School of Education and Arts

Learning through life experiences as distinct from learning through the academy and courses have become increasingly important themes in later life adult education research and practice. Whilst the dominant discourse for most younger people is still about education and training for students in standardised and accredited courses, there is increasing concern to find ways of giving voice to empower people otherwise excluded, disempowered or missing from mainstream education, learning, research and the community. This paper specifically explores and actively mirrors ways of using techniques developed through academic autoethnography to empower older people to share and make sense of the lives they have lived by exploring some of the unexamined assumptions that govern everyday life, behaviour and decision making including in the many, often very informal contexts well beyond educational institutions, the academy and paid work. In essence, like autoethnography, our paper seeks to identify, interrogate and celebrate ways of revealing and displaying multiple layers of consciousness connecting the personal to the cultural for sharing and celebrating diversity in later life.

Our paper focuses on intergenerational learning in informal community settings between older men and boys. It examines and challenges narrow definitions of the notion of what is meant by “older” and “intergenerational” learning. It stresses the importance of older men’s capacity to be contemporary in their worldview, while drawing from a deep knowledge and wisdom developed from their life experiences and also from their formative cultural, national, and Indigenous learning traditions. Our paper provides an account of intergenerational stories wherein men informally mentor, share skills, and develop meaningful relationships with disengaged and disconnected young people in the community Men’s Sheds

Our paper is based on our recently published NCVER project on Men's sheds in Australia, Learning through Community Contexts (Golding, Brown, Foley, Harvey & Gleeson, 2007), which showed that men's sheds informally cater for non vocational, social, health, wellbeing and learning needs of mainly older men. We deliberately used unedited transcripts from the NCVER project in the form of narratives or stories to give the men an opportunity to speak for themselves about the benefits of participating in men's sheds. The paper highlights some of the limitations of the methodology used in the attempt to allow the men themselves to make sense of the benefits they experience and enjoy from participating in men's sheds as conveyed through their own voices. Introduction and context of the paper

This volume contains the papers of the 6th International Conference of the International Network on Innovative Apprenticeship: Architectures for apprenticeship: Achieving economic and social goals, which was held on the campus of Federation University Australia, on September 1-2, 2015.
The papers and keynote speeches offer many aspects for discussion and reflection. This was also the case at the conference itself, which provided two days of topical debates and fruitful deliberations.
The papers covered the themes of Governance, Didactics, Quality of Apprenticeships, School-to-Work-Transition, The Status of Apprenticeships, and Apprenticeships and Social justice.
Apprenticeship today is seen as a promising option for policy makers for providing a training and education opportunity for young people. But also for young people it is appealing to find access to the workplace and to a way of learning which is not just bound or restricted to school. An apprenticeship offers a tremendous chance to find a place in society and workplace. In an increasing number of countries, apprenticeship is also available to mature-aged workers, providing a chance for a career change or re-entry to the workforce.
Apprenticeship is, at its core, a learning concept through practice and solving problems in real life, supported by supplementary schooling and education. Thus it is more than providing people with affordances for learning in the workplace. The apprenticeship model is most firmly rooted in the German speaking countries and regions and is closely bound to history and culture. Out of this tradition two attitudes towards the expansion of apprenticeships have emerged.
One idea is to “export” such a model in other countries. Like German cars, which are renowned in Europe and in the home market, it was taken for granted to bring such goods to other countries. This ‘cut and paste’ attitude, often also demanded by countries who needed to find a quick answer to reforming their Vocational Education and Training systems, was all in all not always successful in the last 40 years, as several evaluations found out. The idea of exporting such a system without being aware of local needs is problematic.
On the other hand it is wrong to think that such a model is not feasible outside the countries with such a home-grown tradition. This sceptical attitude, held by some commentators, is perhaps based on disappointments in the past, and on an over-estimation of nation-specific conditions of education. For sure, in other countries same ideas and concepts have developed differently. On the other hand it is the nature of human mankind that people try to refer to convincing ideas and experiences and are confronted with results, which differ from
12
the original blueprint. So the very old model of apprenticeship is still alive and will inspire new reforms. It is still an interesting mode of getting qualified for the workplace and the society of today and the future.
The conference itself is a proof of how multifaceted this model works in practice. It is widespread and exists in a lot of variations as a lot of papers reflect.
They point out that the need of mutual knowledge of country-specific developments and research and exchange of experiences is important, and that the learning process and knowledge base of apprenticeship is still developing today and in the future.
We would like to thank our major sponsors: the Department of Education and Training, Australia, and Federation University Australia. We also thank our other sponsors: the National Centre for Vocational Education and Training, and Group Training Australia. Thanks also to Bremen University’s TVET Research Group (I:BB) and the University of Zurich. We would also like to thank members of the Australian Vocational Education and Training Research Association for providing assistance to authors with polishing their English language.

