Keynote Address to the Australian Curriculum Studies Association
12/10/2015
Hon Kelly Vincent MLC Dignity for Disability
KEYNOTE ADDRESS
ACSA [Australian Curriculum Studies Association]
Thursday 1st October, Adelaide
Hello, and thanks for inviting me along today. I’m Kelly Vincent, Dignity for Disability’s member of the Legislative Council. I acknowledge that we meet today on Kaurna land. I would like to start by sharing a little of my own journey of advocacy and something about my party and some highlights of my work in parliament.
I will then lead on with a few thoughts about the barriers to inclusion and talk about ways to ensure our education system becomes more inclusive of students with disability into the future.
I hope this gets you thinking about what you can do to improve the lives of people with disabilities, and how by working together we can all create the inclusive future we want.
Dignity for Disability is a small, South Australian based political party and I am the sole elected representative so far. We hold regular fundraisers to support our election campaigns, and I will be up for re-election in 2018. Since I was elected to Parliament in 2010, I have been inundated by constituents seeking advocacy on every issue you can imagine – mostly relating to disability in some way.
I should point out though, that my work covers the full gamut of portfolio areas, and that as an upper house MP I represent the whole of South Australia.
So, as you can imagine, it is a huge workload, managing my parliamentary commitments, constituent matters, invitations to events and also trying to keep an eye on the horizon for the “big ticket” policy development we need to create ongoing positive change.
Although a life in politics wasn’t the career I had planned, landing in Parliament House at the age of 21 has been an amazing opportunity – for me – and for furthering the broader awareness of disability. I feel honoured and privileged to continue my work towards improving the lives of South Australians with disabilities.
As I mentioned, because I am a member of the upper house, the legislative council, I represent all South Australians. I regularly get calls from people requiring advocacy on issues, advice around legislation or policy, or other broader systemic matters surrounding disability. These could include viewing matters through a disability lens across health, transport, housing, the justice system, employment, education, disability services, and well pretty much anything else you can think of.
Advocacy – and my wheelchair – are inescapable parts of my identity. It just so happens that my wheelchair is an essential part of the story of how I became Australia’s youngest female MP.
Unbeknown to me at the time, this political journey began when I started a campaign advocating for a new wheelchair.
I was 20 years old and at that time I was still using the same wheelchair I’d had since I was 10! And I don’t know about you, but I certainly had done a fair bit of growing between 10 and 20 years of age – and my wheelchair was way too small and it was causing me problems because of this.
Although Disability SA were fully aware of my need for a new chair, after waiting many months, I just got fed up. It felt as though I was constantly having to check in and monitor with Disability Services when I might finally get my adult wheelchair.
So, in typical “Gen Y” fashion, I took action and set up a campaign on Facebook. Then, suddenly people from all over Australia were interested in my wheelchair! This interest included David Bevan and Matthew Abraham from our local ABC Adelaide radio station, and I became a bit of a regular on their program – telling their listeners the latest update in my wait for my wheelchair.
In every sense for me, the personal is political. And I invite you to think about your own political actions. Because it is only our actions that will take us beyond our words, beliefs and thoughts to lead us to become a more respectful, fair, just and equal society.
And I think that’s what we want South Australia to be, more respectful, fair, just and equal. Anyway, it was through this wheelchair campaign – where of course I was not only advocating for my own rights but also for the rights of my peers – that I was approached by Dignity for Disability to stand as a candidate in the 2010 election. In unexpected circumstances I was elected becoming something of an “accidental politician”.
I have seen some great changes for the better in the disability sector in the five years since I was elected. Among my achievements as a member of parliament, there are a number of key issues I would like to highlight.
I have been proud to play a pivotal role in creating South Australia’s Disability Justice Plan as a way of giving a voice to people who were previously denied access to fully participate in our legal system. This includes all people with disabilities, whether they come into contact with the justice system as a victim or as the perpetrator of a crime.
Recently, Parliament passed the Statutes Amendment, Vulnerable Witnesses bill. In so doing, we have ensured that people with disabilities will have their right to participate in the justice system upheld. It also ensures people who need communication assistance or who use technology to communicate will be equal before the law.
This is a monumentally important change for many reasons – not least of which is the fact that people with disabilities are statistically so much more likely to experience abuse. In fact, the organisation Women with Disabilities Australia estimates that ninety percent of women and girls with intellectual disability have experienced sexual abuse at some point in their lifetime. Ninety percent.
And sixty eight percent of those women with intellectual disabilities will experience this abuse before they reach the age of 18. Dignity for Disability recognises that the greater the voice of these victims in court, the less likelihood there is that people with disabilities will be specifically targeted as victims of such heinous crimes.
