An analysis of parental engagement in contemporary queensland schooling

Whilst in the early twentieth century, parent involvement in schooling tended to be that of “assistant” or “helper” Johnston, 1981; Kirner, 1976; Limerick, 1988; QCPCA, School Talk, 199

AN ANALYSIS OF PARENTAL ENGAGEMENT IN CONTEMPORARY

QUEENSLAND SCHOOLING

Kym Macfarlane

Bachelor of Education

Diploma of Teaching (Early Childhood)

Centre for Learning Innovation

Faculty of Education

Queensland University of Technology - Doctor of Philosophy

2006

Queensland University of Technology

Doctor of Philosophy Thesis Examination

Candidate Name: Kym Majella Macfarlane

Centre: Centre for Learning Innovation

Supervisors: Professor Erica McWilliam

Dr Daphne Meadmore

Dr John Knight

CONTEMPORARY QUEENSLAND SCHOOLING

Under the requirements of the PhD Regulation 16.8, the above candidate presented a final seminar that was open to the public A Faculty Panel of two academics attended and reported on the readiness of the thesis for external examination The members of the panel recommended that the thesis be forwarded to the appointed Committee for examination

Name: ……… Signature: ………

Panel Chairperson (Principal Supervisor)

Name: ……… Signature: ………

(Panel Member)

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma

at any other higher education institution To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made

Signed: ………

Date: ………

KEYWORDS

Case study, genealogy; bricolage; discourse; truth; power; governmentality; discourse analysis; performativity; propriety; pedagogicalisation; responsibilisation; Foucault; Foucauldian theory; poststructuralism; Bourdieu; habitus; capital; field; game

ABSTRACT

This thesis examines an instance of the failure of a parent-led bid for a new local school in Queensland at the end of the last millennium This parent-led and school-endorsed initiative failed despite a policy climate that appeared actively to encourage such initiatives from government funded school communities The work shows that the parents of Sunnyvale College, (a pseudonym), were both encouraged by the policy environment and discouraged

by the response given to their new schooling initiative, from being full educational partners in the process of the schooling of their children The unanticipated failure is investigated as a case study of parent engagement set against a background of relationships between government and particular educational stakeholders in that time and place It examines how these relationships are played out in this context and what the implications of this are for contemporary relationships of this type

Because the approach to the case study is not based on any assumption that the “failure” was the outcome of a pernicious state, the investigation acknowledges the discontinuous nature of such educational relationships and thus, refuses notions of linearity and continuity The case study approach draws on poststructuralist scholarship, in particular the work of Michel Foucault (1979-84), who is the key theorist informing the investigation Foucault’s theories relating to truth, power and governmentality, are of particular interest and are used as a basis for argument and analysis

The case study is conducted in three key parts First, the study brings together an overarching framework of interpretive and theoretical bricolage, which works to allow multiple theoretical perspectives and understandings to inform the process of investigation Second, there is an acknowledgement of the importance of history and also, of historical contingency,

in the production of events such as this failure Thus, there is an historical account of the establishment of schools in Queensland, particularly in the 1990s, and an exploration of the differences in the establishment process across this decade This exploration is undertaken by working backwards through relevant archival documents and other data in order to highlight the discontinuous nature of such processes This means that parent/school relationships are historicised, using a macro and micro analysis to understand how such relationships have

been produced over time The case in question is situated within this historicising, allowing for an exploration of its nature and setting, its historical background, the roles of particular individuals, and the processes and procedures that were important in the development of the case The third part of the study involves re-theorising parent/school relationships in contemporary contexts

The main argument of the case study is that there was a shift in the discursive constitution of

schooling that was taking place at the very time that the initiative was undertaken in 1997 It

is argued that the school community in question was working out of a set of assumptions about school partnerships, which had already been substantially reinscribed by a new discursive system This new system reframed “choice” and “community” in terms of the

“performative” rather than the “democratic” school

The main arguments and findings in the case study are then used to re-theorise parent/school relationships in post-millennial Queensland, particularly in relation to policy reform This re-theorising is conducted in the form of a discourse analysis of current federal and state government policy and other types of data, which are relevant to schooling in contemporary contexts Various interpretive and theoretical perspectives are used in this process of re-

theorising, including notions of performativity (Ball, 2003a, 2003b, 2004), responsibilisation (Rose, 1990, 1999, 2000) and pedagogicalisation (Popkewitz, 2003) Such notions are

employed to build on the lines of inquiry that develop as a consequence of the use of Foucauldian theory in the earlier part of the study These concepts are also used to develop new epistemological understanding of parent/school relationships in contemporary contexts The work of Pierre Bourdieu (1984, 2001) further assists in the conceptualisation of parent engagement in schooling as a game played on the field of schooling

As a consequence of this re-theorising, it is argued that parent engagement in schooling is a focus of increased attention on the part of educational stakeholders and is increasingly demanded by way of increased levels of responsibilised participation This trend raises questions about the levels of fatigue and anxiety that could result for parents as a consequence of such demanding levels of performance Additionally, an argument is presented that “performative” parenting is a prescribed set of activities, not an open invitation

to leadership and high-level decision-making Thus, as previously mentioned, choice is always already framed, as “proper” parents make “informed” choices with regard to their children’s schooling This thesis concludes that “performative” schools offer new and problematic subject positions for “performative” parents, which are inviting more engagement but constraining the type of partnership that is possible between parents and schools

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

During the writing of this thesis I have received a great deal of support and encouragement from many individuals to whom I owe heartfelt thanks To Professor Erica McWilliam whose support and friendship have sustained me on the journey to the completion of this work It is

no exaggeration to state that this project would not have been completed without her encouragement and enthusiasm throughout some very tough times Her dedication and appreciation for my research inspired me to continue when it seemed impossible To Dr Daphne Meadmore, I express thanks for her encouragement and valuable comments in relation to my work Her intelligence and knowledge of poststructuralist theory gave me a sound base to work on Her patience with my slow understanding was also very commendable Finally, to Dr John Knight whose editorial work and supervisory support was exceptional and proved indispensable in the later stages of the work My special thanks to him for his support, at the emotional, last stages of the process

The generous support of Associate Professor Nicholas Buys and Dr Jayne Clapton has had

no small role in the completion of this thesis Their constant encouragement to achieve completion and assistance throughout difficult times has allowed me to remain focused and to enjoy many opportunities to present my work both in this country and overseas Additionally,

I thank Jayne further for sharing with me her insight and understanding of parent fatigue Special thanks also must go to my colleagues in the School of Human Services at Griffith University who have encouraged me and convinced me that the end is nigh! They will no doubt be pleased that it is

I would like to express appreciation to my mother and father, Kath and Leo Barber, for their belief in the importance of education and to my brother Peter for his intelligent conversation

I am also grateful to my friends, particularly Trish, Gay, Marty, Sally and Mark, who were

‘unfree’ to decide to join me on this time-consuming journey

Finally, thank you to my husband Ian, whose belief in me never waivers and to my children Sarah, Jacob, Kimberley, Caitlin, Lachlan and to my granddaughter Bailey Rose, who were

never patient and demanded my time and attention no matter how engrossed I should have been This, after all, is their right

TABLE OF CONTENTS

KEYWORDS IV ABSTRACT V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS VIII

