# data[].attributes.body
Teaching for Diversity is of key importance in creating and maintaining an inclusive classroom environment, where all learners feel welcomed, supported and valued. This portfolio contains six artefacts curated from in seminar learning, and research and insights from academics and teaching professionals, all of which I believe are important in developing my professional identity as a teacher for diversity. These artefacts are:

Artefact One – What Is Diversity?

This artefact contains my initial thoughts on diversity and what I believed diversity encompassed in Week One of this unit. I believe it is important to reflect on your learning journey and be a reflective practitioner throughout the course of your career and beyond. It also contains my learning intentions for this unit and the knowledge I hope to have acquired at the completion of the unit.

Artefact Two – An Analysis of the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians.

In this artefact, I analyse key aspects of the Melbourne Declaration that stand out to me in developing my professional identity and question whether the commitments set out in the declaration are achievable, applicable or relevant to students in 2018. Do these goals and commitments promote diversity or play a role in further marginalisation?

Artefact Three – Pauline Hanson’s comments on students with Autism Spectrum Disorder and other disabilities.

I included this artefact, as at the time the comments were made, it provoked much outrage from the public, and also forced me to question my own beliefs about integration and whether it benefits or further disadvantages students with additional needs.

Artefact Four – TED Talk by Dorinda Carter Andrews

Dorinda Carter Andrews’ TED Talk allowed me to make sense of the literature in this unit and forced me to reflect on own background and experiences and how they influence the way I teach. It also enabled me to understand how oppression based on race, culture and socioeconomic status is reinforced by the power and privilege of the education system.

Artefact Five – The Problems with Labelling

The reading by Linda Graham allowed me to reflect on the way the language used to describe and define students can have a detrimental impact on the way in which we view our students and can interfere with our efforts in getting to know them.

Artefact Five – A reflection on how my beliefs on diversity have changed?

As I stated in my rationale for Artefact One, I believe in the importance of being critically reflective as it assists us in becoming more effective teachers and allows us to further develop our professional identities and pedagogies.

My teaching philosophy echoes that of the Victorian Government’s Department of Educational and Training (2018) inclusion policy, that ‘all students are to be welcomed, accepted and engaged so that they can participate, achieve, and thrive in school life’. I believe that every student should receive a high-quality education, regardless of their race, culture, religion, class, gender or ability, but that these factors play a key role in their developing identities as both human beings, and as learners, and should be celebrated and valued. It is my mission to help students to realise that their individuality is something to be proud of and I value their diverse backgrounds and experiences and welcome them into my classroom. I aim to create a collaborative, supportive and safe classroom environment that supports and encourages all students and am committed to ongoing professional development to ensure that this is maintained. I acknowledge that I have the privilege and the power to make a positive difference in each and every one of my students lives and it is my responsibility to ensure that I work towards closing the achievement gap and promote equity in my classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
In the first seminar of this unit ‘Teaching for Diversity’, we were asked a number of introductory questions surrounding the topic of Diversity. The below responses were written during and directly after the seminar. I will revisit these questions at the end of Week 5 and reflect on how my views have changed over the course of the next five weeks.

What does it mean to teach for diversity?

·      Learning abilities

·      Social factors

·      Race, culture, religion

·      Knowing your students

·      Differentiation and scaffolding

·      Being inclusive

What do you hope to get out of this class?

What is diversity?

Why do we stereotype our students?

Deeper understanding of race/cultural factors

How to recognise diversity in the classroom

How to deal with diverse situations

How do we implement diversity into our pedagogy?

The relationship between the curriculum and diversity

Student centred pedagogy – diverse

Cultural awareness

What do you know?

My experience working in the field of Special Education has allowed to me gain insight and knowledge into how students with different intellectual abilities learn. It has taught me how to differentiate and scaffold learning and content, as well as strategies for dealing with challenging behaviour in both the mainstream and special education classrooms.

What do you want to know?

I want to delve deeper into the racial, cultural and social aspects of identity, how this impacts on students and discover how I ensure that my classroom is inclusive to all students. I want to know why there are students who continue to be left behind and how I can work with these students to ensure this cycle ends.

Is teaching for diversity important to you?

I believe that Teaching for Diversity is incredibly important, and I consider myself a socially just person. I believe that all students should have the same right to a quality education and believe that every individual on this earth matters. I don’t want to be a teacher who just focuses on the students that are performing well in the classroom, after all, the reason I chose to enter the profession was because I have always been drawn to people who have difficulties and I always want to help them to overcome these difficulties.