Using a post-structural approach this article investigates the working lives of frontline managers in
VET and how they negotiate change in their day to day practices and decision making. The article
is organised around accounts made by managers from different types of Vocational Education and
Training (VET) organisations, namely: Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institutions,
Group Training Organisations (GTO), Registered Training Organisations (RTO), RTO and
Adult Community Education (ACE) joint organisations and stand alone ACE organisations. The
data showed that most managers were experiencing change, albeit in different ways across their
diverse VET organisations and roles. Managers were seen to understand and respond to the discourses
of reform differently, depending on their organisational type, culture and philosophical
beliefs, and according to their understandings of their professional role and status.

The paper reflects on a research project conducted by the authors on behalf of the Australian National VET Equity Advisory Council (NVEAC). We were required to conduct " a review and analysis of effective models and underpinning principles for gathering and responding to feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners ". The term " learner voice " is used extensively throughout the NVEAC documentation to describe engagement with VET students. But the " voice " that has unashamedly dominated the policy discourse in vocational and adult education and training in recent decades has been that of business and industry. The paper critically examines the dynamics of the VET policy framework and current practices in relation to learner voice. It particularly emphasises contradictions in both practice and policy in relation to who speaks and with what authority, and who listens and to what effect. This paper reports on research conducted by the authors on behalf of the Australian National VET Equity Advisory Council (NVEAC), which 'was established in 2009 to provide independent advice to the Standing Council on Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment (SCOTESE) on how disadvantaged learners can achieve better outcomes from VET (Vocational Education and Training)' (http://www.nveac.natese.gov.au/). We were required to conduct 'a review and analysis of effective models and underpinning principles for gathering and responding to feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners'. The term 'learner voice' was used throughout the NVEAC documentation. But, as other research has shown (Angus 2006, Figgis et al., 2007), it is the 'voice' of business and industry that has, for at least the last 20 years, unashamedly dominated the policy discourse in VET in Australia. Recently, however, particularly in England during the final term of the New Labour government, and increasingly in some Scandinavian and European countries, a renewed emphasis on policies of 'social inclusion' in education has increasingly employed the notion of 'learner voice'. Especially important within this discourse are the voices of learners who are perceived to be disadvantaged or marginalized. The paper critically examines current practice in relation to learner voice in VET in Australia. We particularly emphasize contradictions in both practice and policy in relation to who speaks and with what authority, and who listens and to what effect. The paper draws on interviews conducted with more than 60 vocational education and training managers and staff, students and student organizations, and a range of VET stakeholders in all Australian States and Territories. We asked participants particularly about learner voice regulatory frameworks and provider accountability for acting on feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners. Interviewees were very diverse.

