House debates

Wednesday, 11 September 2019

Bills

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020, Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2019-2020, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020; Consideration in Detail

4:32 pm

Photo of Andrew LamingAndrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you. I want to mention the unique student identifier and, in particular, the progress that is being achieved with the USI. Since 1 January 2015 we've had the USI in place, particularly in vocational education, for international students, for Australian students studying overseas and for New Zealand students studying here in Australia. I for one was really encouraged by Gonski 2.0 and their recommendation that we move more broadly to a USI. I understand that's the intention of government and has bipartisan support, which is important. I want to go through some of the big opportunities that come with the USI and some of the forgone opportunities in a policy sense, in a quality sense, of not having one and encourage us to move in this direction.

A USI offers opportunities as early, potentially, as the early education phase. There has been lots of commitment on both sides of the House in the zero to eight years and, more specifically, the 18 months to five years stage. With the jurisdictional challenge of talking here in Canberra but ultimately not actually directly running a school, we want to see that students are absolutely ready to go when they hit prep. We know there are slightly different rules about access to preschool in each of the jurisdictions, but what is lacking is the ability to track a student from early education all the way through to prep and then onwards through to either a vocation or a higher education path.

Why is it costing us at the moment in the early education space? Quite simply, in many cases we don't yet have effective cooperation to identify, at an early stage, struggling and vulnerable students prior to their arriving at prep. We've got to take pressure off teachers. As has been pointed out, there's plenty of experience on the other side, with teachers who now serve in this place. You'd well know just how much impact struggling students in prep can have. The AEDI points that out. In most parts of Australia, even relatively wealthy parts of Australia, up to 15 per cent of students in prep, from that sample done in the AED Census, are deemed as vulnerable in at least one of those five domains. So it's a serious business, and we know that the earlier we intervene the better.

We've had significant overseas models considered here in Australia. There's always a temptation to develop your own models. But Abecedarian, which has come out of the University of North Carolina, is probably the largest enhanced reading and early intervention model in the world and has been culturally tested in every corner. It has been picked up by Queensland and the Northern Territory. Congratulations to them. Initially, it went out of the University of Melbourne. But the then Newman LNP government in Queensland invested, and Labor, right on their tail, continued these regional coordinators to try to identify students that were falling behind in that early education space. Actually, it's not just about therapy; it's not just about doctors and therapists. It's enhanced education as well, and that's not just a matter of sitting kids in circles and reading to a group; it's one to one. That kind of intervention, I hope, will yield dividends in Queensland.

What's the problem and how is it related to the USI? Well, the issue is—to take one example—that a Catholic Centrecare childcare centre still can't provide data on the progress of students to the prep class over the fence in the Catholic primary school. I think that's completely unacceptable. There have been repeated conversations with Catholic Education about this issue. They continue to cite privacy and lack of consent from parents as a reason not to do so much as send their prep teacher down to talk with Centrecare about the kids over the fence. This is unbelievable. This is absolutely unacceptable in a developed economy, and I'll keep saying it to Catholic Education. They need to work together. These children are on a continuum. It's not good enough to say, 'We're going to go and have a little chat a few months before they come into prep.' You've got to start when those children arrive in early learning. You've got to raise the capacity of your early learning workers to identify children who are vulnerable. And you need parental consent when you enrol in the Centrecare preschool so that if there is a problem you can actually pull in allied heath workers. At the moment, that is something that needs to happen.

The fundamental element of the USI, and this is more relevant to ministries like employment, is the skilling initiatives of the current government. Over $500 million is being invested. They recognise that in the absence of a USI you can't adequately track a student all the way through the vocational pathway. The student effectively falls into a blind dustbin of vocational education where it's a tick—you pass or fail—and we don't know if foundation skills are improving. You can't have a nation at the cutting edge of the world's economies if you're not pushing the foundation skills of literacy and numeracy in your vocational cohort. They're either getting a certificate or they're not. It's not good enough. I hope the USI will be a way of changing that. Minister, I'd really appreciate understanding and knowing the progress that we're achieving with the USI.

Comments

No comments