# data[].attributes.headline
Analysing the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians

# data[].attributes.subject
Analysing the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians

# data[].attributes.body
The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians was released by national and state government education ministers in December 2008. The declaration consists of two educational goals and eight commitments to action.

The two educational goals are:

• Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence

• All young Australians become:

- successful learners

- confident and creative individuals; and

- active and informed citizens (MCEETYA 2008, p.7)

The eight commitments to action are:

• Developing stronger partnerships

• Supporting quality teaching and school leadership

• Strengthening early childhood education

• Enhancing middle years development

• Supporting senior years of schooling

• Promoting world-class curriculum and assessment

• Improving educational outcomes for Indigenous youth and disadvantaged young Australians, especially those from low socio-economic backgrounds

• Strengthening accountability and transparency (MCEETYA 2008, pp.10-17)

Does the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians support the notion of ‘Teaching for Diversity’?

One of my biggest concerns with the Melbourne Declaration is that it was created by, what Keefe (2006, p.19) refers to as ‘the dominant elite’. How can it support the notion of ‘Teaching for Diversity’ with such a lack of diversity present in those responsible for the development of the policy? Who was consulted in the development of the policy? Keefe argues that ‘representation means empowering stakeholders and listening to the voices of all involved, particularly the voices and opinions of those individuals and groups who have previously been alienated from educational decision-making processes’ (2006, p.18). It is crucial for teachers to be critical of these policy documents, particularly by examining whose ideologies are being represented.

A key focus of the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians is to ‘support young people to develop a range of generic and employability skills that have particular application to the world of work and further education’ (MCEETYA 2008, p.13). In my opinion, this rejects the key goal of fostering ‘active and informed’ global citizens (MCEETYA 2008, p.7), and promotes further marginalisation of the diverse population of learners from various cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds.

The policy does address previous policy failures, such as failure ‘to improve educational outcomes for many Indigenous Australians’ and addresses that ‘this issue must be a key priority over the next decade’ (MCEETYA 2008, p.5). It also acknowledges that ‘Australian students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are under-represented among high achievers and over-represented among low achievers’ (MCEETYA 2008, p.5). However, in regard to educational outcomes for Indigenous Australians, Hogarth (2015, p.82) suggests that these statements ‘demonstrate the power elite’s resistance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self-determination’, and that ‘one of the major barriers to attaining equal status in Australia is the attitude which pervades society whereby (Indigenous Australians) are still considered to be unable and incapable of achieving success’ (Brady in Hogarth 2015, p.82).

Whilst broad education policies such as the Melbourne Declaration do aim to provide a commitment to ensuring educational equity for all Australians, the policy does fail in terms of addressing key issues faced by students in Australian schools today and its success heavily relies on federal and state budget allocations, which again reinforces the dominant elite’s influence on the education system in Australia.

How does the policy interface with the Australian Institute of Teaching and School Leadership Graduate Teacher Standards?

The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) suggest that in order to achieve the goals outlined in the Melbourne Declaration, there is a priority to ensure the improvement of the quality of teaching in Australian schools (2012, p.2). Thus, they argue that professional learning is crucial to ‘changing teacher and school leader behaviour in order to improve student outcomes to lead to sustainable change’ (AITSL 2012, p.2). This directly relates to Standard 6 of The AITSL Professional Standards for Graduate Teachers – Engage in Professional Learning. The Melbourne Declaration also includes commitments relating to Standard 1 – Know students and how they learn, particularly:

• 1.2 Understand how students learn

• 1.3 Students with diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds

• 1.4 Strategies for teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students

• 1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities; and

• 1.6 Strategies to support full participation of students with a disability (AITSL 2017).

The Melbourne Declaration implies that teachers play a crucial role in achieving the two educational goals stated in the policy, therefore the AITSL Standards are in line with the goals and commitments outlined.

How relevant is the Melbourne Declaration to your personal pedagogy?

I have raised some of my concerns regarding the Melbourne Declaration above, however it definitely raises key issues to be aware of in Australia’s education system and highlights the importance of Teaching for Diversity. I agree with the fundamental aim of the policy which is to improve the educational outcomes for all young Australians (MCEETYA 2008, p.7) but I also believe that it is my responsibility to ensure that I am taking the steps to meet the individual needs of my students and interpreting policy documents in a way that benefits the diverse needs of my students. In other words, I believe it is important to be critically aware that policy documents play a small role in how you create and maintain an inclusive classroom.

