Education Policy 'At Risk'

Governments worldwide consider the need to increase school retention and educational attainment to be so self-evident that both this need and its rationale have become a hegemonic discourse that is taken for granted. In their chapter Susan Groundwater-Smith and Nicole Mockler have raised key questions that challenge this discourse, contrasting the evidence for the economic versus social returns from schooling. These are valid and crucial arguments, which I will add to in this response. In relation to the first controversy - that global policies regarding school retention fail disengaged young people at the local level - by providing an historical analysis of school retention policy in Australia. This highlights the way economic purposes have pushed equity concerns aside over time. In relation to the second controversy - that for some young, disengaged and marginalised students schools are not the solution but may be the problem - by exploring non-linear pathways and alternative education. My argument is that rather than young people being ‘at risk’, education policy itself is ‘at risk’: of not enabling its own goals to be met, and of letting down the young Australians it should be supporting.