List of Tables xii

List of Figures xii

CHAPTER 1: PARENT ENGAGEMENT IN SCHOOLING: FROM CONTINUITY TO DISCONTINUITY 1

INTRODUCTION 1

THE CASE 2

THE STUDY 4

RESEARCH DESIGN 7

DESIGN COMPONENTS 8

Historicising parent/school relationships 8

Beyond orthodoxy 11

RE-THEORISING PARENT/SCHOOL RELATIONSHIPS 13

HOW GOVERNMENT SPEAKS PARENT CHOICE 15

THESIS FRAMEWORK 19

CHAPTER 2: INVESTIGATING THE CASE AS AN ANOMALY 29

INTRODUCTION 29

Policy Slippage .31

Federal/State Relations 34

“State” theory 36

“Random causes” 38

“SITUATING” THE RESEARCH 40

USING CASE STUDY AND BRICOLAGE 45

Bricolage 46

Chapter conclusion 49

CHAPTER 3: THINKING DISCONTINUOUSLY 50

INTRODUCTION 50

UNDERSTANDING GENEALOGY 50

UNDERSTANDING “TRUTH” 55

Good schooling as discourse 56

UNDERSTANDING POWER 59

UNDERSTANDING GOVERNMENTALITY 65

NAVIGATING THE JOURNEY 69

The discontinuous path 71

Chapter conclusion 72

CHAPTER 4: SCHOOL, COMMUNITY, PARENT 74

INTRODUCTION 74

Modes of engagement 75

Governance in Australia 77

The Queensland position 78

Inviting “Participation” 80

Answering the call: selective community “involvement” 83

A call to arms: battling for participation 85

Localising Power 89

Confirming participation: deafening silences 95

The emergence of grass roots participation 97

The possibility of social democracy 98

The “progressive” school 100

Random acts of “sabotage” 107

Discussion 120

Discussion 128

Discussion 135

From activism to performance 138

Formalising the Invitation 144

The limits of parent choice 147

Chapter conclusion 148

CHAPTER 5: PRODUCING RESPONSIBLE COMMUNITIES: THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATE SCHOOL 149

INTRODUCTION 149

The responsibilised corporate community 149

“Training days”: Neo-liberalism and microeconomic reform 151

To market, to market: understanding schooling as a marketplace 156

The new “progressive” school 166

Emerging folklore 168

Properly Pedagogicalised: Producing Sunnyvale College 174

Making a fragile assertion powerful 176

Sunnyvale College – the breakdown of pedagogicalisation: concluding thoughts 181

Chapter conclusion 185

CHAPTER 6: THE TIES THAT BIND - SCHOOL, COMMUNITY AND PARENT POST 1997 186

INTRODUCTION 186

The possibility of partnership 187

Partnerships of the future: Schooling 2010 192

Sunnyvale 2000 – Princip[al] values 196

Categories at work 202

Chapter conclusion - An unequal game 207

CHAPTER 7: PLAYING THE GAME: ENGAGEMENT IN SCHOOLING 209

INTRODUCTION 209

Understanding the game 211

Chapter conclusion 222

CHAPTER 8: PLAYING THE SAME GAME DIFFERENTLY: ENGAGEMENT AS RESISTANCE 224

INTRODUCTION 224

Engaging in choice 235

Engaging in diverse choices 238

EXPLORING HOW THE GAME IS PLAYED 244

Negotiating the field 245

Thinking otherwise about games of truth 249

REFEREEING THE GAME 257

Conclusion 263

CHAPTER 9: A PROBLEM OF THE PRESENT: INDUCING PARENT FATIGUE264 INTRODUCTION 264

THE POSSIBILITY OF PARENT FATIGUE 265

Chapter conclusion - Active resistance 277

CHAPTER 10: CONCLUSION 280

INTRODUCTION 280

Revisiting research questions 281

Relevance and utility of theoretical framework for this study 294

Effectiveness and relevance of the analytic framework to the examination of the research questions .297

Limitations of the thesis 299

Contributions and implications of the thesis to sociology of knowledge, policy and practice 299

Further research 301

Conclusion 304

REFERENCES 306

List of Tables Table 4.1 104

Table 4.2 117

Table 4.3 123

Table 4.4 133

List of Figures Figure 1 Thesis framework 28

Figure 2 Thinking parents as community 143

Figure 3 The schooling field (A) 214

Figure 4 The schooling field (B) 227

Figure 5 The schooling field (C) 229

Figure 6 The successful engager 261

Figure 7 The game of engagement on the schooling field 262

CHAPTER 1: PARENT ENGAGEMENT IN SCHOOLING: FROM CONTINUITY

TO DISCONTINUITY

INTRODUCTION

Parents and teachers should be put in charge of the country’s 7000 public

schools to stem the drift to private education…[Dr Barry McGraw of the

OECD states that] public schools should be run like private schools to ensure

that they do not become “a residual provider bogged down in bureaucracy…

Where there is more competition between [public] schools – as there would

be here – there’s more innovation in teaching practices and creativity”

(Norrie & Doherty, 2005:np)

The role of parents in the process of schooling in Australia has undergone some significant changes since the establishment of government schools in the late nineteenth century Whilst

in the early twentieth century, parent involvement in schooling tended to be that of

“assistant” or “helper” (Johnston, 1981; Kirner, 1976; Limerick, 1988; QCPCA, School Talk,

1997)1, more recently parents have been invited to be involved in the schooling process in a

more concrete way (Department of Education, 1990a; Department of Education, 1997a) In Queensland, policy has been more “parent-friendly” over the last four decades (Schools in

Australia: Report of the Interim Committee of the Australian Schools Commission [Karmel Report] , 1973; Department of Education, 1997a; Department of Education, 1999d) with both

state and federal governments increasingly devolving decision-making power to school communities (Cranston, Dwyer & Limerick, 2000; Gwyther, 1997; Lingard & Rizvi, 1992; Meadmore, 2000; Rivzi, 1993; Smyth 1995) This devolutionary process has included inviting parents to become more involved in their children’s schooling at the level of school leadership and governance In countries such as the United Kingdom, as well as in Australia, policy has called on parents to engage actively in making decisions about schooling and schooling alternatives for their children (Gerwitz, Ball & Bowe, 1995; Marginson, 1996, 1997) Australian federal government rhetoric has had a particular focus on the importance of

1

This thesis is referenced according to the Harvard style See – Variation on Harvard style - The Written Assignment, (1998) Queensland University of Technology

parent choice in the marketplace as a means of meeting diverse needs of the community and determining quality in schooling These trends culminated in 1996 in an explicit government invitation to parents to establish new non-government schools if existing schools did not meet

their children’s needs (States Grants [Primary and Secondary Education Assistance] Bill,

1996)

In an apparent contradiction of the emergent agenda of devolution, choice and engagement,

an application for planning approval2 for a particular community secondary school was

refused, by the Queensland Department of Education (Office of Non-State Schooling) in

1997 The parent community involved in this application was part of Sunnyvale State School (a pseudonym) that had been in existence since 1985 This school had a strong reputation in the community for successfully engaging students in schooling via a particular non-traditional pedagogical approach The school’s “progressive” reputation was well known and reasonably widespread, and many of the parents at the school whose children had experienced successful engagement were very committed to the type of curriculum that was conducted there This commitment by parents culminated in their application to establish Sunnyvale College as a secondary school extension of Sunnyvale primary school in order to further continue this school’s pedagogical approach under the same principal

THE CASE

Sunnyvale State School was, from the outset, a fully multi-age school that engaged in teaching children by means of an integrated, thematic curriculum The principal of the school was experienced in this type of teaching and had argued strongly in correspondence with parents3 that children learn best in a co-operative environment, free from academic competition Students from Sunnyvale school, unlike their counterparts in the Queensland government school system, were not subjected to formal lockstep testing but were encouraged to learn at their own developmental level Even though the children at this school were in grades that corresponded to their age, they were not restricted to working only at that level but could move above and below the standard of their grade The purpose here, as was

2

Planning approval was the precursor to any school obtaining non-state school status in Queensland in 1997,

immediately following the introduction of the States Grants [Primary and Secondary Assistance] Bill, 1996

advocated by the principal at the time, was to ensure that children felt less threatened by an inability to do the work and were less likely to become bored doing work they already knew

