Document

Unpacking educational inequality in the NT

Professor Sven Silburn* & Steve Guthridge**, John McKenzie*, Lilly Li** & Shu Li** * Centre for Child Development and Education Menzies School of Health Research, Darwin, NT

** Health Gains Planning NT Department of Health, Darwin, NT

AIM How can existing data be used to enable a more integrated understanding of educational inequality in the NT?

NAPLAN Year 3 Reading (2013)

48% of NT Indigenous students had NAPLAN scores at or below the national minimum standard in 2013

Progress towards CtG targets: NAPLAN Year 3 reading at or above NMS 100

% at or above NMS

90

Non-Indigenous (National)

80 70 60

On track to meet the CtG Target by 2016

Indigenous (National)

50 40 30

Indigenous (NT)

By 2018 the % of NT Indigenous children above NMS will have doubled but this will still be far below the CTG target

20 2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

1. How important is the current policy focus on attendance?

Students’ attendance history: Children born in the NT 1994-2004 (N=6,448) Non-Indigenous students

% of expected attendance

Indigenous students

% of expected attendance

2. How much does “Place” matter in shaping attendance and achievement?

Community socio-demographic differences: % adults speaking English by % with yr 10 ed.

u

n

Relative influence of community factors associated with remote school attendance Mean number of people per bedroom

0.49

% Adults with year 10 education

0.14

% Adults who speak English only

0.11

Mean weekly household income

0.09

Community remoteness (ARIA)

0.08 0.05

% Population who are Indigenous % Community SES (ICSEA) % population aged < 15 years

0.03 0.01

3. How do early childhood development outcomes shape subsequent school achievement?

2012 NAPLAN Yr 3 Reading ( % < NMS)

Are AEDI outcomes associated with NAPLAN? Indigenous R2 linear =0.789

2012 NAPLAN Yr 3 Reading ( % < NMS)

% of children with 2009 AEDI Total Score < 25th national %ile)

Non-Indigenous R2 linear =0.032

th

Relative influence of remote community factors predictive of 2012 NAPLAN reading < NMS

Mean weekly household income

0.45

Mean number of people per bedroom

0.20

% Adults with year 10 education

0.14

Mean school attendance % Adults who speak English only % AEDI vulnerable (2009)

% population aged < 15 years

0.10 0.05 0.04 0.02

4. Do early-life health and socio-demographic factors influence NAPLAN outcomes?

Individual child factors associated with Indigenous Yr 3 reading < NMS Multivariate logistic regression: Crude and adjusted risks for NAPLAN Yr 3 Reading below the National Minimum Standard (NMS)

Factor

Children Crude N=4,603 (100%) Odds Ratio

Adjusted Odds Ratio

Primary carer’s education