# data[].attributes.headline
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson says she will not apologise for her comments on students with autism.

# data[].attributes.subject
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson says she will not apologise for her comments on students with autism.

# data[].attributes.body
In June 2017, Senator Pauline Hanson once again hit the headlines, this time, for her comments on students with Autism Spectrum Disorder attending mainstream schools. Ms Hanson addressed the Senate regarding government funding for the education sector and in her argument stated that schools do not need more money, rather they need solutions to current educational issues. An issue she highlighted was her opinion that students with disabilities, including those with autism, were causing unnecessary stress on teachers and other students in the classroom. She stated that ‘these kids have a right to an education, by all means, but, if there are a number of them, these children should go into a special classroom and be looked after and given that special attention’ (Storyful News 2017).

At the time these comments were made by Senator Hanson, I had just commenced working as a Teacher’s Aide at an Autism Specific School after working in a number of Mainstream and Special Development Schools. Prior to this, I had not considered the implications of ‘mainstreaming’ students with intellectual or physical disabilities on teachers and students. I can recall two key moments that have strongly contributed to my developing pedagogy as a teacher for diversity. The first occurred when I was on my third-year practicum at a co-educational government school in Melbourne’s inner east. My mentor teacher was talking me through each of the students in her Year 9 English class and pointed to a photo of a student remarking, “Oh he has autism, you’ll be able to tell, but don’t worry about him because he’s really smart so you don’t have to do anything”. This statement made by my mentor teacher affirms Keefe’s argument that ‘in terms of dominant culture, those students with disabilities who were able to attend regular schools without added support or attention were welcomed and some students succeeded in making the transition’ (Keefe 2006, p.23). As a result of this student being academically skilled and therefore seemingly requiring no additional educational support, the teacher made the assumption that neither she nor I should ensure that we cater for his individual learning needs.

The second key moment occurred when I was working at a mainstream primary school with a student who had a severe intellectual and physically disability. This student was thirteen years old and was in Grade Five. For the most part of the day, he sat at his own desk for the entire day, facing a wall, whilst the other students sat at their grouped desks or on the floor. Due to his physical disability, he was only able to go outside when the other students were in class, which meant he sat inside, alone, during recess and lunch time. The teacher in the classroom did not engage with him once, as that was my job. This is a school that prides itself on being inclusive and employs many education support staff across all levels. Keefe (2006, p.23) explains that ‘those students with disabilities who required understanding and support were less successful as integration into the dominant culture was not always responsive to their specific needs’.

In an attempt to defend her claims, Senator Hanson clarified that she did not mean to say that students with disabilities ‘do not belong in the mainstream’, but rather ‘give them special attention, if they need that special attention’ (Bickers & Killoran 2017). She explained that teachers were unequipped to provide ‘an appropriate program for children with special needs’ (Bickers & Killoran 2017). I think that Ms. Hanson’s raises an interesting point. There are many schools attended by students with additional needs that do not have the resources, support staff or adequately trained teachers to cater for their individual needs. Keefe argues that ‘integration is therefore regarded as a physical change from special school to regular school without any movement by the dominant culture to accept or embrace diversity and difference’ (Keefe 2006, p.23). There is a huge difference between a traditional school that has students with additional needs in attendance, and inclusive schools. Keefe (2006, p.23) found that ‘integration policies in education failed to identify or address the specific needs of students with disabilities as they changed from special schools to regular schools’ (Keefe 2006, p.23). The Students with a Disability policy developed by the Victorian Government provides teachers and schools with guidelines about inclusive education, but does not focus on these specific needs.

My experiences in working as a teacher’s aide in a special education setting has provided me with invaluable experiences and strategies to ensure that I cater to the diverse needs of my students, particularly those with intellectual or physical disabilities. It has made me a passionate advocate in raising awareness about the issues these students face and how to ensure they have access to their fundamental right of an inclusive education. On my practicum rounds this year, I have been able to apply this knowledge into the mainstream classroom which has allowed me build stronger relationships with my students, adapt my lesson planning and content to suit their needs and make simple adjustments that can make a world of difference if you are aware of the issues our students face.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Consciousness Gap in Education - An Equity Imperative

# data[].attributes.subject
The Consciousness Gap in Education - An Equity Imperative

# data[].attributes.body
How does my own social location, my race, my class, my gender, my religion shape my mindset about teaching and learning, the students that I'm serving, and the practices that I act out? (Andrews 2014).

