Upload
anne-jarvis
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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 scoresat or below the national minimum standard in 2013
Progress towards CtG targets:NAPLAN Year 3 reading at or above NMS
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
% a
t o
r ab
ove
NM
S
On track to meet the CtG Target by 2016
Non-Indigenous (National)
Indigenous (National)
Indigenous (NT)By 2018 the % of NT Indigenous children above NMS will have doubled but this will still be far below the CTG target
Students’ attendance history: Children born in the NT 1994-2004 (N=6,448)
% of expected attendance % of expected attendance
Non-Indigenous students Indigenous students
Relative influence of community factors associated with remote school attendance
Mean weekly household income
% Adults with year 10 education
% population aged < 15 years
Mean number of people per bedroom
% Adults who speak English only
Community remoteness (ARIA)
% Population who are Indigenous
% Community SES (ICSEA)
0.49
0.14
0.11
0.09
0.08
0.05
0.03
0.01
Are AEDI outcomes associated with NAPLAN?
2012
NA
PLA
N Y
r 3 R
eadi
ng (
% <
NM
S)20
12 N
APL
AN
Yr 3
Rea
ding
( %
< N
MS) Indigenous
% of children with 2009 AEDI Total Score < 25th national %ile)
Non-Indigenous
R2 linear =0.789
R2 linear =0.032
% of children with 2009 AEDI Total Score < 25th national %ile)
Relative influence of remote community factors predictive of 2012 NAPLAN reading < NMS
Mean weekly household income
Mean number of people per bedroom
% Adults with year 10 education
Mean school attendance
% Adults who speak English only
% AEDI vulnerable (2009)
% population aged < 15 years
0.45
0.20
0.14
0.10
0.05
0.04
0.02
Individual child factors associated with Indigenous Yr 3 reading < NMS
Factor Children
N=4,603 (100%)
Crude Odds Ratio
AdjustedOdds Ratio
Primary carer’s education <year 10 2,022 (43.9%) 4.76 2.77
Age of mother at child’s birth <18yr 718 (15.6%) 1.95 1.92
Primary carers education = year 10 1,190 (25.8%) 2.16 1.78
Male gender 2,393 (51.9%) 1.31 1.40
Smoking in pregnancy 1,951 (42.3%) 1.03 1.36
Low birth weight 581 (12.6%) 1.45 1,24
First live birth 1,074 (23.3%) 1.03 1.36
Gestation < 37 weeks 609 (13.2%) 1.55 1.18
Multivariate logistic regression: Crude and adjusted risks for NAPLAN Yr 3 Reading below the National Minimum Standard (NMS)
[NT Early Child Development Data-linkage Demonstration Study: Silburn, Lynch, Guthridge & McKenzie]
Relative importance of perinatal health and socio-demographic factors for Indigenous NAPLAN Yr 3 reading
Population Attributable Risk %
Population Attributable Risk is the reduction in incidence if the whole population were unexposed, comparing with actual exposure pattern.
5. How can we derive a more “holistic” understanding of the key drivers of
educational disadvantage?
De-identified linkage of selected data items from NT administrative datasets
Datasets already linked Datasets to be linked
Summary
Addressing educational inequality in the NT requires recognition that:
1. School attendance really matters
2. Levels of remoteness vary considerably
3. Community characteristics have significant influence
4. Early-life health & socio-demographic factors also matter
5. Linking child, family, community & school data will assist in identifying key causal pathways and the best leverage points for improving outcomes