Anecdotal data4 indicated that the children from this school, by and large, appeared to enjoy the learning environment and were relatively happy to come to the school This was borne out

by the children’s seemingly close relationship with their teachers, the absence of complaints about bullying, and a very low incidence of damage to school property There was also a wide range of further curricular activities that they could undertake, and children of all levels

of ability were encouraged to participate5

As has previously been stated, for almost two decades in Queensland, parents had been invited to take a greater role in their children’s education In this particular case, parent initiatives in this respect were to work towards the establishment of the afore-mentioned secondary school In 1991, the parents of Sunnyvale State School established “The Multi-Age High School Lobby Group” with a view to continuing their children’s education in a similar setting This group was given the responsibility by interested parents at a special meeting to lobby the State government to establish a multi-age high school in their region

After five years of negotiations with the State Government, the parents of this community established the “Sunnyvale College Steering Committee”, a body that pursued the establishment of the school via the non-government system Finally, in July 1997, application

re-was made to the Office of Non-State Schooling to set up Sunnyvale College However, on the

9th December, the secretary of Sunnyvale College Limited received correspondence stating that the committee’s application had been refused The reason given for this refusal was that the application did not meet the first three criteria for the establishment of a new school

required by the Office of Non-State Schooling at this time in 19976.

This decision was apparently at odds with the stated policy direction inviting communities to engage more closely with schools and to exercise choice Its logic appeared to contradict prevailing ideas for schooling in terms of parent choice and engagement made explicit in a plethora of policy documents from the Department of Education promoting choice, diversity

and devolution Certainly since 1987, policies such as Focus on Schools (FOS) (Department

of Education 1990a) and Leading Schools (LS) (Department of Education, 1997a) had

directly advocated school-based management and had encouraged parents, in particular, to look towards the establishment of school councils in an effort to participate in this process Coupled with federal government advocacy of parent choice, such policy moves had created

a climate in which this group of highly engaged parents came to see themselves as deciding,

at least in part, how their children were to be educated

Out of this contradiction arose the questions that prompted the research in this thesis: How was it possible that the Sunnyvale College application was refused, given the high degree of parent involvement and the prevailing policy climate? How can this event increase understanding of the relationship between school policy and schooling practices that pertain

to parent engagement?

THE STUDY

The major aims of this study are (a) to investigate the failure of Sunnyvale College as a new

schooling initiative in Queensland in 1997 and (b) to use that investigation to re-theorise

parent/school engagement in contemporary Queensland This research is undertaken as a

• A significant reduction in enrolments or, as appropriate, projected enrolments;

• A contraction of curriculum offerings to a point which would significantly jeopardise the educational program of the school; or

• Unplanned closure of a state or non-state school

(b) The proposed school’s catchment area is within an area where expected student population is growing by two per cent or more per year or where the proposed school provides a significant element of choice for which there is an established clientele in a non-growth area;

(c) Unless the proposed school is offering the significant element of choice envisaged in the criterion above, there is not an excess of permanent accommodation of more than ten per cent in aggregate in schools in the catchment area which cannot be used productively or the new school is likely to lead to a greater than ten per

cent underutilisation in the five years following approval (Office of Non-State Schooling, 1997:4)

case study, but one with a difference as the strangeness of this particular case provided a means for producing “new” or “alternative” answers to epistemological questions about parent engagement in the schooling process Thus, a different framework was needed that generated a means for developing such “alternative” ways of researching a “familiar” problem of parent participation and its limits and possibilities

In this study it was deemed necessary to undertake the investigation of the case in three key parts First, an overarching framework that provided for the multiplicity of the case was necessary Second, a focus on the case itself in terms of its nature, its relationship to history, the physical setting, its relationship to other contexts and how it has come to be known (Stake, 1998) was needed Third, an examination of what can be learned about parenting and policy from the case given its history, attributes, characteristics, operations and relationships was an important component Such an investigation then required an approach that enabled new and alternative understandings and possibilities to be highlighted, in ways that allowed multiple perspectives and approaches to be considered Thus, a framework that privileged the notion of multiplicity and valued both local and broader opinions, understandings and perspectives as informing understanding was deemed necessary

For this reason, a decision was made to draw on the notion of bricolage as a way of opening

up the issue as both a local event and as an opportunity to re-theorise parent/school relationships Bricolage (Levi-Strauss, 1966) is understood as a ‘pieced together set of representations that are fitted to the specifics of a complex situation’7 where ‘the choice of research practices depends on the questions that are asked, and the questions depend on their context’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003:6) Such a process allowed for an ‘emergent construction’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003:5; Weinstein & Weinstein, 1991) to be produced that added ‘rigour, breadth, complexity, richness and depth’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003:8) to the theory building and re-theorising that followed This approach was used to enhance the possibility of dealing with the subsequent questions that arose as a result of the first stage of the analysis These questions highlighted the development of particular themes of investigation that became evident through this analysis, and which warranted further study As Yin attests, case study

7

The researcher, as bricoleur, utilises whatever resources – cultural objects, signs, texts, practices, theoretical perspectives – that are available in addressing the task at hand (Levi-Strauss, 1966)

investigators are ‘driven to theory’ (1999:3) Thus, the opportunity to investigate and/or develop theory could be more fully undertaken by examining multiple perspectives, and this was made possible through the bricoleur’s lenses

While the notion of case study as a method was integral to the study of this event, there was also a need to move beyond the case to seek clearer understanding of how such an event was possible The case study method was applicable to historically understanding the event but needed to proceed in a way that incorporated historicising rather than merely history8 If history affirms all knowledge as perspective (Foucault, 1980, 1984a, 1984c), historicising allows previously disqualified perspectives to be opened up for scrutiny The history of the Sunnyvale case was messy and disparate and, consequently, was impacted by multiple identities, perspectives, policies and practices that were both locally and globally produced

In this study then, the nature of the Sunnyvale case was explored in relation to how it was produced, that is, as an effect of the relationship between the historical and contemporary economic, political and social discourses in post-millennial Queensland Thus, the case was understood as an anomaly or discontinuity - a contradiction of systemic and social practice that produced new and contesting understandings and knowledge

Exploring the Sunnyvale case as an “anomaly” and tracing its applicability to the present context involved consideration of the following questions:

1 How were new schools established in Queensland in the 1990s? How was Sunnyvale College to be established?

2 What role did communities normally play in the establishment of new schools?

3 What roles, processes and procedures in establishing a new school were enacted in the case of Sunnyvale College?

4 How did the Sunnyvale parents understand their role in relation to the schooling of their children and subsequently in relation to the establishment of Sunnyvale College?

8

Here, to historicise is to ‘specify the particular historical conditions with which it [the event] was generated and what its properties and shape owe to these conditions, and…what part it plays in wider circumstances’ (Fairclough, 1995:19)

Examining these questions necessitated the use of an approach that allowed possible

“alternative” explanations to these questions to be explored through probing the experience, knowledge and contribution of the local actors in the event Exploring discontinuity in social and systemic practice in this way opens up the possibility for “new” ways of theorising

“familiar” problems In relation to this particular case study, the examination of such explanations has led to a re-theorising of how parent/school relationships may actually work

in this current context This re-theorising was undertaken by a focus on further questions that became apparent following the analysis of the case These are:

1 What are the conditions of possibility that now produce the “success” or “failure” of parents engaging in the process of schooling for their children?

