Identifying "the target population"
Subtitle: a genealogy of policy-making for English as a second language (ESL) in Australian schools (1947--1997).
Published: 2005
Language: eng
Number of pages: 472
Subjects: English language -- Study and teaching -- Australia -- Foreign speakers -- History.; Education and state -- Australia -- History.
Description: In 1997, after twenty-eight years of supporting English as a Second Language (ESL) programs for immigrant schoolchildren---and despite evidence of considerable and mounting need---the Australian federal government limited its funding to new arrivals only. This thesis attempts to explain how and why this happened. Its specific contribution is as case study that deploys the notions of "population," "pedagogic discourse," "governmental alliance" and "claims" as key explanatory tools to show how ESL connects with concerns designated as "mainstream."I argue that a secure place for ESL in policy-making would require its claims to be recognised as both normal and distinctive. However, such claims have never escaped being identified with a supposedly abnormal population that deviates from unspecified and unspecifiable pedagogic norms. In Australian schools, this identifcation began in the 1950s with teachers' claims that immigrant children disrupted normal classrooms and should be removed. These claims were finally acknowledged with the 1969 Child Migrant Education Program, whose separate status established ESL as a distinctive pedagogical field in schools. Rejecting its founding assumptions and those of mainstream policy-making alliances, the field drew from the emerging discourses of language learning research and multiculturalism to claim that ESL needs were normal and meeting them was socially desirable.Needs proved openended in supporting claims, which became problematic. Likewise, how to identify legitimate ESL learners remained unresolved. By the mid-1980s, again under Labor, these problems fed into a mainstream perception that ESL was a prime contributor to escalating claims, accountability failures and curriculum "fragmentation." Administrative and educational reforms delegitimated needs by installing centrally determined outcomes, which erased ESL's specificity as a pedagogic discourse, submerged its learners within a "disadvantaged" and later an "at risk" population, and so, once again, disallowed ESL's claims.Framing claims as self-evidently flowing from needs was instituted in 1972 under a Labor government. Believing that separate provision was stigmatising and divisive, policy-makers "mainstreamed" school ESL in 1976, which delegitimated its distinctive pedagogy. In 1979, a non-Labor government reversed this decision. In situations where ESL teachers' work was clearly identifiable, it came to be accepted as normal and valuable.
Notes: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Toronto, 2005.

Electronic version licensed for access by U. of T. users.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-06, Section: A, page: 2139.