Consistent with the 'looking back, moving forward' conference theme, in this paper we undertake a critical, research-based appraisal of the current, arguably neglected state of adult education in Australia in 2010, and proceed to paint a picture of how a different and potentially more positive future might be realised. Firstly, we emphasise situations (including states and territories) in Australia in which adult education is seen to be lacking or missing for particular groups of adults. Secondly we emphasise research evidence confirming the demonstrable value of learning for purposes other than those that are immediately vocational. We identify links between lifelong and lifewide learning on one hand, and health and wellbeing on the other. Part of the paper involves international comparisons with other forms of adult learning that Australia might learn from, adapt or borrow. We make particular reference to research underpinning the recent Inquiry into the Future of Lifelong Learning by NIACE in the United Kingdom. Our 54 Barry Golding and Annette Foley first main conclusion has to do with equity. Adult and community education (ACE) in Australia is currently seen to be least available or accessible to those Australians with the most limited and most negative experiences of school education, but the most need to learn in non-vocational domains. These groups include older Australians, some men and women, people not in paid work, and rural, isolated and Indigenous people. Our second main conclusion is that, to realise adult learning's future potential, we need changes to government policies, research and practice that acknowledge and actively support the broader nature and value of learning for life across all age groups. To paraphrase research from Belgium by Sfard (2008), based around Beck's (1986) exploration of reflexive modernity, the adult education function of ACE is in dire straits, unless education is seen as being much more valuable than the sum of individual vocational competencies, and particularly unless it is also recognised, valued and supported as one of many valuable outcomes of social, lifelong and lifewide learning throughout the community.

Our paper seeks to explore whether (or not) it is important to learners in Australia that vocational education and training (VET) becomes a universal part of the adult learning 'service' transaction. The idea for the paper's rhetorical title, 'Do you want VET with that?' comes from a service catchcry in a fast food chain that seeks to 'add value' to the sales transaction by adding the option of 'French fries'. In exploring the question and its presuppositions about the value of VET, it critically examines a range of Australian and international policy and research literature. The paper addresses several AVETRA conference themes, including the work of VET and its workforce, learner success and skilling for Australia's future. Our paper critically examines the extent to which 'value adding with VET' has permeated contemporary education and training discourses in all sectors. It seeks to deconstruct some of the prevailing presuppositions about the specific vocational utility of learning. We use some of our previous research around community learning contexts to examine the link between learning and a range of non-vocational outcomes, such as benefits to health and wellbeing. Our paper provides evidence from the literature examined to challenge the notion of learning for vocational outcomes alone. In doing this it draws on critical insights from recent research from Europe and its component states that confirms how learning can produce outcomes that benefit people's lives and self-esteem beyond work. We argue that there is room in contemporary VET discourse/s for an expanded discursive field where health and wellbeing can be acknowledged and valued as important 'outcomes' of learning alongside skills development.

Involving learner voice and learner input in the promotion of students' own learning has the potential to empower learners and transform their learning experience. A greater emphasis on genuine engagement of students could also potentially transform Vocational Education and Training (VET) and Adult Community Education (ACE) systems, and, in turn, workplaces and communities. This paper presents initial findings from research conducted in a range of VET (vocational education and training) and ACE (adult and community education) organisations in three Australian states and the Northern Territory with a view to identifying the mechanisms and systems used to capture learner voice. The paper also draws upon recent research in the UK and Europe that has provided critical insights into the benefits to learners' experiences and successes that result from taking learner voice seriously in the Further Education setting. The paper concludes that learner voice is not being seriously considered in VET in Australia, and that authentic approaches to capturing and responding to learner voice might lead to better outcomes for students.