2 How can an analysis of these conditions inform theory about parent/school relationships?

RESEARCH DESIGN

The case study undertaken in this thesis situated the notion of parent engagement in schooling

as “a problem of the present” (Foucault, 1984a, 1991) Foucault’s notion of “a problem of the present” invites a researcher to investigate a present problem in terms of how it has come to

be historically constituted As previously stated, this particular investigation proceeded by using a particular event of “failure” as a means for building theory and by the application of this new theoretical understanding to analyse present notions of parent engagement Undertaking the case study in this way enabled the researcher to problematise the Sunnyvale

“failure” and to build new theory as a result of the examination of the problematisation

To investigate questions about the Sunnyvale case in order to build theory meant attending to

a number of tasks, namely:

• examining significant historical shifts in establishing non-government schools;

• documenting notions of “community” that informed this process;

• identifying roles, processes and procedures in the Sunnyvale case, and

• synthesising past and present practices to explain how the engagement by parents in the Sunnyvale school is currently understood

These four tasks were accomplished by means of three methodological components in the study design:

• historicising parent/school relationships (situating the case, its nature and setting and its historical background, (Stake, 1998));

• using this theoretical account to conduct a macro and micro analysis into roles, processes and procedures in the Sunnyvale case (the consideration of contextual factors and informants, (Stake, 1998), that is, who, how, what, when? (Yin, 1994));

• re-theorising parent/school relationships (by the consideration of multiple perspectives)

Each of these components is outlined briefly in this chapter

Undertaking this research as bricoleur involved the use of information acquired from the case

study to apply new theorising to Queensland parent/school relationships since 1997 This part

of the investigation built a theoretical understanding of how parents now engage in the schooling process framed in terms of propriety and performativity (Ball, 2000, 2003a, 2003b, 2004; Jeffery, 2002) - that is, in terms of what counted as “the right thing to do” and what it meant to conduct oneself as a “parent doing the right thing” Thus, the investigation focussed

on a “normalising” discourse that produced understanding and logic in terms of what might

be deemed “normal” in relation to parent engagement in schooling

DESIGN COMPONENTS

Historicising parent/school relationships

According to Foucault (1984a, 1984c, 1991), schooling is historically constituted through discourse Historicising parent/school relationships in both government and non-government

contexts is fundamental to any discursive analysis that tries to explain the “success” or

“failure” of these relationships To this end, relevant historical and contemporary policy documents, newspaper articles and correspondence were analysed for their significance in

“producing” the Sunnyvale case and the impact of such an event on parents’ engagement in the schooling process This textual analysis was undertaken by a combination of “working backwards” and then “forwards”9 through such documents as those relating to:

- The history of schooling in Australia and in Queensland from Leading Schools in 1997 to the Karmel Report in 1973;

- Government and non-government schooling debates;

- Key government policies related to democratic localism and/or its limitation; and,

- Relevant correspondence and texts relating to the Sunnyvale case

The historicising was conducted in terms of a discourse theoretical reading of the term

community within “schooling” discourse In this study, following Foucault (1984c, 1984d, 1991), discourse refers to language use associated with an institution or set of practices Foucault understands discourse as producing social and systemic practice by means of the constitution of ‘regimes of truth’ (1980:131) that govern such practices This includes expressions of the values of particular institutions engaged in these practices Foucault (1980:131) attests that:

Each society has its regime of truth, its “general politics” of truth; that is, the types of discourse which it accepts and makes function as true: the mechanisms and instances which enable one to distinguish true and false statements, the means by which each is sanctioned; the techniques and procedures accorded value in the acquisition of truth; the status of those who are charged with saying what counts as true

Understood in this way, a discourse theoretical reading of the term community then, is a reading that indicates how community (or equivalent terms) worked within particular

9

In this type of analytic work the notion of “working backwards” is paramount This analysis works by beginning in the present and “working backwards” to the past Within this process however, the researcher begins by working backwards, then can move forwards and then backwards again It is also possible for the researcher to move in and away, examining micro then macro events and data in various combinations

discursive systems or institutions at any given point in historical time to constitute educational identities and norms in that time and place Thus, in Foucault’s terms (1980), the

word community signifies a social category of possibility

The idea of a community of parents as “highly involved” in policy making, was unthinkable until quite recently in Australia Yet recent and current conditions, (historical, discursive, situational) allow for new possibilities to be made apparent For example, it has become

possible for the local newspaper The Courier-Mail (5/8/00) to declare the rights of parents in

relation to such matters by highlighting government initiatives ordering government school teachers to provide better information to parents about how their children are faring in relation to other children in class This article argues that the government is making such a call in order to enhance ‘greater parental involvement in school decision-making’ (p 1)10

Moreover, recent government policy and rhetoric, social and economic shifts, discourses of

individualisation and media advocacy, have worked to normalise a high level of parent

involvement in schooling Put another way - parents have been “responsibilised” as community members (Rose, 1999, 2000) Ironically, the character and effects of this responsibilisation were central to the Sunnyvale case and yet, in this case, these aspects worked to constrain rather than enable this particular parent group in terms of their engagement in the schooling of their children

In order to examine what is sayable and unsayable about parent involvement in schooling, relevant discourses producing notions of the “proper” or “normal” performance of parents in the schooling context need to be fore-grounded The initial investigation of the case study then, proceeded as a discourse analysis comprising:

- An examination of how the participation of parents in schooling in Australia came to be organised (This was conducted as archival research that “worked backwards” and then

“forwards” to track key parent/community discourses and discursive shifts, that is,

10

Cole, M and Parnell, S (2000) ‘Parents call for more say on schools,’ Courier-Mail, 5th August, p 1, Brisbane: Queensland Newspapers

documentation of rhetorical moves within policy and other official discourse It focused

on key government policies related to participatory schooling and/or its limitation);

- An identification and exploration of key texts in the “state/private” debate, as important nodes for producing rhetoric about ideal schooling and ideal school communities and how they ought to be achieved in Australia;

- Analysis of relevant rhetorical shifts around the idea of “choice”, “community” and

“diversity” in specific state and federal policy texts in order to fore-ground the mechanisms used to produce claims made about ideal schooling and ideal school communities; and,

- Scrutiny of the rhetorical structure of texts made available from the Sunnyvale case, particularly in relation to the notion of community

Beyond orthodoxy

When “abnormal” events (such as the Sunnyvale case) occur within school communities, researchers tend to seek explanations that provide closure They often seek a reason that completely explains why the situation is as it is As a departure from this orthodoxy, the study

of Sunnyvale documented in this thesis focused on contingencies, creating events as

“strange” and asking how they might have been “otherwise” Consequently, a genealogical approach (Foucault, 1983, 1984a) was important to this study because it allowed for an intentional positioning of the Sunnyvale event as both within and against normalised convention and inquiry (Lather, 1996)11 Genealogy allows for “the telling of the story” but also for a critique of the storyteller and story at the same time Such an approach assisted the researcher to work within and against the dominant educational, historical and disciplinary discourses producing the event in question In this case, it allowed for the development of an understanding of “normal” parenting as historically and discursively constituted

The research design represents a departure from traditional case studies of schooling practices In terms of the analysis of the case, genealogy builds theory at the same time as it challenges orthodox readings of historical events, precisely because it refuses the twin imperatives of linearity and continuity that drive most understandings of educational history

11

Such work required an explanation of examples of conventional approaches, as documented in Chapter Two

as “developing” over time This particular means of theory-building created space for understanding the policy/practice relationship regarding parenting Thus, the departure from tradition allowed room for “thinking otherwise” about how the policy/practice relationship impacted on the engagement of parents in the process of schooling in Queensland at this particular time and place

re-If the inquiry were to proceed out of orthodox explanations that rely on causality, there might have been four possible reasons given for this type of event (whether such reasoning is based

on a developmental or critical theory of history or both) It is likely that such explanations would have included notions that:

