Norah Hosken and Sophie Goldingay School of Health and Social Development Social Work

1. Affirming that everyone belongs: Practical and philosophical issues in teaching students from low socio-economic status backgrounds Norah Hosken and Sophie Goldingay School of Health and Social Development Social Work

2. What does it mean to be from a low SES background? Is that all I am? “I grew up in Dog Swamp- a working class suburb. I walked out of school at 15 years of age – no one stopped me. I worked for a while, saved and then did an intensive year to matriculate at a Technical college. I got in to a University- worked part time all the way through. I was lonely at University. Most of the other students seemed to have gone there already with friends. They all had nice teeth – family must have been able to afford braces. I was devastated when I got my first essay assessment, ever, at University back. I passed but the only written comment on my paper was – “This is a non-event”.

3. What does it mean to be from a low SES background? Is that all I am? Need to be careful to recognise the “complex intersectionality” of peoples identities and experiences. (Choo & Ferree 2010 p.137) Be sensitive to the effects of classed, racialised and gendered practices, and peoples experiences of fluid identities (Diversi & Moreira 2008) Draws from my current PhD study.

4. Statistics The Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) has a high proportion of students who: • are from a low SES background (24%), • are first in family (15%); • gain access to the course through a TAFE qualification (29%) rather than as secondary school leavers (13%) • are mature aged (Deakin University, Strategic Intelligence and Planning Unit SES pivot tables ‘Domestic Enrolments 2007 – 2010).

5. Social context issues Devlin (2011) argues – the taken for granted assumptions, values and expectations familiar to middle class students are not (necessarily) familiar to the majority of working class students. Leading to problems with: • Comprehending material • Adjusting to teaching styles • Demonstrating knowledge and skill to the ‘expected’ standard

6. What are these hidden values and assumptions? • Hard to identify if you’ve been brought up with it – hence challenging for academics to make them explicit • Some students don’t value what they bring to the learning endeavour – assumption that middle class ‘ways’ superior

7. From our observations of working with diverse students they are: • Importance of the ARGUMENT (Graff, 2003) • Importance of the ‘independent learner’ (Read et al., 2003) • Importance of conventions such as individual ownership of ideas and referencing them • Meanings of academic words like ‘discuss’ in assignments, and practices like ‘critical thinking’ • Knowing who to ask for what, when, and how

8. Lawrence (2005) • Seeking the right help in the right places – e.g. asking lecturers and tutors for help • Seeking and offering and receiving feedback in tactful ways • Expressing disagreement (in the right way!)

9. Practical issues for low SES students and teachers

10. What can I do as an academic/ teacher? • Clarify the mystery of the conventions of literary practice (Lillis, 2001)

11. What can I do as an academic/ teacher? • Engage in dialogue with students to create shared meanings and understandings – a “mutual respect inquiry approach” across similarities and differences (Hosken 2010; 2011). • This occurs in context of acknowledgement of the dominant knowledge system in the university and the greater responsibility on those with the most power and access to resources to change (Goldingay et al 2011; Hosken 2010). • Mutual mentoring (Hosken 2010) • Write curriculum that allows students to see themselves in the discipline (Hosken 2010; Hosken current research 2011-2014)

12. What can I do as a teacher? • Flexibility to enable realistic timeframes with assignments • Explicit explanation of expectations including the very basics – e.g. work needs to be argument-based, it needs to follow orderly linear sequence and weigh up competing views – only part of the story • Avoid deficit approaches – adopt ‘discourse’ approach – university adapt to fit the diverse students (Zepke & Leach, 2005). • Develop awareness of own teaching content and practice – how embedded is it in Western middle-class epistemology and discourse? (Goldingay et al. 2011; Hosken 2010).

13. “After class, a student asked me how to read the information that was on the power-point and handout that was placed in columns. It was explained to me that columns had not been used in their primary school education in Sudan. The student described the process used to understand my class. He heard my English spoken words, looked at and read the English power point and handouts, converted that in his mind to his oral Southern Sudanese tribal language, took notes in Arabic, and converted everything to English at home. He also clarified for me that Arabic is written from right to left (opposite to English) and his created visual learning challenges for him in understanding diagrams and columns, in particular. I reflected on how much of my taken for granted teaching practice was shaped by, and immersed in, Western thinking and presentation” (Hosken, 2010 p.6).

14. A two-way process of development • “two-way process of change and development” (Bamber & Tettas cited in Devlin, 2011, p. 7). • This means that the university and the students are encouraged to “understand the value of the discourse or code they already possess, as well as to understand the value of the alternate one” (Priest as cited in Devlin, 2011, p. 7).

15. Two-way process Goldingay et al 2011Epistemological equity continuum StudentsProgression of academic skills in first year, to be increasingly practice based by fourth year University/Schools/DisciplinesProgression of epistemological equity skills stages Fourth year Fourth year Epistemological equity Third year Third year Practice Skills Epistemological humility Second year Second year Epistemological unawareness Academic Skills First year First year Epistemological assimilation

16. Epistemological Continuum (Goldingay et al. 2011 Adapted from Mason et al., 1996).

17. References Choo, H & Ferree, M (2010), 'Practicing Intersectionality in Sociological Research: A Critical Analysis of Inclusions, Interactions, and Institutions in the Study of Inequalities', Sociological Theory, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 129-49. Devlin, M. (2011). Bridging socio-cultural incongruity: Conceptualising the success of students from low socio-economic backgrounds in Australian higher education. Studies in higher Education. Retrieved 11 February from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.613991 Goldingay, S., Macfarlane, S., Hitch, D., Hosken, N., Lamaro, G., Farrugia, D., Nihill, C. & Ryan, J. (2011). A framework for academic skill development: Study Report. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University. Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. London: Yale University Press. Hosken, N. (2010). Social work and welfare education without discrimination. Are we there yet? Practice Reflexions, 5(1). Hosken, N. (in press). Developing and Enacting an Ethical Framework and Method for Cross-Cultural Research. In T. McKenna, J. White & M. Vicars (Eds.), Discourse, Power, Resistance: Down Under’, Vol 1, : Sense.

18. References Lawrence, J. (2002). The deficit discourse shift: University teachers and their role in helping first year students persevere and succeed in the new university culture. Paper presented at the 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference. Retrieved from http://eprints.usq.edu.au/5471/1/Lawrence_6th_Pacific_Rim_Conf_AV.pdf Lawrence, J. (2005). Addressing diversity in higher education: Two models for facilitation student engagement and mastery. Research and Development in Higher Education 14(5), 469-81 Lillis, T. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation, desire. London: Routledge. Priest, A. (2009). ‘I have understanding as well as you’: Supporting the language and learning needs of students from low socio economic status backgrounds. Journal of Academic Language and Learning 3, no. 3: A1–A12. Read, B., L. Archer, and C. Leathwood. (2003). Challenging cultures? Student conceptions of ‘belonging’ and ‘isolation’ at a post-1992 university. Studies in Higher Education 28, no. 3: 261–77. Zepke, N., and L. Leach. (2005). Integration and adaptation: Approaches to the student retention and achievement puzzle. Active Learning in Higher Education 6, no. 1: 46–59.