The paper reflects on a research project conducted by the authors on behalf of the Australian National VET Equity Advisory Council (NVEAC). We were required to conduct " a review and analysis of effective models and underpinning principles for gathering and responding to feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners ". The term " learner voice " is used extensively throughout the NVEAC documentation to describe engagement with VET students. But the " voice " that has unashamedly dominated the policy discourse in vocational and adult education and training in recent decades has been that of business and industry. The paper critically examines the dynamics of the VET policy framework and current practices in relation to learner voice. It particularly emphasises contradictions in both practice and policy in relation to who speaks and with what authority, and who listens and to what effect. This paper reports on research conducted by the authors on behalf of the Australian National VET Equity Advisory Council (NVEAC), which 'was established in 2009 to provide independent advice to the Standing Council on Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment (SCOTESE) on how disadvantaged learners can achieve better outcomes from VET (Vocational Education and Training)' (http://www.nveac.natese.gov.au/). We were required to conduct 'a review and analysis of effective models and underpinning principles for gathering and responding to feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners'. The term 'learner voice' was used throughout the NVEAC documentation. But, as other research has shown (Angus 2006, Figgis et al., 2007), it is the 'voice' of business and industry that has, for at least the last 20 years, unashamedly dominated the policy discourse in VET in Australia. Recently, however, particularly in England during the final term of the New Labour government, and increasingly in some Scandinavian and European countries, a renewed emphasis on policies of 'social inclusion' in education has increasingly employed the notion of 'learner voice'. Especially important within this discourse are the voices of learners who are perceived to be disadvantaged or marginalized. The paper critically examines current practice in relation to learner voice in VET in Australia. We particularly emphasize contradictions in both practice and policy in relation to who speaks and with what authority, and who listens and to what effect. The paper draws on interviews conducted with more than 60 vocational education and training managers and staff, students and student organizations, and a range of VET stakeholders in all Australian States and Territories. We asked participants particularly about learner voice regulatory frameworks and provider accountability for acting on feedback from learners, particularly disadvantaged learners. Interviewees were very diverse.

This thesis, completed as part of the assessment for Bachelor of Arts (Honours) at Federation University Australia, focuses on G.W.F Hegel's 'Phenomenology of Spirit' (1977) and posits a symmetrical system of movements that align with the works of Sean Williams in this 'Books of the Cataclysm'(2001-2004). This is symmetry is then used as a way of unpacking and highlighting aspects of Hegel's system.

Alexis Wright’s writing is regularly discussed in terms of the way in which it brings Indigenous perspectives, experiences, and histories to the foreground. Following Carpentaria’s Miles Franklin Award win in 2007, Wright claims that – writing from her own Indigenous “viewpoint” – she tries “to bring out the way” many Indigenous Australians “think as people;” to share, what she terms, “something of our humanity, something of our character, something of our soul” (“Alexis Wright Interview,”  217). An awareness of the dynamics underpinning Indigenous exposition and cross-cultural exchange are integral to understanding Wright’s oeuvre. Yet while close readings of Wright’s literary works need be attuned to the “things” that are being expressively shared (modes of storytelling), I propose that such analyses also need to be conscious of the halts, silences, and gaps in her narratives; the unarticulated spaces which may connote trauma. Drawing on Alison Ravenscroft’s approach to reading trauma in “Indigenous-signed texts” – a reading technique that focusses on elements of the unknown, or “nodes of silence” – this chapter examines some of the ways in which the unspeakable is conveyed in Wright’s short fiction (16).

Kim Scott’s That Deadman Dance has been popularly described as a ‘post-reconciliation’ novel due to the ways in which it seems to transcend the goals and set-backs of the 1990s reconciliation movement (Steger par.4; Jones par. 3; Adelaide par 10). By focussing on sites of cross-cultural interaction and exchange, Scott’s book makes room for multiple voices, perspectives and ways of being-in-the-world. This essay contends, however, that rather than moving beyond Indigenous and non-Indigenous reconciliation, That Deadman Dance uses scenes of cross-cultural interaction to reconfigure key reconciliatory frameworks/discourses, particularly those which centre upon notions of belonging.

The concept of belonging is deeply problematic in reconciliatory discourses, not only for First Nation Australians who are still dealing with the trauma and dispossession of colonisation but also non-Indigenous people who are coming to terms with the legacy of a violent history of invasion.  All homemaking processes are irreconcilably warped or disturbed by the ‘wheel of colonisation’ in That Deadman Dance and, in many ways this schism can be seen to justify Scott’s call for ‘some sort of ‘gap’ between Indigenous and non-Indigenous societies […] a time of exclusion to allow communities to consolidate their heritages’ (Kayang and Me 263).   