• policy “slippage” occurred between policy intention and enactment, that is, that the link between state government and local schools had broken down (Burke, Limerick, Cawte & Slee, 1993; Gwyther, 1997; Lingard, Hayes & Mills, 2000; Lingard & Rivzi, 1992; Meadmore, 2000; Riley, 1992);

• federal/state relations are at odds on some deeper level, that is, that federal invitations and policy were not reciprocated at the state level (Lingard, 2000; Lloyd, 1998; Marginson, 1985);

• anomalies such as Sunnyvale are indications that school policy is at work to repress individuals despite democratic rhetoric, that is, that policy effects are hegemonic (Marginson, 1996, 1997); or,

• this was an accident of timing and spatial location – the parent body was in the wrong place at the wrong time Here “accident” is not used in the sense that Foucault uses it12, but in the sense of an aberration in an otherwise logical and coherent set of

“developments” (Quirke, 1992)

All these “explanations” arise out of epistemological assumptions that anticipate an ordered and rational world of events, in which structures both invite and inhibit human agency As such, what these traditional explanations offer are assumptions about systemic and social practice that may or may not be realised They each provide only one perspective that

12

Foucault’s understanding of accident is not in terms of aberration Rather, it is representative of idiosyncratic events that represent discontinuity

privileges one line of thinking By allowing a focus on multiple perspectives and lenses (including these), other lines of thought were opened up for scrutiny and these lines of thought allowed space for new understanding to be developed Orthodox explanations can only remain assumptions and cannot be verified as “truth” but as separate “stories”

The notion of how systemic and social practices are constituted is an important component of this thesis The analysis undertaken in the thesis highlighted that parent involvement in schooling, as both a systemic and social practice, has increased and is continuing to do so This means that it is becoming more reasonable to consider high level parental involvement

as a necessary undertaking for both children to succeed and schooling to function Thus, a methodological approach that does not assume such practices as necessarily reasonable was used as a central component of this work

RE-THEORISING PARENT/SCHOOL RELATIONSHIPS

The genealogical analysis of the Sunnyvale event highlighted possible issues for parents and for school communities Such issues were then examined in terms of how these might impact

on the current context of schooling, particularly in relation to parent engagement To do so,

an analysis of present policy documents, texts and relevant rhetorical data was undertaken as

a means of understanding how such data contributed to notions of schooling and parent engagement at this historical time The bricoleur’s lenses used to develop this analysis allowed consideration of multiple perspectives, that is, perspectives that might incorporate a variety of underpinnings but that are also epistemologically coherent In this case, these perspectives included the archival and genealogical approaches undertaken, which were underpinned by Foucauldian theory, as well as further theoretical and literary work that incorporated aspects of such theory and also other poststructuralist and postmodern understandings Such a framework enabled an account of the ways that logic and reason about parent engagement came to be produced and internalised (Bourdieu, 1984, 2001; Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992; Popkewitz, 2000)

As Ball (1990a, 1994) attests, no invitation by government to engage is ever truly an “open” one However, parents may well regard invitations to engage as “real” and, as such, misrecognise the invitation as being relatively limitless Ball’s (1990a, 1990b, 1994, 2000,

2003a, 2003b, 2004) work on policy as discourse is a useful lens for interrogating policy relating to parent participation because he emphasises the presence of ‘ambiguities, omissions and contradictions’ (Bowe, Ball, with Gold, 1992: 13; see also Ball, 1990a, 1994; Mulderrig, 2003), which are often written into policies In the case of schooling, these ambiguities, assumptions (Ball, 1990a, 1994), omissions and contradictions work as boundaries as well as spaces of possibility, to delimit the participation of individuals in the process The effects of these ambiguities, assumptions, omissions and contradictions is that they allow room for manoeuvring, enabling practices to emerge that might not align with the policy text but still

be “legitimate” Thus, Ball’s (1990a, 1990b, 1994, 2000, 2003a, 2003b, 2004) work provided

a framework in this study for understanding how present policy reform situated parents in terms of expanding or delimiting their role in the process of schooling from 1997-2005

In this study, a discursive analysis was undertaken, as indicated earlier, to allow an understanding of how “proper” or “appropriate” parent engagement is produced in the current context of Queensland schooling and school governance An examination of consequences of policy reform that works to produce parents’ understanding of themselves as “proper” engagers was an important part of this investigation, given that parents can both recognise and misrecognise (Hunter, 1993; Popkewitz, 2000, 2003, 2004) invitations to engage in their children’s schooling In Rose’s (1999, 2000) terms, such misrecognition can produce parent behaviour as appearing reasonable to many parents while also indicating impropriety to others This applied in the Sunnyvale case, for even though this group of parents was highly participatory in that they were heeding all of the governmental invitations to engage in schooling they were not properly “responsibilised” (Rose, 1999, 2000), as they failed to engage in the “correct” manner

While the work of Foucault provided a useful means of examining the development of possible new theories and new regimes of truth produced from the 1997 event, other scholarly work helped to tease out and unsettle the “truths” that were produced The work of Bourdieu (1984, 2001) assisted in the exploration of how social and systemic practice is conceptualised and internalised That is, Bourdieu’s work was helpful in terms of producing added understandings relating to how “truthful” versions of social and systemic practice are constituted and how issues of propriety and performativity constitute social and systemic

practice in schooling The use of an interpretive and theoretical bricolage as a framework in this thesis allowed such a combination to be possible and highlighted the need for a diverse approach

HOW GOVERNMENT SPEAKS PARENT CHOICE

Understanding of both systemic and social practice is necessary in order to appreciate how the Sunnyvale parents were unable to achieve success, even though they appeared to be taking invitations to engage in school leadership and governance on board Equally necessary, is the development of an understanding of how government policy and practice have contributed to producing social and systemic practice in relation to parent involvement

in schooling, as it is currently understood Thus, the way in which governments understand their respective roles in schooling and education in terms of both systemic and social practice was opened up for scrutiny

As has previously been mentioned, state/federal relations in Australia have been a point of controversy While schooling has long been viewed in this country as a state matter, since the 1960s the role of the federal government in schooling has been increasing (Hogan, 1984; Marginson, 1985, 1996, 1997) More recently in the 1990s, policy direction has been guided

by federal government policy and its relationship to industry and economics (Boswell, 1996; Dawkins, 1998; Dudley & Vidovich, 1995; Kenway & Fitzclarence 1998; Knight, 1993; Lingard, 2000) This has also impacted on state policy direction Disagreements between state and federal stakeholders have impacted on schooling and schooling communities The Sunnyvale case indicates that parents particularly have been confronted by such policy impotence in terms of the government-community decision-making process While governments alone are not solely the producers of parenting protocols, nevertheless governments do make decisions that have real effects on parents and other social groups, as is evident in the Sunnyvale “failure” Government policy reform in relation to parent engagement in schooling has largely highlighted notions of responsibilisation and parent choice As previously stated, in Ball’s (1990a, 1990b, 1994, 2000, 2003a, 2003b, 2004) terms, policy reform can lead to misrecognition and confusion Thus, rhetoric that generates the direction and advocacy for particular policy reforms can produce confusion about engagement and participation in terms of what is made explicit or what they fail to say – the

silences - about normal parenting, parent choice and engagement In particular, statements made by influential policy makers can determine how parents understand engagement at certain times and in certain contexts Thus, when individuals such as the Hon David Kemp

MP, (Shadow Minister for Education prior to 1996 and Minister for Education in 1996-7), made policy statements such as the one cited below, these can be interpreted by parents as open invitations to lead and precipitate change:

Parent Choice in schooling is increasingly recognised not only as a basic

human right, but also as essential to implement an effective parent market in

education A strong parent market is essential to provide parents with genuine

influence over the character and quality of schooling in Australia…Parent

choice implies school systems, which have the flexibility to provide the

diversity, which parents seek and the independence to respond to parental

values as they are reflected in the marketplace (Kemp, 1991a:22)