In order to Teach for Diversity, it is crucial that as teachers we take the time to critically reflect on our own backgrounds, beliefs and experiences and how these influence the way in which we teach and the way in which we view our students. Dorinda Carter Andrews’ TED Talk challenges educators around the world to reflect on the dominant culture in the education system, and the ways in which our mindsets can negatively affect our goals in achieving equity in the classroom.

Andrews (2014) argues that one of the key problems facing students from diverse backgrounds, is the education system’s ‘inability to name issues of power as fundamental to the racial and cultural divide’ and that once ‘we begin to examine power as part of the equation, we have a better understanding of how racism, oppression and issues of cultural bias work to undermine the academic performance of students of colour and low income students’.

This facet of diversity is one that I have previously been only superficially aware of. Due to the often-short duration of practicum in previous years, I have struggled to create meaningful relationships with my students and it something I deeply regret, as not only does it mean I have failed a fundamental part of teaching – knowing your students, but it also means that I have not been able to make a powerful difference in my students schooling experiences. This year, however, I have made a conscious effort to get to know my students on a deeper level by showing them that I am interested in their beliefs, unique backgrounds and experiences and that they are valued members of the classroom and society. I have reduced the amount of time I spend out the front of the classroom and instead sit with individuals or groups of students to promote a more collaborative approach. When a student shares an opinion or belief or experience, I thank them for their contribution. I would never shut down a response from a student because the message that sends to them is that their opinion or belief does not matter, and I believe that every student matters.  I frequently draw on students to ‘teach’ the rest of the class, for often they know more about a particular issue or topic than I do because they have lived it or experienced it or seen it.

Thomson argues that in order to change educational probabilities, ‘teachers’ working conditions must be such that they are able to find, use and value each child’s particular configurations of knowledges, narrative and interests’ (2002, p.8). We as teachers can promote change by firstly being critically aware that we are, in fact, the ones who are privileged in the system and we can use this privilege to either help our students or to harm them (Andrews 2014). This is key to understanding ‘the limits that can be set on learning by the contexts, opportunities and pedagogical practices to which young people are exposed and how these limits can be lifted, and their effects negated’ (Hart et al. 2004, p.167). It is inherent that teachers are critically aware of the ways in which their words and their actions can work to create an equitable classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
Labelling is a key issue facing students in the education system and is used to categorise students according to a number of factors such as ability, additional needs and behaviour. Many believe that labels are useful in identifying those students who require additional support, however along with these labels come stereotypes, pre-determined ideas or beliefs about a student, and a lack understanding. Linda Graham argues that labelling our students may prevent us from ever getting to know the student for who they are (2006, p.49) which can be detrimental to creating and maintaining a safe and inclusive classroom.

The school where I am currently attending practicum streams students according to academic ability. There is the ‘enhanced’ class, as they are labelled by teachers, and then everyone else. I have noticed through observation that many teachers at this school treat students according to their label. If they are in the enhanced class, they are smart, gifted, motivated, intelligent and capable learners. If they are on the bottom end, they are challenging, disruptive, rude, disrespectful, lacking in intelligence and a ‘problem class’. Graham argues that when we assign a group or individual with a particular label, ‘what we think about that student then becomes delimited by what we already think we know’ about that particular label (2006, p.49).

The way we think about students can have affect the way they act in the classroom. When I was told that one of my Year 8 classes was a ‘difficult class’ and ‘at the bottom end of the stream’, I had a predetermined view about these students before I had even met them. This influenced the way I entered the room, the way I introduced myself, the way I structured the first lesson and the way I composed myself. What I actually came to realise, after walking around the room and sitting with groups of students, was that these students had become accustomed to acting a particular way due to the way in which they were perceived by their teachers. By taking the time to begin a conversation, to learn about these students, their likes, their dislikes, their strengths and their weaknesses, I was able to change my mindset and view these students in a completely different and positive way.

Graham explains that ‘a deeper understanding of the power of language is important for teachers to be able to avoid being conduits and instead to become critical circuit breakers’ (Graham 2006, p.48). I had a CRT supervise on of my final lessons with this class, and before the students entered the room she said, “Good luck, they’re a tricky bunch”. Without thinking I quipped back, “I actually really enjoy working with this class, they’re great kids”. Her facial expression reminded me that we still have a very long way to go.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflection - How Have My Beliefs On Diversity Changed?