By contrasting Noongar ontologies of being in country with Western approaches of dwelling, That Deadman Dance both reveals and questions the various modes via which belonging is cultivated and/or sustained. Yet while this process is deeply unsettling, Scott does not disallow the possibility for hope. Instead of gesturing to space of post-reconciliation, this essay argues that Scott’s narrative reinvigorates reconciliatory dialogues by emphasising the power of wellbeing; a concept which is separate from discourses of ownership but inseparable from notions of cultural healing.



List of Works Cited
Adelaide, Deborah. “Kim Scott leaves competition for dead in all male Miles Franklin win.” By Megan Clements. The Conversation 22 June 2011. Web. 17 July. 2014.

Jones, Tony. “‘Post-Reconciliation’ novel wins Miles Franklin.” ABC Lateline 22 June 2011. Transcript. Web. 23 Nov. 2014.

Scott, Kim and Hazel Brown. Kayang and Me. Fremantle, WA: Fremantle Press, 2013. Print.

Steger, Jason. “Win a Milestone for Indigenous Fiction.” The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 June 2011. Web. 18 June. 2014.

The ‘sorry novel’—a term coined by Sue Kossew to describe fictional works by non-Indigenous Australian writers that actively engage with political processes, particularly those pertaining to reconciliation—is explicitly interested in exploring scenes of cultural bridging; spaces which cross the gap purported to exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.  This paper will examine literary depictions of bridging space in the wake of Alison Ravenscroft’s text The Postcolonial Eye: White Australian Desire and the Visual Field of Race.

Positioned against what Ravenscroft refers to as “current moves to erase the divides between settler and Indigenous peoples and to cover over our differences,” The Postcolonial Eye adopts a form of reading that allows cultural “gaps” to remain intact. Although Ravenscroft is not the first critic stress the importance of cultural incommensurability, her emphasis on “radical difference” is at odds with mainstream postcolonial criticism in Australia, which often tends to echo the “close the gap” rhetoric of reconciliation. As The Postcolonial Eye critiques white critics’ attempts to “bridge” cultural divides, it is not surprising that Ravenscroft’s “experimental” approach to (un)reading race has been railed for potentially “paralysing” postcolonial literary analysis. However, recognising sites of “unknowing” need not polarise the ways in which we read race or stall processes of reconciliation.

While Ravenscroft’s research poses strong (and important) challenges to non-Indigenous writers, this paper argues that a distinct receptiveness to unknowing is apparent in many examples of sorry literature.  In narratives such as Alex Miller’s Landscape of Farewell and Gail Jones’s Sorry, for instance, certain aspects of indigeneity are represented as distinctly untranslatable to non-Indigenous characters and, by extension, non-Indigenous readers.  By making room for the enigmatic, Miller and Jones not only demonstrate the innately partial nature of cross-cultural entanglement but also recognise that acts of crossing are not, by extension, acts of revelation; that there are always some things, as Ravenscroft suggests, which must “fall from view.”

In both Henry Lawson and Leah Purcell’s versions of The Drover’s Wife, the space of the wood pile functions as a cross-cultural interface; an allegorical zone where interactions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians are both projected and unsettled. In Lawson’s original short story, for example, the wood pile—which has been stacked “hollow” by an itinerant Indigenous worker—represents both the Drover’s wife’s precarious position in the bush and, more broadly, “the white woman’s ambivalent attitude towards Aborigines” (Kossew 31). When approached from the perspective of the unnamed Indigenous character who is responsible for stacking the wood pile, however, this hollowing-out becomes an act of agency which subverts settler conceptions of terra nullius and undermines the semblance of home, hearth and belonging that the wife tries to cultivate throughout the narative. In Purcell’s recent stage adaptation of Lawson’s text,  the space of the hollow wood pile is reframed as a site of potential; a site where other stories can emerge and in fill cultural/historical gaps. This paper proposes that by reimagining the space of the hollow woodpile as a site of domestic immurement—where settler Australians become both literarily and metaphorically entombed within the very trappings of settlement— Purcell reinvigorates debates surrounding topics such “who has the right to call Australia home” and forces a poignant reconsideration of Australia’s national narratives.