In this case, the rhetoric names ‘a strong parent market’ as ‘essential’, with schools appropriately responding to ‘parental values’ (Kemp, 1991a:22) Additionally, there is a notion that parents must have ‘genuine influence over the character and quality of schooling’ (Kemp, 1991a:22) Thus, it becomes easy to understand how the Sunnyvale parent group might have perceived such rhetoric as an open invitation to decide and influence Misrecognition occurs when parents and other individuals do not see that terms such as

“choice”, “market” and “values”, can be used in a tactical way to achieve certain ends or particular agendas relating to the ways in which parents are actually permitted to engage This does not mean that the actual invitation to engage is not genuine, as governments continue to invite engagement What is sometimes not apparent is the tactical use of rhetoric

to produce ‘fabrications’ (Ball 2000: 8, 2003a:224) Ball attests that such fabrications have

‘organising effects’ (2000:16) that produce the ways in which social and systemic practice might be played out This means that the ambiguities, assumptions, omissions and contradictions that are inherent in policy direction and reform, allow particular ways of being

to be made apparent, thereby privileging certain levels of performance as properly representing how parents need to behave when governments invite them to engage Thus, what can occur is that parents misrecognise these ambiguities, assumptions, omissions and

contradictions as ways in which they can engage according to their own views, values and perspectives, when actually this misrecognition means that parents are not properly

‘fabricating’ (Ball, 2000:15) themselves

This is arguably true in the Sunnyvale case Clearly, the rhetoric of government policy represents a genuine invitation and so it is not simply a case of governments seeking to repress individuals or organisations for their own ends However, phrases such as ‘parental values as they are reflected in the market place’ (Kemp, 1991:22) limit notions of choice and values, as these notions are always already framed Thus, when governments make statements such as ‘parent influence over the character and quality of schooling’ (Kemp, 1991:22), that infer parents’ ability to engage at levels of leadership and governance, these statements actually work to produce engagement in ways that privilege particular values and activities as “proper”

In broad terms, freedom of choice in education (although sometimes severely constrained) has been part of a universal agenda for many decades13 In 1997 in Australia, National Coalition party policy firmly advocated choice for parents with regard to their children’s schooling The reinforcement of this invitation to parents occurred over the decade of the 1990s and was illustrated in Coalition Party policy rhetoric during this period as highlighted above Influential members of the Coalition used “choice” with respect to parents and schools, culminating in the specific invitation to parents to engage by means of establishing a school of their choosing David Kemp was prominent throughout the 1990s in directing and formulating federal government policy on schooling in this way Coupled with the federal Labor government’s policy linking education and microeconomic reform, the Coalition used such discourse to drive its policy direction in terms of excellence and choice in the marketplace:

13

According to Hogan (1984), the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights insists on freedom of

choice for parents with regard to their children’s education This declaration was adopted in 1966 and ratified by

the Australian government in 1972 The principle of this declaration was embraced by the Karmel Report and in

the legislation, which established the Schools Commission In fact, Hogan states, ‘ …there has never been any government veto on parents’ choice of private schools for their children’ (1984:25)

Ultimately, excellence in schooling is based on informed parental choice, not on bureaucratic supervision and dictation (Kemp in Hansard, 1991b: 943)14

The logic here is that parent choice is supposed to play an integral role in the determination

of “excellent” or “quality” schooling Additionally, there is an assertion that parent engagement in schooling will promote “excellence” and “quality” in the marketplace Indeed, devolution and diversification are situated as positive developments against the negative positioning of ‘bureaucratic supervision and dictation’ (Kemp, 1991b:943) “Bureaucracy” with its negative connotation in the above statement is pre-empted in similar terms in the next statement relating to government schooling:

…[P]arents of government school children, …have a right to choose They

have a right to be able to choose their child’s school They have a right to

proper comparative information about the standard of educational

achievement of their children, for they care about the quality of their

children’s education more than anyone else (Kemp in Hansard, 1991c:

1114-1115)

What all the three citations share, as federal government statements of policy direction, is an explicit message to parents that they can and should “choose” the character and quality of schooling for their children What is interesting, indeed remarkable, in the Sunnyvale case, is that a highly engaged group of parents who were highly attuned to this sort of rhetoric did not achieve their goals of leading the establishment of the kind of school they wanted for their children The failure of the Sunnyvale application appeared almost unprecedented or even bizarre, in the particular climate of 1997 It is clear that, in the main, governments were, and

still are, encouraging parents to engage in choice-making regarding schools (Howard, 2004,

60 Minutes 12/09/04; Norrie & Doherty, 2005; Nelson, 2005) In fact, the Hon Brendan Nelson MP echoes Dr Barry McGraw’s statement at the beginning of this chapter, in the same article This statement highlights a recent invitation to parents to take on highly responsible roles in the schooling process However, when applied to Sunnyvale, such a

14

Hansard is the vehicle by which, government debates, policy reform and party political policy are made available in the public domain

notion caused a “breakdown” in both relationships and in systemic and social practice Thus, the Sunnyvale case serves as a key site for learning about the limits of parent choice and participation in the process of schooling

THESIS FRAMEWORK

The study was designed to make it possible to “think otherwise” (Foucault, 1984d; McWilliam, 1998) about the Sunnyvale case as an unanticipated event It involved a local examination of persons and processes, in order to re-theorise the “bigger picture” of macro change and policy direction (Foucault, 1980, 1985; Hatcher 1997) As bricolage, the research utilised local examination of the “failure” of parents to be able to lead innovation, highlighting particular knowledges that might normally be “unheard” or disqualified What follows this introductory chapter then, is an investigation of the Sunnyvale “failure” with a view to developing an understanding of how parent/school partnerships were being constituted at this critical point in 1997 The case becomes a platform for considering how parent engagement in the process of schooling is played out in post-millennial Queensland

The notion of the responsibilised parent as the ethical community member is explored, so that

the effects of high-level engagement currently required are examined and understood This investigation is undertaken by means of the following structure

Chapter Two demonstrates more fully the inadequacy of conventional explanations mentioned earlier that might be used to explain an event such as the Sunnyvale “failure” This

chapter argues that the “neatness” of such analytical tools disqualifies the local Four

orthodox explanations - policy slippage, federal/state relations, “state” theory and random causes - are explored in detail to highlight the inconsistencies and gaps that such explanations tend to leave unexplained or unexplored The main point of Chapter Two is the notion that traditional jigsaw analyses suggest closure from particular “truthful” standpoints Such a

perspective advocates that one story represents the only story, as how the “bigger” picture is

explored determines what the end result will be However, the questions that are left unanswered at the end of the examination of the traditional approach, clearly indicate that one

“true” story is neither likely nor credible The chapter then goes on to focus on the use of case

study as method and examines the value of case studies in general and in this case in particular Moreover, the notion of re-theorising the results of the case study is explored

