Facilitating strong school and community partnerships
in Aboriginal education
KEVIN LOWE, Inspector, Aboriginal Education, Board of Studies NSW
Introduction
Since 2000, the Office of the Board of Studies NSW (OBOS) has conducted a range of
projects designed to support teachers of Aboriginal students in Years K–10. Through its
commitment to working collaboratively with schools, parents and Aboriginal communities,
OBOS has, in effect, been promoting the development of social capital. The aim of this paper
is to formalise and crystallise the community-building intention of the OBOS projects and to
propose a framework for future projects that will keep social capital objectives in the
forefront when the projects are being planned.
Social capital
In this paper, the term ‘social capital’ means networks of relations that enable individuals
and communities to have self-esteem, motivation, hope and a sense of collective ownership
and responsibility.
The development of social capital theory in the Australian policy environment has grown out
of the work of Bourdieu, Coleman, and Putnam (Winter 2000; Schwab 2001, p 1; Stone 2000;
Patulny 2003). Putnam (1993, 1995) identified social capital as the cooperative relationships
within the community that lead to a deeper affiliation with the concepts of collective
ownership and responsibility through membership of civic groups. Coleman’s (1988)
construction focuses on structures of social relationships, particularly as they relate to the
acquisition and accumulation of both ‘intrinsic human capital’ (personal motivational
advantages that come through real and sustained engagement in the economic life of the
community) and ‘extrinsic human capital’ (pay, holidays, rewards etc). Bourdieu’s definition
(1993) of social capital has an economic imperative – it emphasises the ability of individuals
and groups to generate and accumulate economic resources, which enable them to be more
independent of government services (Stone 2000, p 10).
Winter’s (2000, p 5) later analysis of these apparently divergent views provides a point of
consensus. She notes that each conceptualises social capital as being the development of
networks of enabling relations that operate as a resource for collective action, although
Putnam, Coleman and Bourdieu have each applied the concept to developing an
understanding of the social phenomena at different social scales (at the level of individuals,
communities and nation states). Following this logic, social capital can be understood as
being networks of social relations that are characterised by norms of trust and reciprocity, and
it can be usefully conceptualised as being a stock, or resource, for collective action that may
lead to a broad range of positive social outcomes (Stone 2000, p 10).
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 1
Government agencies and social capital
Projects that embed social capital outcomes now play an important role in the discourse of
governments when developing policies designed to impact on the delivery of social and
economic projects. Governments and community groups alike see that the success of projects
designed to address lower social and economic outcomes must be linked to the projects’
capacity to engage people to take ownership of their successful implementation. With this in
mind, Stone (2000, p 4) raises a cautionary note in her review of research in this area, when
she notes that current social capital projects on their own are not necessarily sufficient to
foster economic development in depressed communities. Stone suggests that, without direct
and ongoing government input, social capital projects that act in isolation may in fact further
entrench community disadvantage. This work strongly highlights the need for governments
to play an active, ongoing role in strategic policy implementation and social capital building
programs if systemic economic and social disadvantage are to be successfully challenged.
When formulating projects to do with Aboriginal communities, agencies need to have the
aims of seeking to improve the long-term engagement of the communities and encouraging
them to recognise the importance of being empowered. Of course, when a community is
empowered, the dynamic of the relationships between it and governments fundamentally
changes. Government agencies need to forge new relationships where they work
collaboratively with communities as equal partners in both policy development and
implementation. This is the way to create sustainable improvements in the social and
economic outcomes for these communities.
Attempts in the education sector to build partnerships
Within this broader policy dynamic, the education sector in NSW has been forced to confront
its historic inability to develop inclusive, effective and sustainable partnerships with
Aboriginal parents and communities. The recent Review of Aboriginal Education in NSW
(Review 2004) sets out to describe the nature, structure and function of such relationships,
and the role that these will have in radically changing the dynamics of these relationships.
This will be an evolving process and one that will require significant negotiation so that true
collaborative projects can be developed (Review 2004, pp 205–206).
There have been many attempts by schools to initiate and foster partnerships with Aboriginal
parents and communities, but their success has been largely illusory or short-lived. One
consequence of this is that, to a large extent, neither schools nor community members are
convinced that developing sustainable school and community relationships is either possible
