.
. Press.
·
·
Salvaris, M. (1990) Social Justice Strategies in Education,
·
paper delivered at !he Northern Area Con-·
vention: Social Justice in Northern Area
Education, 14-15 March, 1990. ·
Starr, K. (1991) Whatis Social Justice?' Curriculum Perspectives. Vol. ll, No. 3, September,
. 1991.
Wallace, M. (1990) · Social Justice in Northern Area. paper
delivered at the Northern Area Convention: Social Justice in Northern Area Edu-•
cation, 14-15 March, 1990. · ',.
Willis, P. (1977) ·Learning to Labour: How Working Class
· ·
· •Kids Get Working Class Jobs. London,
Saxon House.
Wren, B. (1986) Education for Justice, 2nd edition. London,
SCM Press.
Note to Contributors
· The South Australian Educational Leader aims to promoLc
!he analysis and critique of current educational policy and ·• ··
practice. It seeks to be current, provocative, questioning,
and challenging.
While most contributions emanale from the Seminar
Program sponsored by The Centre for SLuclies in EducaLional
Leadership, olher contributions are welcome.
Readers are invited to submit analyLic and critical papers on
current educational issues. Papers should be between 5000
and 7500 words long. Manuscripts shotild be accompanied
by a computer disk (preferably a 31/2" disk) containing an
· MS DOS or Apple file containing the paper.
·
Contributions should be sent to: ·
Broce Johnson
.
.
Editor, South Australian Educational Leader
University of South Australia
Salisbury Campus
Smith Road
Salisbury East 5109 ·
South Australia
10