![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
Parent engagement in schooling has long been held as a vital component of the successful navigation of the schooling process and, consequently, governments often invite such engagement via policy implementation. However, at times, contestation arises about parent engagement, with some parents seemingly ‘crossing the line’ when attempting to be involved in their children's schooling. This paper investigates the possibility of parent engagement in schooling in Queensland, Australia, conceptualising it as a game of social and systemic practice. The author examines this notion using an example of contestation between parents at a regional government school and the education authority. Policy directives about parent engagement are explored, with the rhetoric of such policy applied to the example in question. The work of Bourdieu and Foucault is used to argue that the invitation to parents to engage is framed and thus often misrecognised, resulting in unintended conflictual relationships between parents and governing authorities.
Notes
1. Miriam David's (Citation1998, 256) early work in the United Kingdom has cited the centrality and ‘critical importance of home school relations’ as integral to educational policy in this country for at least 30 years.
2. Planning approval was the precursor to any school obtaining non‐state school status in Queensland in 1997, immediately following the introduction of the States Grants [Primary and Secondary Assistance] Bill, 1996 (Australia, Parliament Citation1996).
3. The researcher was for an extended period of time an active member of parent groups within the school.
4. Six years as President of the Parents & Citizens Association gave the researcher access to strongly held opinion in that association, as well as that of the principal and other staff.
5. An example of this is the school's participation in the ‘Tournament of Minds’ competition, where up to 20 teams from the school participated, which, at that time, was a record for this competition.
6. This amount was raised each year, over a period of three to four years during this time, as the P&C were adamant that this was a way to balance the budget and maintain the standards set at the school.
7. The researcher, as bricoleur, utilises whatever resources – cultural objects, signs, texts, practices, theoretical perspectives – that are available in addressing the task at hand (Levi‐Strauss Citation1966).
8. To ensure rigour when using bricolage it is important to endeavour to seek epistemological coherence when choosing literature to justify arguments. In this case, Ball's work on performativity and propriety, Rose's work on responsibilisation and ethical citizenry and Popkewitz's work on pedagogicalisation have been chosen in order to seek coherence with the work of Foucault and Bourdieu. The author acknowledges that other important texts are available; however, those chosen represent the most suitable applications in this case.
9. Using the analogy of a game of social and systemic practice to unpack the Sunnyvale case allowed the case to be used as a generalisable vehicle. While some aspects of the study are only applicable to this special case in Queensland, the game analogy situates rules, players and referees as general rather than specific participants.
10. Activities that the Sunnyvale parents engaged in included public meetings to present their point of view of the application failure as a conspiracy, parents and children picketing Education Queensland offices in the city, the parents and citizens association of the primary school writing letters of complaint to Education Queensland implying conspiratorial intervention, and television and radio appearances to present their case.
11. Additionally, the Principal of Sunnyvale State School was vocal in his opposition to Education Queensland policy in similar public forums.
12. In fact, the parents who were part of the Sunnyvale Steering Committee were all middle‐class professionals. However, their ideas about schooling worked against them to such a point that their own cultural and economic capital was insufficient to overcome obstacles to their goals for their children in this instance. Such a notion both builds on and contradicts Reay, David, and Ball (Citation2001), who argue that habitus confines possibilities. The Sunnyvale group, although essentially middle class, shared understandings and dispositions that were produced in an era that privileged child‐centred approaches and practices. These notions marginalised these parents in the 1990s, where school performance and market forces were of greater importance than the interests of the child.