or of any significant value. Indeed, instead of success in this area, stories abound of the
unsuccessful engagement between schools and Aboriginal communities, which in turn have
affected the willingness or interest by schools to initiate local projects aiming at greater
community engagement. To a large degree this dichotomy is often not addressed by
government agencies, with many developing strategies focusing on issues such as
governance and leadership training at the expense of strategies that foster positive
interactions at the ‘grassroots’ level between schools, teachers, parents and communities.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 2
The renewed interest in developing programs aimed at improving the engagement of parents
and the broader Aboriginal community in their children’s schooling has come out of a
growing realisation that the rewards for such engagement include a positive effect on student
aspirations with regard to their schooling (Lester et al. 2001).
But the Review (2004) pointed out that the lower-than-average rates of participation,
performance, attendance and retention of Aboriginal students remain well below that of other
students. This confirms Schwab and Sutherland’s (2001) analysis, which highlighted the
crisis levels in Aboriginal student under-performance across all Australian educational
jurisdictions. Reports such as Schwab’s and the Review have come at a time when increased
targeted funds have been made available across the country and a plethora of educational
programs trialled (What Works 2000). Examples abound of both learning (including intensive
tutoring, ‘Aboriginalising’ curriculum and teaching and learning programs)1 and approaches
to welfare service provision (such as buses to take students to school, breakfast programs,
excursion programs and uniforms), being implemented to address social and/or educational
deficits in student behaviour and learning. Even though programs continue to be established
on these principles, they have not been shown to make promised improvements, and have left
schools struggling to find approaches that lead to more effective student learning.
Even though improvements in Aboriginal learning outcomes have been reported through the
implementation of some programs (What Works 2001), there is a growing acknowledgement
that their sustainability has proven to be largely ephemeral and of little long-term value
where, with little or no discussion, the aspirations and knowledge of parents/community are
interpreted, articulated and recorded by others. Many of the currently endorsed school-based
approaches are underpinned by a deficit model of education where student achievement and
behaviour are serviced with programs that are add-ons to existing programs purposely
designed for a short shelf life with little opportunity to impact on improving or changing
student learning and or teacher practices. This is not surprising as the imperative for such
programs is to seek ‘immediate’ results and reverse trends to issues that are complex and
require subtle and sustained multi-faceted solutions.
While there may be a growing body of research (What Works 2000; Schwab 2001)
highlighting the value of particular approaches to Aboriginal education, there are few
programs that position Aboriginal parents/community at the centre of school programs that
seek to address the issues affecting systemic student disengagement with schooling. Yet it is
this dynamic that is acknowledged as being central to sustainable social capital projects and
critical to long-term sustainable and effective educational programs.
Programs that ignore the rights of parents to be informed and provided with knowledge about
school curriculum and teaching and learning processes, and that do not involve them as active
partners in engaging students, are unlikely to make any significant advances towards
sustaining educational improvements for Aboriginal students. Lester’s research on the
implementation of the Aboriginal Careers Education Project (Lester et al. 2001) in part
highlighted the failure of programs that were not based on making sustainable connections
with communities.
1
The NSW Department of Education and Training is currently implementing a range of programs such as
Count me in Indigenous, Maths in Context, and Literacy Scaffolding.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 3
The success of OBOS’s approach
Under the Education Act 1990 the Board of Studies NSW (‘the Board’) has the statutory
authority to provide appropriate and accessible curriculum that has regards for the special
needs of Aboriginal students. In part, the Board has interpreted this legislative brief through
the development of a range of specific syllabus initiatives (Aboriginal Studies 7–10 and
Stage 6, and Aboriginal Languages K–10), Aboriginal perspectives across the mandatory
K–10 curriculum (Aboriginal and Indigenous Cross-curriculum Content K–10) and an
increasing number of education projects that have focused on assisting teachers to implement
new curriculum. A critical element of all these projects has been the fostering of school and
community partnerships. These partnerships have focused on bipartisan relations between
Aboriginal parents and their communities and schools which are based on developing trust
through the achievement of mutually agreed educational goals.
The purpose of the projects is closely aligned to Putnam’s conceptualisation of social capital
as being based on developing ‘trust, norms and networks that improve the efficiency of social
capital by facilitating coordinated actions’ (Winter 2000, p 5). Putnam (1995) speculated that
