Learning From Alternative Schools to Enhance School Completion

Abstract

International organizations, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), as well as governments in OECD member countries are implementing policies aimed at increasing secondary school completion rates. Some decades ago, the senior secondary years were an exclusive option for an elite minority. Now, a common expectation is that they will cater to 90% or so of young people. However, too often the practices in contemporary schooling contexts have not kept up with this change. In particular, there is extensive evidence that concerning numbers of socially and educationally marginalized students are rejected by, and themselves reject, mainstream schooling. As a result, in many jurisdictions alternative educational provision has been central to re-engaging young people and enabling their secondary school completion. Such provision includes “flexible,” “second-chance,” or “alternative” schools that, although not all the same, often have in common an inclusive and democratic approach to educating young people who have not been well served in mainstream schools. Rather than such alternative schools being seen only as a useful “stop-gap” measure for marginalized students, they offer a valuable opportunity to re-imagine education. Such sites demonstrate structural, relational, and curricular changes that enable a range of education and learning options. First, in terms of structures, practical support and wraparound services are central to removing or alleviating structural barriers and clearing a path for learning. Second, supportive relationships are significant in enhancing the quality of young people’s educational experiences and outcomes. In particular, connectedness and partnerships are key factors. Finally, a diverse curriculum is needed to facilitate an education that is meaningful and authentic, and builds the capabilities young people need in the 21st century. Initiatives aimed at speaking more meaningfully to young people who have traditionally been poorly served by schooling are at the core of many alternative schools, but they are also present in outstanding mainstream schools. These innovations offer inspiration for reform across all schools, for all students. Embedding such reform through broad systemic change in mainstream schooling is necessary to facilitate an education for all young people that is: meaningful in holistic ways, democratic and respectful, supportive and enabling, and equips them with the skills and knowledge to progress their hopes, dreams, and imagined futures.

Counter stories: The voices of Indigenous peoples undertaking educative roles in flexi schools

“…Some flexi schools located in regional and remote locations have at times had an enrolment of 100 per cent Indigenous students. Engagement of Indigenous young people in flexi schools has featured in broader studies in the field (Mills & McGregor, 2010;te Riele, 2012); however, there has been very little explicit research or inquiry into the significance of this, particularly in relation to the broader Indigenous education landscape.…”

“…As flexi schools are sites young people access when they have been disenfranchised from mainstream schooling, flexi schools can offer answers to complex questions that have not been resolved in mainstream settings (Shay & Lampert, 2018;te Riele et al, 2020). For example, when the data demonstrates, amongst other things, that mainstream settings are not providing engaging learning experiences for many Indigenous young people, as evidenced by school completion rates and other CTG data (Commonwealth of Australia, 2020), there is a lot to learn from a context that is able to engage the very same cohort of young people.…”

Connection, connectivity and choice: Learning during COVID‐19 restrictions across mainstream schools and Flexible Learning Programmes in Australia

“…Some were enrolled in mainstream schools and others in Flexible Learning Programmes. The latter are accredited programmes offering a “second chance” at education for young people, whose needs were not well‐served in mainstream schools (te Riele et al, 2020 ). We draw on data consisting of 30 qualitative interviews from the Learning through COVID‐19 project (McDaid et al, 2020 ; McDaid, Cleary et al, 2021a ; McDaid, Povey et al, 2021b ), a large study on the impact of the pandemic on educational inequality in Australia.…”

“…Enrolment in either mainstream school models or Flexible Learning Programmes at the time when COVID‐19 restrictions were introduced might have inflected opportunities for students to engage in learning, stay connected and exercise meaningful choices. Flexible Learning Programmes are an alternative option to mainstream schooling in Australia for students, often from disadvantaged backgrounds, for whom the mainstream schooling system had not worked well (te Riele et al, 2020 ). A focus on changing educational provision to better suit students is central to Flexible Learning Programmes (McGregor et al, 2015 ).…”

“…Flexible Learning Programmes come in various forms – some are attached to a mainstream school, while others are separate institutions. They are generally characterised by efforts to address structural disadvantage (such as providing free learning materials and meals, and support for transport and housing); an emphasis on positive relationships (fostering belonging, supporting well‐being and adopting more democratic approaches to teacher–student relationships) and tailoring the curriculum (ensuring it is meaningful and authentic for each student) (te Riele et al, 2020 ). We tease out nuances in student experiences across Flexible Learning Programmes and mainstream school models to identify opportunities for improved student‐centred practices.…”