Kenway’s article, ‘Challenging inequality in Australian schools: Gonski and beyond’, uses a socio-cultural perspective to address inequality in education, the Gronski report as a basis to her analysis. Inequality is addressed through the study of funding and segregation in catholic, nongovernment and government schools in order to underpin advantages and disadvantages of these schooling sectors. In this article, Kenway argues that when inequality is spoken of in the public, the media and within the education system, it is quite general in providing specificity of the issue. Particularly, in the Gonski report, due to its vague idea of the Great Moral Wrong, a concept which Kenway argues is epitomised through how the intellectual abilities of
…show more content…
Providing different perspectives of academic and factual pieces of evidence, to convince the audience that inequality in Australian schools is anything but timid.
Kenways argument as to the apprehensive nature of inequality in education is definitely plausible. Inequality and hierarchal ranking according to results and student success have become the focus in current day society, as depicted through the advertisements of HSC results and school rankings in the media.
However, Gonski’s ‘performance inequality graph’ and Kenway’s analysis of the table can be challenged in terms of the argument stating that nongovernment schools would more often then not accept bottom quartile students. When infact, as depicted through school result advertising, government school’s would accept students of top quartile to promote success of the school.
Furthermore, in terms of her argument suggesting that disadvantaged students are more likely to attend government schools is also quite misleading. Due to the fact that in many Catholic schools and other Religious schools, on occasions tuition fee waivers are given to students struggling financially or are disadvantaged in living
Providing different perspectives of academic and factual pieces of evidence, to convince the audience that inequality in Australian schools is anything but timid.
Kenways argument as to the apprehensive nature of inequality in education is definitely plausible. Inequality and hierarchal ranking according to results and student success have become the focus in current day society, as depicted through the advertisements of HSC results and school rankings in the media.
However, Gonski’s ‘performance inequality graph’ and Kenway’s analysis of the table can be challenged in terms of the argument stating that nongovernment schools would more often then not accept bottom quartile students. When infact, as depicted through school result advertising, government school’s would accept students of top quartile to promote success of the school.
Furthermore, in terms of her argument suggesting that disadvantaged students are more likely to attend government schools is also quite misleading. Due to the fact that in many Catholic schools and other Religious schools, on occasions tuition fee waivers are given to students struggling financially or are disadvantaged in living