successful projects are those that focus on the building of bonds of trust and reciprocity that
lead to supported and coordinated action. While there is an acknowledgment that it is possible
for social capital to be possessed by individuals, the primary focus of the Board’s Aboriginal
projects is for schools and communities to build open, meaningful and sustained engagement
around the ‘real’ teaching and learning work of schools.2
An appreciation of the importance of active participation of the community in schooling, and
the deep knowledge that comes from such interaction, has influenced the Office of the Board
of Studies NSW in its conception, development and implementation of curriculum projects
developed to meet the learning needs of Aboriginal students.3 In working towards this goal,
schools have had to develop a deeper understanding of the aspirations of Aboriginal parents
and communities to be actively engaged in their children’s education. These projects have a
demonstrated potential to impact and affect critical issues of student engagement such as the
long-term aspirations and expectations of Aboriginal students and the development of better
long-term relations between schools and students. The success of these projects has
underpinned the conceptualisation of further projects that place parents and the community at
the centre of a holistic approach to the classroom dynamic.
Educational environments as sites of social capital
One of the key hypotheses posed in the social capital literature, is the proposition that social
capital within one type of social relationship will foster the generation of social capital in
2
That is, the effective transmission of knowledge between the players in ways that acknowledge the authority of
both groups and is predicated on an assumption that its purpose is the delivery of equality of learning outcomes
for all students.
3
The Aboriginal Curriculum Unit’s current projects include Mathematics in Indigenous Contexts, Science 7–10:
Aboriginal Perspectives, Aboriginal Languages K–10, and Integrated K–6 Support, and primarily focus on the
development of sustainable learning partnerships between teachers and Aboriginal parents/communities.
Reports can be located on the Board’s website at http://ab-ed.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 4
another. Stone’s recent work (2000, 2001), which focused on the importance of strong familial
relationships in generating social capital and economic wellbeing, proposed that social capital
within the family, based on good-quality familial relationships, would generate social capital
in other spheres of life – in particular increased democracy, trust in institutions, and
neighbourhood cohesion (Stone 2001, p 9).
Stone undertook work with Hughes on the capacity of social capital to strengthen the family in
the broader community (Stone & Hughes 2001). They noted that ‘the extent to which families
are involved in local and other communities (including informal and formal linkages) has been
linked to an improvement in a child’s educational outcomes and significant decreases in levels
of social resistance (Stone & Hughes 2001, pp 2–3). They argue that the stronger the linkages
families have with community life, the more likely it is that they and their children will
conform to the values of the wider community, share in community goals, and be subject to
the possibility of community sanctions. The conundrum for policy developers is that while
greater social integration within the mainstream may support improved outcomes, the policy
developers need to appreciate that Aboriginal communities will continue to resist their
submergence within the fabric of mainstream Australia (Stratton 1998, p 42). Within
discussions on multiculturalism, Aboriginal people continually speak of a desire to maintain a
degree of separateness from the culture of the dominant society – in many ways born from
their dispossession, a denial of their existence in their own country, and exclusion from the
benefits of the wealth of this nation.
In addition to the overwhelming disadvantage that accrues to Aboriginal people due to race,
Stone and Hughes (2001) also noted the low levels of what they refer to as ‘bridging social
capital’4 in rural and remote Australia, the very location where a significant proportion of
Aboriginal communities are located. While acknowledging the current weakness in data on the
distribution of social capital within Australia, Stone and Hughes reported on research by Onyx
and Bullen (Stone & Hughes 2001) that while social capital in general was higher in rural and
remote communities, the same communities displayed a much lower tolerance to diversity.
These high levels of intolerance were also noted in the findings of the National Inquiry into
Racist Violence (Racist Violence 1991) which identified high levels of racist behaviour against
Aboriginal people in rural and remote Australia. It could well be claimed that the regions’
overall lower levels of employment and commensurately high levels of welfare dependency
further exacerbate the prevalence of racism.5
Stone and Hughes’ work (2000–2003) confirms many of the critical principles underpinning
4
5
Bonding social capital involves trust and reciprocity in closed networks (in which members of networks know
other members), and helps the process of ‘getting by’ in life on a daily basis. ‘Getting ahead’ in contrast, is
facilitated through ‘cross-cutting ties’ that take the form of either bridging or linking social capital. Bridging
social capital involves overlapping networks (in which a member of one group can gain access to the resources