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflection - How Have My Beliefs On Diversity Changed?

# data[].attributes.body
The above image demonstrates how my beliefs about diversity have changed over the past five weeks. The words written in black were my initial thoughts on diversity and the words and phrases in red signify how these thoughts have changed over the course of this unit and the key concepts that are important to be critically aware of.

Over the past five weeks, through participating in seminars, completing the weekly readings, personal research and critical reflection, I have a much clearer view on what diversity is, the barriers that stand in the way of it and how I can teach for diversity. I acknowledge that my learning surrounding diversity is a continuing process and does not simply cease once this unit is completed. I am committed to taking all necessary steps to ensure that I create and maintain an safe and inclusive classroom for all of my students.

Kroll and Galguerra (2004, p.15) support the belief that student learning in the classroom is impacted by the relationship between ‘individual knowledge and institutionalised practices’ as well as the ‘broader socio-political setting and the function of the school as a societal institution’. School is an extension of life.  What continues to occur in schools in terms of marginalisation and exclusion with continue to occur in the world around us, if we as teachers do not make the conscious decision to be critically aware of these issues and take the necessary steps to make a positive difference. Kroll and Galguerra (2015, p.14) question whether the curriculum is accessible and meaningful to students? If it isn’t, teachers should work collaboratively to ensure changes are made. In my teaching method of English, I can push for a change in selected texts to ensure that these texts are accessible, meaningful and relevant to my students, that the characters face similar issues or come from similar and diverse backgrounds as my students. In my method of Drama, I can use Augusto Boal’s ‘Theatre of the Oppressed’ to explore current social and political issues and provide my students with an opportunity to express themselves and to give them a voice. None of this can occur without schools addressing educational disadvantage, power, privilege, the dominant culture and being committed to developing and implementing a school wide approach to being inclusive.

This unit has allowed me to reflect on my own identity, how my background and experiences influence the way I teach, how to reflect on these influences to ensure a commitment to teaching for diversity and how the diverse abilities, backgrounds and experiences of my students can be celebrated, valued and welcomed into my classroom learning environment.

# data[].attributes.body
Andrews, D. (2014). The consciousness gap in education - an equity imperative | Dorinda Carter Andrews. [video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOrgf3wTUbo [Accessed 11 Aug. 2018].

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2012). Australian Charter for the Professional Learning of Teachers and School Leaders: A shared responsibility and commitment. Melbourne: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, pp.1-9.

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2017). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. [online] Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. Available at: https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards [Accessed 15 Jul. 2018].

Bickers, C. and Killoran, M. (2017). One Nation leader Pauline Hanson says she will not apologise for her comments on students with autism. News.com.au, [online] p.1. Available at: https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/one-nation-leader-pauline-hanson-says-she-will-not-apologise-for-her-comments-on-students-with-autism/news-story/28c3d5151629ca2393d97b041c27ee1d [Accessed 8 Aug. 2018].

Department of Education and Training (2018). Students with a Disability. Melbourne: State Government of Victoria, p.1. Available at: http://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/principals/spag/participation/Pages/studentswithdisability.aspx[Accessed 3 Apr. 2018].

Graham, L. (2006). Done in by discourse or the problems with labelling. In: M. Keefe and S. Carrington, ed., Schools and Diversity, 2nd ed. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia, pp.46-64

Hart, S. et al. (2004). The Core Idea of Transformability. In: S. Hart et al., ed., Learning Without Limits. Berkshire: Open University Press, pp.165-193.

Hogarth, M. (2015). A critical analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan. Masters. Queensland University of Technology, p.82.

Keefe, M. (2006). The Inclusive Society. In: M. Keefe and S. Carrington, ed., Schools and Diversity, 2nd ed. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia, pp.17-30.

Kroll, L.R. and Galguerra, T. (2004). Teaching and Learning to Teach as Principle Practice. In: L.R. Kroll et al., ed., Teaching as Principled Practice: Managing Complexity for Social Justice. New York: Sage Publications, pp.1-15.

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. Melbourne: Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, pp.1-19.

Storyful News (2017). Far-Right Senator Pauline Hanson Wants Autistic Children Removed From Mainstream Classrooms (Full). [video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8ewlyRaFEs [Accessed 17 Aug. 2018].

Thomson, P. (2002). Schooling the Rustbelt Kids: Making the Difference in Changing Times. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, pp.1-18.