Chapter Three explores how this case study differs from traditional case studies by illustrating how the research utilises not only ethnographic strategies but also those of historicising The chapter presents the researcher’s understanding of how genealogy is useful

to the Sunnyvale case study It does so by engaging with Foucault’s theorising of truth, power and governmentality (1978b, 1979, 1980, 1984c) This chapter shows how the theory underpinning the genealogical method assists in the development of an understanding of how social and systemic practice might be thought at particular times and places A particular focus of the chapter is the relevance of Foucault’s notions of truth, power and governmentality to the Sunnyvale “failure” While the traditional explanations cited earlier give meaning to some aspects of the case in point, as previously stated, there are several unexplained factors that do not appear to make sense For example, the notion of parent choice in relation to Sunnyvale appears problematic The parents of Sunnyvale were highly informed about government policy at the time and were very knowledgeable about how policy was represented They knew that parent choice was an integral aspect of federal government policy and were looking to take advantage of that The Sunnyvale parents and Queensland’s Department of Education, (now Education Queensland), were working out of competing “truths” that positioned them as antithetical to each other when, in reality, their

needs and interests were quite similar in some respects (Department of Education, 1999d) As

is indicated later in this thesis, because the Sunnyvale group was intent on deciding curriculum for their children, they were seeking to take on a role that was not available to

them Thus, the chapter cautiously explores the notion of the Sunnyvale parents as unruly or

ungovernable, as well as examining the effects of such behaviour on the Sunnyvale “failure”

The next three chapters of the thesis contribute to the Sunnyvale story in both a collective and individual way Collectively, Chapters Four, Five and Six represent the process of working backwards through particular relevant data with Chapter Four as the beginning of the process Chapters Five and Six represent sections of this process, beginning and ending at different points in a messy and disparate way However, even though Chapter Four begins this process

of working backwards, Chapters Five and Six are also part of the whole That is, the process

of working backwards begins in Chapter Four and continues throughout Chapters Five and Six, albeit by the use of different sets of data

Chapter Four contributes to the Sunnyvale story by historicising moves to encourage parent

engagement in schooling in terms of a discourse-theoretical reading of the term community

This is undertaken by working backwards through important archival text and policy data

relevant to the production of the term community throughout the relevant historical period In

Chapter Four, particular Department of Education and Education Queensland policy

documents such as Focus on Schools, (Department of Education, 1990a), Shaping the Future, (Department of Education, 1994) and Leading Schools, (Department of Education, 1997a) and literature such as Education Office Gazettes 1974-1992, are examined in terms of how

“community” (or equivalent terms) is produced in these documents Additionally, important

federal government policy documents, in particular, the Karmel Report, 1973, are also

examined in relation to how these might have “produced” parent participation in the process

of schooling Documents and literature are examined to highlight discontinuities, ambiguities and accidents (Foucault, 1980, 1983, 1984d, 1991; Hatcher, 1997) The theoretical approaches of Nikolas Rose (1990, 1999, 2000) and Thomas Popkewitz (2000, 2003, 2004) are introduced in this chapter as a means of establishing particular links to Foucauldian theory, as well as highlighting more recent understandings of how terms such as

“community” and “engagement” are framed In this way, the notions of pedagogicalisation (Popkewitz, 2003) and responsibilisation (Rose, 1999, 2000) are explored as helpful and

related ideas The usefulness of these theoretical underpinnings to unpacking the Sunnyvale event, is highlighted here as a major contributor to developing an understanding of how this particular event actually played out in reality

An important aspect of this chapter is a focus on participation and how this notion is

conceptualised in terms of propriety As such, the chapter begins the study’s focus on the limits of parent choice, highlighting examples of “proper” and “improper” participation by the Sunnyvale parents The above notions of pedagogicalisation and responsibilisation are

used to enhance understanding of categorisation and how it works to both constrain and

enable parents seeking participation in schooling at the level of governance and responsible leadership There is a focus on the notion of the meta-category of ethically responsibilised

community member and of how such a category both limits and allows parents to undertake roles of leadership and governance in terms of their engagement in schooling This chapter marks the beginning of the development of particular permissible categories for parents, which are further elaborated on in Chapter Six What begins to become apparent in this chapter, as a result of a genealogical investigation of the Sunnyvale story, is that only certain categories of governance and leadership are available to parents Seeking existence in others,

as these parents attempted, can prove problematic and can impact on how such parents are perceived within the community

Chapter Five moves to examine the macro by a continuation of the process of working backwards through an historical tracking of schooling via federal government policy documents, in terms of community participation and engagement This chapter focuses on particular discursive shifts in relation to schooling with respect to world wide economic

shifts Particular federal government policy documents, for example, the Finn Report, Young

People’s Participation in Post-Compulsory Education and Training (1991), the Carmichael

Report, The Australian Vocational Certificate Training System/Employment and Skills

Formation Council (1991) and the Mayer Report, Putting General Education to Work,

(1992), are examined in order to track discursive shifts in how schooling was produced and how community participation was framed in relation to federal policy projections

As an offshoot of the strategies used in the genealogical investigation in Chapter Four, local texts are also highlighted as an important source of data that complements the macro focus Such texts are examined to trace the impact of neo-liberal (Barry, Osborne & Rose, 1996) understandings and microeconomic reform that have emerged from the policy focus mentioned above These texts are also examined in terms of how the progressive moves of school communities were understood at particular important historical times The concept of the progressive school is signified in relation to important discursive shifts in how progressive education was understood and the notion of the “new progressive school” as the

“new corporate school” is introduced, as both are constitutive of new discourses that inform the means by which education is enacted The examination of these critical data is undertaken once again by historically moving backwards and forwards as necessary Such a process is

necessary in order to track how, when and where discontinuities emerge and subsequent shifts occur

This notion of “progressive” as a relational concept that ties parents with schooling is

examined in this chapter It reveals how the Sunnyvale parents were progressive in more than one sense They were progressive in that they responded to government invitations to participate in the schooling of their children They were also progressive in terms of the social democratic understanding of the term “progressive” - that is, in terms of how progressive education was constituted in Queensland in the 1970s However, in the 1990s the term “progressive” was beginning to take on a new meaning The shift to conceptualising social and systemic practices in terms of neo-liberal discourses and microeconomic reform was working to re-constitute the term “progressive” in relation to such concepts Thus, as previously stated, how progressive came to be produced as “truth” in the 1990s, that is, in terms of “corporate” schooling, was antithetical to the “truth” about progressive schooling from the Sunnyvale parent group’s perspective Additionally, the chapter moves to explore

the notion of parent engagement in schooling, as part of the notion of the new “progressive”

school Engagement in schooling, as beyond the meta-category of participation and as a means of “unfree” participation, is examined, in order to begin to conceptualise the notion of

parents as partners in the schooling process

Chapter Six builds on the previous chapter by focussing on the ideal and the reality of parents

as “partners” in the process of schooling The term “partnership” is examined with respect to

particular policy documents Federal and state government documents such as the Karmel

Report, (1973), Focus on Schools, (Department of Education, 1990a), Shaping the Future, (Department of Education, 1994), Leading Schools (Department of Education, 1997a), Future

Directions for School-Based Management in State Schools, (Education Queensland, 1999a),

Implementation of School-based Management in Queensland State Schools, (Education

Queensland, 1999b), School-based Management in Queensland State Schools, (Education Queensland, 1999c), Education (Accreditation of Non State Schools) Bill 2001, and the

Queensland State Education 2010 document (Education Queensland, 1999d) are examined in terms of how these produce the notion of “parents-as-partners” in schooling The notion of parent participation is examined in terms of its constitution, as well as in terms of the shift

from parent participation to parent/community participation This nexus emerged in the genealogical investigation in Chapter Four, in both policy and local documents and rhetoric Thus, there was a shift from parent (highlighted by the quantitative data in Chapter Four) to parent and the wider community (also present in this data up to the early 1990s) to school community as being more definitive by 1997 This shift is examined in terms of its relationship to the breakdown of parent/school relationships in the Sunnyvale case