of another group because of overlapping membership). Linking social capital involves social relations with
those in authority, which might be used to garner resources or power. Each of these three forms of social capital
is arguably essential to a strong community (Stone & Hughes 2001).
These findings are also supported in research by Dunn and McDonald (2004) who, in reporting on the
geography of racism in NSW, noted that while there is no clear differentiation in the levels and propensity of
racism between urban and rural environments, generally there are greater levels of intolerance away from the
main urban concentrations of inner Sydney.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 5
the development of current school and community projects, with Stone (2001, p 12) noting
strong correlation between levels of educational achievement and the levels of social capital
within that community cohort. The positive impact of parents/community involvement on
achievement and engagement in schooling of Aboriginal students has also been demonstrated
by Howard et al. (2003) in their study of Mathematics programs funded through the Office of
the Board of Studies NSW. Their paper reported on the positive impact on student learning,
which also assisted in the development of social capital. Howard et al. (2003) hypothesised on
the trust and reciprocity that is developed when both ‘effective and inclusive’ schooling
practices are initiated alongside programs that lift student achievement.
This correlation was noted in the findings of the evaluation of the Office’s initial
Mathematics projects in 2002–3.6 Community involvement in these projects was shown to
have uncovered a deep vein of social and cultural potential when teachers and Aboriginal
community members engaged in a collaboratively developed mathematics project. Peer
mentors working with schools reported a deeper teacher connectedness to their teaching and
higher levels of trust which developed between the teachers. The success of these projects
was largely built on a growing reciprocity between the project participants, as contextualised
teaching ideas were planned and local histories and cultural insights were shared and woven
into programs. Teachers, who in some cases had been long-term residents in these
communities, spoke of getting their first insight into the lives of their Aboriginal students and
communities; see http://ab-ed.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au
The pivotal role of this relationship cannot be understated, for what developed was a
collaborative process predicated on the promise of the more effective delivery of educational
services to students. This was achieved through an authentic engagement between parents and
the school, based on a fundamental shift in mutual understanding. In this project, the social
capital was built on the collaboration that took place between parents, communities and
schools as programs were developed and implemented by teachers.
The success of the Mathematics in Indigenous Contexts projects which have developed
around schools, teachers, parents, community and students, has been built on the principles of
a deepening engagement around the negotiation and delivery of appropriate curriculum.
Discussions, which commenced during the development of the teaching materials, soon
raised a range of wider issues that were seen to impact on the capacity of students,
communities and schools to develop effective long-term strategies to improve student
performance in schools (Howard et al. 2002).
6
This project outlines the process used to develop Stage 2 context-based Mathematics units of work in two
NSW schools that have significant Aboriginal student enrolments. The teachers, who worked closely with
their community members, were also supported by teacher mentors and university mentors who acted as
critical friends providing feedback and evaluation as the project developed. The site includes the teaching
units, student assessment information and reflection, exemplified by work samples including photographs,
video footage and audio grabs, students and staff journals. The site is located at:
http://ab-ed.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/go/maths-k-6
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 6
A framework for the development of social capital within an educational
environment
The poor relationship that historically has existed between Aboriginal people and some
government service agencies is often affirmed as programs and policy initiatives are
established that fail to meet their needs. In establishing these programs, governments have
often misunderstood the dynamic that exists between themselves, the communities they
service, and individuals and families from within those communities. Work on this has been
undertaken by Stone and Hughes (2003), who looked to map the intricacy of the relationships
between self, family and community, as well as government and private agencies. The
following framework, based substantially on this approach, provides a useful way to analyse
the complexity and strength of these relationships with Aboriginal communities, and the
interconnection with overall community health. The framework examines the inputs of
service agencies and the broader community – in particular, how they have interacted with
Aboriginal communities, both historically and currently – and potential hypothesised
outcomes that might be expected from these interactions.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 7
A model of social capital within an educational environment
Social capital
Illustrations of hypothesised
determinants of social capital
Personal characteristics:

age

gender

health
Family characteristics:

strength/pervasiveness of
intra-family connectedness

relationship status

presence of children
Community:

history

intra-community
connectedness

health and effectiveness of
local service agencies
Resources:

educational attainment of
key family members

training of teachers

access/capacity of liaison
staff

inclusive policies/practices

employment

access to housing/health
care
Attitudes & values:

tolerance of diversity

shared community goals
Characteristics of area:

location

level of socioeconomic
advantage

proportion of networks in
local area

knowledge of local area

safety of local area
Networks in which trust
& reciprocity operate
Informal ties:
 kinship ties
 extended family
 friends
 workmates
Characterised by familiar
forms of negotiated trust
and reciprocity
Network characteristics
(across network types)
Size and extensiveness,
eg:

number of informal
ties

depth of
relationships with
neighbours
Density and closure, eg:

strength and depth of
community
Generalised relationships:
relationships

locals – esp. other

local people know
Aboriginal people
one another

people in general

interaction between
Diversity, eg:
Aboriginal
degree of ethnic
community and civic 
diversity of friends
groups

educational diversity

racism
of groups a person is

impacts on
a member of
employment,

cultural mix of a
education, housing
local area
etc

degree of
racial/ethnic
Characterised by
integration
generalised trust and
reciprocity
Institutional
relationships:
 relations &
expectations of
institutional systems,
eg:
o police
o justice
o schools
o health
o levels of ties/
resistance to power
Characterised by trust in
institutions
Illustrations of
hypothesised outcomes of
social capital
Individual/
family wellbeing:
 capacity to ‘get by’ (eg
pay/access primary staples
for existence)
 capacity to ‘get ahead’ (eg
employment)
Public wellbeing:

access to government
service agencies

effective delivery of
agency outcomes

negotiated policy
outcomes

positive community with
government agencies
Vibrant civic life:
interaction with local activities
Neighbourhood/ area
wellbeing:

tolerance of diversity

reduced crime
Political wellbeing:

inclusive democratic
practices

quality of local
governance
Economic wellbeing:

prosperity

reduced inequality
Educational wellbeing:

parent/community
involvement &
engagement

student integration &
participation

equality of student
performance & retention
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 8
(Adapted from Hughes and Stone 2002)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 9
In general this framework:
 emphasises both the structure (network size, density and diversity) and quality (trust and
reciprocity) of social relations within Aboriginal communities, and between these and the
wider community within which they exist
 distinguishes between social capital developed within different sorts of networks, which
exist at the different social scales of informal, generalised and institutional relations, both
in Aboriginal communities and in the wider community
 recognises that the characteristics of social networks that affect the capability or
usefulness of social capital. This helps to understand and define the types of relationships
between Aboriginal communities and the various bureaucratic levels of a government
agency or department
 separates the measures of social capital from its determinants and outcomes (and
recognises the causal cycle) between the nature of any relationship and the capacity of a
community to develop social capital from that relationship (Stone 2003).
Developing a systemic social capital project
The framework is in part based on what has been learnt during the projects established by the
Office of Board of Studies with schools and local Aboriginal communities since it began, in
2000, to initiate a wide range of projects designed to support teachers of Aboriginal students
in Years K–10.
The development of these projects was underpinned by a commitment by schools to work
both with the parents of Aboriginal students, and the wider Aboriginal community as they
stived to collaboratively develop and implement a school-based curriculum.
A framework for establishing a social capital project
Stages
1. Developing an
understanding
2. Developing a
plan
Issues
One of the critical issues that needs to be exposed in each school/community context is
developing an understanding of the ‘nature of the beast’ that the team collaboratively
wishes to address.
Issues that need to be addressed include:
 roles of each of the players
 what is the problem?
 whose problem is it?
 determine level of commitment from each group, aligned to:
o level of real involvement
o inclusiveness of school
o history of school/community.
 what ‘control’ can be exerted by the project – who else must be involved?
 developing an understanding of issues:
o negotiated learning
o data collection and analysis
o impact of broader community to student engagement and longer-term
learning aspirations.


determine and build an understanding of contextualised curriculum and
pedagogy
linking effective teaching to an understanding of the student, and the learning
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 10


