The maintenance, or in some cases revival, of Aboriginal languages has become an important issue to Aboriginal people, and should be an important issue in Aboriginal schools if local people show concern about it. There is good reason for this concern. Predictions vary among linguists about how vulnerable Aboriginal languages are. There are about fifty Aboriginal languages spoken today. One informed estimate is that by the year 2000 a dozen of these will still be naturally reproducing themselves, that is, still spoken spontaneously by young children. Another informed estimate is that by that time only about three languages will be vigorous and spoken by children. These three are the related Yolngu languages in North East Arnhem Land, the related Western Desert languages of which Pitjantjatjara is the best known, and Kriol which is a new Aboriginal language and the largest, and growing rapidly.

Our assumption that there is a best way to go about language maintenance is not supported by a well established theory that can be applied in all contexts. Even though a good deal is known about language shift there is not agreement among linguists about what causes it in different situations. For example, it is assumed that isolation would help Aboriginal languages to stay strong, and that closeness to a large town would cause an Aboriginal language to weaken under pressure from English. But linguists have pointed out that some really isolated Aboriginal communities seem to be losing their language and that the language of some groups living near towns is staying stronger. It has also been assumed that if a community has one dominant Aboriginal language then it will remain stronger than those languages in a community where there are a number of different languages in use. Again linguists have observed that that is not always the case.

1988, the year of the Bicentenary, was considered by some as the start of a new era for Aborigines. However, despite excellent media exposure on Aboriginal issues, the bicentennial year concluded with just memories of various celebrations.

We enter the 1990s at a time of increasing change throughout the world. I believe that it is necessary for everyone involved in Aboriginal education to focus on some important issues that encompass this delicate area.

In the Plenary Address to the Cross Cultural Issues in Educational Linguistics Conference held at Batchelor in 1987, Mandawuy Yunupingu, Principal at Yirrkala Community School, expressed the hope that a school using ‘both-ways’ curriculum would help Aboriginal people regain control of their lives. Among other things he states,

Several months ago I was asked by a neighbour-friend, ‘Mrs James’, to help her get her eleven year-old son, ‘Stephen’ and eight year-old daughter, ‘Katherine’, back to school. Mrs James was in hospital in Sydney at the time, recovering from a serious operation, while Mr James, an invalid pensioner, was trying to look after the two remaining children at home. (An older son is with foster parents).

Stephen had missed more than 100 days of school in 1988 and had not returned to school in 1989. Katherine had a somewhat better attendance record but had stopped going to school when her mother went off to Sydney. Stephen’s and Katherine’s absences had been drawn to the attention of the home-school liaison officers.

The author was fortunate to be awarded a New South Wales Teaching Service Fellowship for 1990 to undertake an investigation of the professional development of teachers, including executive, in schools with significant Aboriginal enrolments. This fellowship was undertaken in South Australia over a four-week period in March and April this year.

Perhaps the highlight of this investigation was the emphasis placed on appropriate and adequate induction programs within the human resource management portfolio of the South Australian Department of Education.

On August 23, the Aboriginal educators, Kathy, Bruce and myself, and the cultural officer, Doug Nicholls, spent the day at Mallan School, which is about 20 minutes drive from Swan Hill into New South Wales.

When we arrived by bus the children, parents and teacher had the fires already going. Doug and Bruce, with the help of half of the students, put the clay balls in the fire while Kathy and I organised the other half of the students to paint one another’s faces along with the teacher and the parents. After everyone had their faces painted, they checked to see if the clay balls were hot enough to cook their lunches. Their lunches ranged from fish, chicken, duck, potatoes to eggs.

After putting the tucker on to cook, Doug and Bruce led everyone for a walk through the bush, showing them scarred trees and finding some red ochre. Bruce showed the children how to mix the red ochre with water.

The aim of comparative studies in education is to improve our understanding of our own problems of education at the national level. In the words of Phillip E. Jones (1973:24), “Comparative education can lead us to understanding, sympathy and tolerance”. More than that, it is hoped that it can lead to improved circumstances for Australia’s most disadvantaged minority group – the Aborigines.

The Aborigines were the first people to have a social system in Australia. That system, however, has undergone dramatic change in the last 200 years at the hands of ‘white’ migrants. Changes in educational policy in Australia have been largely a reaction to what the ruling majority has regarded as the ‘Aboriginal problem’. Schooling for Aborigines thus moved, early this century, from an era of mission schools and reserves to ‘formal’ schooling which was introduced in the 1960’s. Policies then shifted in turn from ‘assimilation’ to ‘integrationism’ to ‘self-determination’ and self-government’ for the Aborigines.