Additionally, in Chapter Six, there is a textual examination of local documents including newspaper articles, the Sunnyvale Parents and Citizens Association correspondence and newsletters, as well as documentation that related to Sunnyvale College Such an examination and tracking of documentation allows for a further exploration of the notion of categorisation Particular categories for parents in relation to participation that have existed across the historical time frame investigated in this thesis are developed as a consequence of this tracking and analysis These categories are presented and identified While the majority of these categories are developed and focussed on in Chapter Six, some categories that were examined individually in earlier chapters are also included as part of the previously mentioned collective work that was undertaken in Chapters Four, Five and Six Such categories are highlighted once more in Chapter Six as part of a present to past focus on how these have played out and worked to produce roles for parents in the process of engagement

in schooling An exploration of the conditions of possibility for these to both constrain and enable parents in relation to their engagement in the schooling process is undertaken

Categorisation is highlighted in this chapter as a means of governing and monitoring the behaviour and engagement of parents in the schooling process While particular categories of participation enable parents to engage in schooling at highly responsible levels, admission to other categories is constrained For example, while in the 1990s, parents are responsibilised

in terms of the new progressive school, as “managers” of their children’s schooling, other categories and therefore, other types of participation and engagement were unavailable to them This chapter uses the information gained in previous chapters to argue that in the 1990s, parents, as ethically responsibilised school community members, could not be

curriculum decision-makers or curriculum leaders, in the way in which the Sunnyvale

parents attempted to be

Chapter Seven begins to explore the above information further by making links to this notion

of categorisation and contemporary policy/discourse The focus in this chapter is on how past social and systemic practices produce further policy reform (Ball, 1990a, 1990b, 1994) - that

is, how events and circumstances (such as the Sunnyvale “failure”) lead to further reforms in social and systemic practice The particular accidents and discontinuities producing the Sunnyvale event are implicated in further policy and in contemporary identities being forged through current policy and rhetorical norms Thus, an examination of the implications of the Sunnyvale event as constitutive of further reforms in social and systemic practice is undertaken

Such an examination is undertaken in the chapter by using the analogy of a game To do so, the engagement of parents in the process of schooling is situated as a “game” of social and systemic practice This analogy is used here to highlight the consequences and implications

of shifts in such practices and for the “players” involved in this game The work of Bourdieu (1984, 2001) is used in this chapter as a means of understanding the process of engagement in

schooling as a game and schooling as a field of social practice Bourdieu’s work highlights

the significance of “game playing” and “rules” in discourse or language use The notion of the game allows for certain aspects of social and systemic practice to be made apparent For example, a game implies players, a field, referees, rules and practices of inclusion and exclusion It is also an indication of how particular contact or interactions might work Participants in the game are governed by rules, which produce the game as played in a certain way, at different times throughout history Thus, the analogy of the game (Bourdieu, 1984, 2001) becomes a means of understanding how social and systemic practice might come to be understood as “truth” at particular historical times Moreover, as the rules of games can be altered and “improved”, the game can then act as a representation of how the discursive

“truths” of social and systemic practice come to be re-worked and re-invented Additionally, policy discourse and reform are made more visible in terms of how they contribute to the

representation of the rules of engagement A case is made in this chapter that the lenses of the

bricoleur allow the combination of particular theoretical perspectives to be drawn together to inform the re-theorising that is occurring It is argued that this approach allows multiple perspectives to be possible, as different theoretical perspectives bring different lenses to

developing lines of inquiry and, as such, add richness and rigour to the investigation Stephen Ball’s (1990-2004) work is used extensively in this chapter, as a framework for examining current policy reform in relation to parent engagement in schooling Ball (1990a, 1990b,

1994, 2000, 2003a, 2003b, 2004) applies Foucauldian theory in his work on policy/text analysis His work is helpful in understanding the importance of examining the ‘ambiguities, omissions and contradictions’ of such policy reform (Bowe, Ball, with Gold 1992:13; see also Ball, 1990a, 1994; Mulderrig, 2003) and how these contribute to the ever-changing

“rules” of social practice The use of Foucault’s theories in Ball’s work allows for the development of an understanding of how ambiguities, assumptions, omissions and contradictions, work to produce new regimes of truth about social and systemic practice Chapter Eight takes the analogy of the game further by dealing with how parents are able to

“successfully” or “unsuccessfully” participate in the game The chapter explores how particular notions of propriety are produced and how these, in turn, produce “successful” or

“unsuccessful” participation in the engagement game The notion of

engagement-as-resistance is introduced as a means of understanding how to resist particular categorisations that might position parents problematically Foucault’s understanding of how individuals attempt to escape the obsession with validity is examined in terms of ‘playing the same game differently’ (1984b:295) This notion of Foucault’s is used to illustrate how resistance to categorisation might be possible or might be used as a tool of “escape” Additionally, the chapter highlights examples of how such notions of game-playing work to produce particular forms of social and systemic practice in particular ways Aspects of game-playing such as those cited above and others, - how the game is played, how the field is negotiated, how the game is refereed and how the rules of the game are set - are explored

Chapter Nine highlights the issues and consequences of playing the game or of attempting to play the game differently, by examining continued policy reform that privileges notions of performativity, that is, the level of performance necessary to exist in categories that represent the “right thing to do” or the “right way to behave”(Ball, 1990, 1994, 2003a, 2003b, 2004; Jeffery, 2002) and responsibilisation (Rose, 1999, 2000) in relation to parent engagement as a

discursive product in post-millennial Queensland Concepts such as parent fatigue (Macfarlane, 2003, 2004) and anxiety are coined as possible outcomes of parent engagement

in the process of schooling, existing as a form of “performance anxiety” in the performativity game In view of what has preceded this chapter, notions of performativity, propriety, responsibilisation and pedagogicalisation illustrate how parents must engage in the schooling process The preceding information to this chapter has worked to inform this investigation in ways, which determine that currently in Queensland, particular levels of performance are necessary, for parents to be viewed as ethically responsibilised community members Meeting these new levels of performance takes significant social, cultural and economic capital and so, levels of fatigue and anxiety are more than possible in certain circumstances

These notions and resultant circumstances are presented as one story in relation to the

consequences and issues for parents and for schooling that may result from high levels of responsibilisation, governance (Rose, 1999, 2000) and performativity (Ball, 1990, 1994,

2000, 2003a, 2003b, 2004; Jeffery, 2002)

Chapter Ten returns to address the original research questions in this study The study’s significance, its implications for parents in the engagement process, its particular contributions to how parent participation in schooling has been understood historically and is understood and acted upon in post-millennial Queensland, its limitations and possible directions for future research are discussed This process is undertaken by examining the study’s contribution to epistemology in the field and further research in order to give the reader a succinct understanding of the issues relating to parent engagement in schooling that have emerged, the implications of these and the future directions that could be possible The chapter also points to significant areas of further research particularly in terms of parent engagement, finalising the story presented

As a summary, Figure 1 illustrates how the work in this thesis is both conceptualised and

undertaken

1 How were new schools to be established in

Queensland? How was Sunnyvale College to be

established?

2 What role did communities play in the establishment

of new schools?

3 What roles processes and procedures in establishing

a new school were enacted in the case of Sunnyvale

college?

4 How did the Sunnyvale parents understand their role

in relation to the schooling of their children and the

establishment of a new school?

Research questions

1 What are the conditions that now produce “success” or

“failure” for parents engaging in the schooling of their

children?

2 How can an analysis of these conditions inform theory about

parent/school relationships ?

Genealogical tools - Micro

1 Problematising – an anomaly – a problem of the present

2 Historicising parent/school relationships by working backwards through:

• The history of schooling in Australia and in Queensland from Leading Schools in 1997 to the Karmel Report in 1973

• Government and non-government schooling debates

• Key government policies relating to democratic localism and/or its limitation

• Relevant correspondence and texts relating to the Sunnyvale case

3 A macro and microanalysis including the above:

The “failure” of Sunnyvale College

Policy/discourse analysis - Macro

1 A macro and microanalysis including archival research and document searches

2 Re-theorising parent/school relationships