3. Assuring
effective
outcomes
outcomes
what are the training and development needs of the teachers, especially in
regard to changing teaching methodologies?
developing innovative teaching programming, linking:
o student need
o curriculum direction
o teaching context
o parent/community involvement.
Schools:
 who is involved? The respect that school authority gives to the project
 whole-of-executive support for project
 facilitate school and community dialogue
 shared learning compacts with parents
 opening school to community inclusion:
o project-specific
o whole school.
Teachers:
 acknowledge:
o impact of teacher expectations on student engagement
o need to effect change in teaching/learning/assessment dynamic
 challenge own understanding of broader impacts on student learning
 understand the impact of culturally appropriate inclusion and participation of
parents and community
 assist in development of whole-of-project quality learning outcomes.
Students:
 witness collaboratively developed teaching/learning compacts focused on
their engagement
 engage in learning environment.
Parents/community:
 share understanding of local contexts
 engage with learning needs of students
 understand their impact on long-term student aspirations
 prepare students for schools
 support mutually developed and agreed projects with students.
Project team:
 facilitate meetings
 sustain funding appropriate to project needs
 focus on effective and achievable project outcomes
 identify peer mentors to collaborate with staff and community
 assist in the provision of training and development
 garner broader systems support for school and community
 facilitate and support positive outcomes for all participants.
The list of strategies and outcomes will vary from project to project.
The experience of the OBOS projects is that schools and communities have engaged with
many of the above issues over the life of the projects. During the projects, clarity about the
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 11
nature of social capital has been emerging. However, for parents and communities to see how
social capital-creating enterprises can help develop environments favourable for long-term
improvements in student engagement with learning, teachers and schools, critical links
between policy and program implementation are needed. In recognition of this the Board of
Studies, through its Aboriginal Education Unit, intends to promote the development of social
capital.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 12
Bibliography
Bourdieu P 1993. Sociology in Question. Sage, London.
Coleman JS 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,
Vol. 94 (supplement), pp S95–S120.
Dunn KM and McDonald A 2004. ‘Geography of racism in NSW. Some preliminary findings
and a theoretical exploration’. Unpublished paper, University of New South Wales School of
Geography.
Howard P, Perry B and McKnight A 2003. Mathematics in Indigenous Contexts: A Case Study.
Board of Studies NSW. www.learningcontexts-mathematics-k-6.nsw.edu.au/more/FullPaper.pdf
Hughes, J and Stone W 2001. Social capital linking family and community? Family Strengths:
Everybody’s Business, Everybody’s Gain, Proceedings of the Family Strengths Conference,
Newcastle NSW, 2–5 December 2001. Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Hughes, J and Stone W 2002. The families, social capital and citizenship project: An exploration
of the nature and distribution of social capital in Australia. Social Capital and Public Policy
Workshop, Royal Melbourne institute of Technology, Melbourne, 18 October 2002.
Hughes, J and Stone W 2003. Social capital: The link between family and community.
Proceedings of the 8th Australian Institute of Family Studies Conference, Melbourne, 12–14
February 2003.
Lester JH, DeSantolo J and Hanlen W 2001. ‘Enterprise and Career Education Foundation:
Reporting to Tasks B and C. B: Snapshots of Relevant Commonwealth Funded Programs. C:
Reporting on Case Studies 1–6’. Enterprise Career Education Foundation, Sydney (unpublished
report).
Office of the Board of Studies NSW 2006. Aboriginal Educational Contexts. Office of the Board
of Studies, Sydney, retrieved 24 January 2006 http://ab-ed.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au
Patulny R 2003. Social capital – values and time use. Proceedings of the 8th Australian Institute
for Family Studies Conference, Melbourne, 12–14 February 2003.
Perry B and Howard P 2002. Evaluation of the impact of the Counting On program during
2001: Final Report. NSW Department of Education and Training, Sydney.
Putnam RD 1995. Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy,
Vol. 6, No. 1, pp 65–78.
Putnam RD, Leonardi R and Nanetti RY 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in
Modern Italy. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ.
Racist Violence: Report of the National Inquiry into Racist Violence in Australia 1991. Human
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 13
Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Canberra.
Review of Aboriginal Education 2003–2004. NSW Department of Education and Training.
Schwab RG 2001. ‘If you have a dream, you make it happen’: Approaches to maximising
educational engagement among young Indigenous students. Report prepared for Research and
Evaluation Division, Department of Education, Science and Training, Canberra.
Schwab RG and Sutherland D 2001. Building Indigenous Learning Communities. Centre for
Aboriginal Economic Research, Canberra, No 225/2001.
Stone W 2000. Social capital and social security: Lessons from the research. Family Matters No.
57, Spring/Summer 2000, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Stone W 2001. Measuring social capital: Towards a theoretically informed measurement
framework for researching social capital in family and community life. Research Paper No. 24,
Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Stone W 2003. Social capital poor? The meaning and relevance of social capital for
understanding disadvantage in Australia. Proceedings of the Social Policy in the City Seminar,
5 June 2003, Sydney, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Stone W and Hughes J 2001. Sustaining communities: An empirical investigation of social
capital in regional Australia. Proceedings of the SERGA 2001 Fifth National Conference, 10–12
September 2001, Townsville.
Stone W and Hughes J 2003. Social capital at work: How family, friends and civic ties relate to
labour market outcomes. Research Paper No. 31, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Stratton J 1998. Race Daze: Australia in Identity Crisis. Pluto Press, Smithfield, Sydney.
What Works: Explorations in Improving Outcomes for Indigenous Students 2000. Australian
Curriculum Studies Association, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
Winter I 2000. Towards a theorized understanding of family life and social capital. Working
Paper 21, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Social capital through open curriculum engagement
These materials are provided for research purposes and may contain
opinions that are not shared by the Board of Studies NSW.
Page: 14