During a four-week period in March and April, 1990, I had the opportunity to visit several Aboriginal and mainstream public schools in South Australia as part of a Fellowship sponsored by the New South Wales Department of School Education.

The selection of South Australia as a location to visit was recommended to the author by various colleagues in Aboriginal education who considered that “many fine things were happening” in South Australia in the area of Aboriginal education. My impressions confirmed what I had been told by others.

In Vol.16 No.3, p.37, we published an article by Mr Kerr entitled “A Metaplan Approach to Needs Assessment”. This was an outline of an approach used by the Aboriginal Education Unit, Kalgoorlie Education Centre, W.A. to determine the educational needs of Aboriginal Communities. One of the target groups selected for this program was a group of traditional Aboriginal people from the remote community of Coonana. Mr Kerr now writes:

The following is a copy of the report on the project sent to the Coonana School.

The main focus of this analysis will be on three programs, in particular Milingimbi, Bamyili and Yuendumu.

J. Harris and J. Sandefur (1984) define bilingual education as “the use of two languages in a well organised program”. The NT Department of Education’s Bilingual Education leaflet (1987) extends this definition to include the qualifications –

The analysis examines how the documents approach – if at all – several different aspects of Aboriginal education as expressed in particular by Aboriginal women, the traditional educators of Aboriginal children (Gale, 1983). These aspects include:-

1. – Aboriginal Learning Styles

2. – Parental and Community Involvement

3. – The Child as an Individual

4. – Teaching Staff – Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal

5. – Curriculum Content – Aboriginal History; Aboriginal Studies (general); Integration into Other Subjects: and Relevance of Content

6. – Research-based Teaching

7. – Languages

8. – Racism

9. Misinterpretation of Basic Aboriginal Philosophies

10. – Resources

This paper is a report on a recent study of urban Aboriginal children at home and at school, in Adelaide. It will mostly describe the situation for just three of the students in one reception / Year one classroom, as they are representative of many Aboriginal students in the other classroom which was closely studied, and in classrooms whose teachers I interviewed, or who were observed by me. In other words, the situation that I am describing for Naomi, Jason and Terry is, I believe, similar to the situation for many young Aboriginal students in urban classrooms in South Australia. Naomi, Jason and Terry were three physically attractive, energetic, bright and curious five year olds. Outside the classroom they were articulate and confident but inside the classroom, by the end of the year, they were in the lowest academic group for their age, considered troublesome by their teacher, and were largely ostracised by their non-Aboriginal peers.

The Hon. John Dawkins (then) Minister for Employment, Education and Training, launched the Aboriginal Education Policy at a grand event in the Committee Room at Parliament House on 26th October 1989. The Prime Minister blessed the occasion with his presence and a short speech. Three of the former Chairs of the the National Aboriginal Education Committee were there, as were Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educationists from most Australian states. Only New South Wales, which decided to boycott the launch, wasn’t officially represented.

There are two reasons for calling the policy that the Minister launched the Aboriginal Education Policy. Firstly, because it is the first policy formally endorsed by any National government; and secondly, because it responds to the call made in the 1988 Report of the Aboriginal Education Policy Task Force, for a concerted national effort –

As Lecturer and Curriculum Writer: Mathematics for the Anangu Teacher Education Program, I write to share some of the successes of a Maths workshop which I facilitated for the program’s Stage 3 students, 26 February to 2 March 1990.

I have included a brochure for further information regarding the Anangu Teacher Education Program (ANTEP).

The research on which this article is based was undertaken at Pularumpi, Melville Island, Northern Territory in 1984-85. At the time I was employed as the adult educator for Pularumpi, and was conducting courses and classes which involved mathematics at various levels - a course in metrication for the technical staff; mathematics for specific purposes for the health workers, police aides, Council and Housing Association bookkeepers, and for the Essential Services apprentices.

In all this I was never too sure of my methodology: what was the most effective way of helping these adults to learn? The basic problem was that I had no information of their pre-knowledge - the mathematical knowledge they possessed prior to their entry into the classes. Most had formal education to a secondary level, a few had completed secondary schooling in Darwin, Perth or Melbourne, with mixed results. Beyond that formal knowledge, however, I needed to know the students mathematical preconceptions so that I could more effectively assist them to learn the specific purpose mathematics they needed for the jobs they held.

In 1984, the Northern Territory Education Department published a paper by Pam Harris, Money in Aboriginal Communities. This was the first academic work I had encountered which addressed my needs as an educator in this area. Harris examined modern shopping practices and posited a theory of attitudes to numeracy. This information was presented in a readable form and in an effort to assist educators of Aboriginals in mathematics.