The literature describes a number of barriers and enablers to successful—or in some cases, any—collaboration between schools and communities.
3.3.1 Discerning Reality from Myth, Assumptions and Speculation
Examples of myths that require countering include parents comprising the entire school community, and that communities are homogenous and not qualified to contribute to the curriculum and pedagogical aspects of schooling (Freebody et al., 2011). Groundwater- Smith (2011) identifies ‘negative, even hostile conceptualisations of the community’ (p. 94) as a significant barrier.
The concept of ‘community’ is often misunderstood to mean just parents, exclusive of others. This makes some sense, in that the children belong to the parents, and the school in effect belongs to the children. Freebody et al. (2011) explain this issue as one caused by the perception that ‘how the community can “help their school” can equate to “how parents can help their own children”’ (p. 70). This focus is narrow, putting additional pressure on parents without consideration for other, wider possible productive collaborations, opportunities and benefits.
Freebody et al. (2011) emphasise the importance of:
educators developing realistic, relevant and productive relationships with local communities that are based on actual understandings of particular communities, rather than on assumptions, stereotypes or ideals. (p. 77)
Having a poor understanding of the community is a significant barrier, and this includes awareness of the schooling experiences of parents and caregivers, which may have created a negative perception of formal schooling. A lack of understanding is also likely to be coupled with a negative perception of cultural capital in the home, and ignorance about cultural resources in the community (Groundwater-Smith, 2011).
54
Misunderstanding and reliance on “myth” conflict with educational theory and research, given the notion that ‘the most effective school-community relationships consist of the community having a genuine effect on the core business of schools–what happens in the classroom’ (Freebody et al., 2011, p. 77). This is unlikely to occur if there is not some genuine understanding of the real experience of students, their families and community (Freebody et al., 2011; Groundwater-Smith, 2011; Moll, Amanti, Neff & Gonzalez, 1992).
3.3.2 Neoliberalism, Teacher Accountability and Time
As previously identified, there is a significant amount of research that supports collaboration between schools and communities as an effective way supporting student achievement and wellbeing, particularly for Indigenous students. The international literature, however, suggests that neoliberal trends in education are preventing schools’ adoption of collaborative practices (Bottrell, 2011; Bottrell & Goodwin, 2011e). There is an adverse tendency towards initiatives affecting low-income and Indigenous families to narrowly focus on teacher competence, teaching quality and assessment reporting, which comes at the expense of productive partnerships. This is compounded by increased accountability requirements that take considerable teacher and school leader time, preventing other activities that would help achieve broad social justice aims (Bottrell, 2011).
Rather than focusing on the managerial and technical aspects of teaching, Bottrell (2011) advocates for engaged teachers, those who actively champion social justice issues and are committed to overcoming disparities in education through individual and community development. In so doing, an engaged teacher will build relationships with community partners to reduce marginalisation of students traditionally underserved by education on the basis of race, class or gender. The community context becomes a way of achieving collective decision making and community mobilisation, as opposed to making excuses for the underachievement of particular groups. Bottrell (2011) recognises that it takes time to develop relationships that will contribute to effective collaboration. Even when teachers and schools recognise the benefits, time constraints mean that sustainability can difficult to achieve. To overcome this, it is suggested that a shift of focus from teacher
55
competence to teacher engagement is required. Teacher time should be devoted to community collaboration and engagement, to prevent the technical aspects of teaching from suffocating an already time-poor profession (Bottrell, 2011).
3.3.3 Teachers from Non-Indigenous Groups Teaching Cultural Content
Teachers’ values, attitudes and ideologies are considered important characteristics for successfully teaching Indigenous students. To be effective, educators require favourable dispositions towards Indigenous world views (Castagno & Brayboy, 2008). However, research does not propose that teachers must be of the same cultural background as students to be effective collaborators. For example, McWilliams, Maldonado-Mancebo, Szczepaniak and Jones (2011) discussed the experience of a non-Native American teacher teaching in a NICE programme, successfully delivering Native American curriculum. The teacher described her journey as having moved from initial suspicion due to traditional cultural paternal hierarchies and beliefs, to her skills and value as a teacher being embraced and recognised by community elders.
Research highlights the need for consistency and reliability over time to build high-trust relationships, essential for successful collaboration (Groundwater-Smith, 2011; McWilliams et al., 2011). The research also suggests that the ethnic composition of staff is less important than the values, beliefs and attitude that they have about the Indigenous community they collaborate with.
3.3.4 Schools and Communities Operating in Isolation from Each Other
Traditionally, children were educated in or close to their homes. Schools then became stand-alone institutions with rules and constructs that separated children from home, and took over the primary preparations for the work force (Coleman, 1987). Bottrell and Goodwin (2011b) describe schools as being ‘not entirely cut off from the wider community’, but also as ‘bounded institutions insulated from the surrounding cultural forms and practices’ (p. 4–5). When schools are isolated from their community in this manner, it is difficult for them to form relationships and collaborate with other groups. This relates to Te Riele’s (2011) observation about class differences in towns as having a
56
distinct feeling of ‘us and them’, reflecting the Australian colloquial saying of ‘being from the wrong side of the tracks’ (p. 215).
Freebody et al. (2011) explain that some local communities resist collaboration with government or state agencies due to historical failures to support Indigenous students in schooling:
School-community relationships will falter if we fail to realise the ambiguity of the role of schooling in increasingly conflicted and individualistic societies such as contemporary Australia, and the deep and not obviously unjustified ambivalence that some communities, cultures and groups feel towards the promises made by mainstream schooling. (p. 76)
Deloria and Wildcat (2001) point to the need for Indigenous communities to engage more in schooling, and particularly for Indigenous leadership and contribution to initiatives that target children of their own cultural background.
3.3.5 Other Issues and Opportunities
A number of lesser barriers to collaboration can also be identified in the research, including communication; schools’ exclusive focus on current students and located community, limiting wider, global perspectives; questions about the legitimacy of membership in the community, i.e., how deep people’s ties are and how their perspectives are weighted in the school ethos and decision making; cultural sensitivities and the perception that if someone engages with a school, others from the same community should not interfere. To some, it can appear that the community as a whole is uninterested and uncaring. There are also concerns about student privacy, if for instance people not employed by schools are able to observe students or access information about student achievement and then share what they have learnt with other people outside of the school (Freebody et al., 2011).
Communication between schools and communities is often one-sided, and can be considered tokenistic. Groundwater-Smith (2011) reflects on ‘how paradoxical it is that while we can make a strong case for more substantial two-way interaction, little of it takes place in any authentic way’ (p. 92). For example, schools often present information to the community through reports, instead of consultation or as an invitation to work collaboratively.
57