I have also have established a parliamentary select committee that is currently looking into the experience of students with disabilities and/or additional learning support needs in our education system. The need for such a committee is clear from my dealings with many families who are struggling to have their children’s right to an education met.
My consistent lobbying of the South Australian Certificate of Education, or “SACE” Board has finally led to an improvement to the wording on future SACE Certificates. This was necessary to remove the words “this student has completed a modified curriculum due to intellectual disability” from SACE Certificates.
This change is significant for two reasons. The first being the right of students with disabilities to be recognised as equals among their peers. After all, students can contribute to their SACE in a variety of ways, not all of which are strictly academic in the traditional sense, for example by completing a trade. So why is taking a different path due to disability the only difference that needs to be pointed out in the wording of the certificate?
The second reason the old SACE certificates were problematic is because of the potential implications for future opportunity. Many recent school leavers bring their SACE certificate along to job interviews. Therefore, this wording on the certificate essentially forced a student to disclose their disability status to potential employers. And although we all know it is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of disability, unfortunately conscious and unconscious bias by employers is well documented.
I am pleased to say that there is now also a Governor’s Commendation for Excellence in Modified SACE award. These small yet significant changes allow increased equality for students with disabilities who are working at the best of their ability to be rewarded on the same basis as other students.
In working towards these changes, I am following up on the issues parents bring to me about their child’s experience within the education system. In matters such as these, we celebrate the small victories, and learn to work at the speed of bureaucracy.
So in some ways, the human rights of people with disability as equals alongside our non-disabled peers in the community are slowly being recognised.
But, I have to say, we still have such a long way to go.
People still ring up talkback radio and ask:
‘Why should I have to pay for someone else’s kid’s wheelchair?’
…forgetting that tomorrow they themselves or their own child could so easily become members of the “disability club” and be reliant on others for their showers and personal care for the rest of their life. That’s the reality of it, and of course it makes me angry that such attitudes still exist.
A study by the organisation Children with Disability Australia suggests that as many as one-in-four school-aged children are being denied enrolment at the school of their choice, or are unable to attend school full-time due to a lack of resources.
Parents and families are still in crisis trying to support their children, who may for instance, display a range of behaviours or whose complex support needs are not being adequately funded.
Here in South Australia, I can certainly say that “yes” we are seeing benefits from the NDIS, but we are also seeing “turf wars” over funding during the roll out. And I see children as the losers here in an adult bureaucratic game over which they have no control.
Because we now understand the enormous social and economic value of early investment in children, it is really nothing short of criminal that children are being left in limbo between systems. We are seeing this for instance in the practicality of provision of speech pathology services, during the roll out of the NDIS. It is coming down to a case of there being not enough physical space in schools for therapists to come and deliver these services. It is an issue we need to untangle so that the full benefits of the NDIS can be realised.
I want to see a community that will more than “cope” with differences. I want our system to offer the type of positive and re-assuring attitudinal support that values and respects individual children and their parents. I particularly don’t want parents to feel that they can’t get the understanding they need when they are involved in accessing services such as education.
As part of the Australian Government Department of Education and Training’s “Students First” program, one of the key areas of focus is engaging parents in education. Well, when I look at the issues parents bring to my attention, it seems that schools are not actually ready to engage parents in education if they are not able to offer students with disabilities full-time enrolment at school.
So, it is very easy to think that battles have been fought and won when it comes to the rights of people with disabilities. But the reality is that we really have a long way to go. To further illustrate this, I share the following example.
In a recent visit to an Adelaide school, I was frankly shocked when, in front of students, a senior teacher explained to me that all the students there were “non-verbal” and “incontinent”. Those were her words. This statement, the timing, place and utterance of it was wrong in so many ways.
For one thing, I cannot accept that anyone working with students with disabilities would think such a breach of personal privacy, is okay. But in this case I can only assume that this teacher somehow deemed her disclosure acceptable because of the student’s disability. It was also unnecessary, and irrelevant for the conversation we were having which was supposed to be about the student’s education. The lack of respect indicates to me that these students are not in a genuinely supportive environment in their school, and that is deeply concerning.
It is vital that children have champions, within their close circle – their family, within their broader circle – their early learning centres and schools and, importantly within the policy circle of government. We need the champions at the highest level to understand the importance of education, but we also need that on-the-ground respect for all students in their schools.
Years ago we talked about “early intervention” whereas now we more correctly describe this work as “early investment” and research is reinforcing the value of working with very young children.
“Intervention”, to my mind, is a highly negative word which suggests that a child’s disability is something to be fixed, whereas “investment” challenges that thinking.
Investment also reminds us that with the right support every child –whether or not they have a disability — has innate worth and potential. After all, no child can thrive without some level of support, but we wouldn’t refer to the provision of shelter, food, or clothing as “intervention”.
I’ve got some statistics to present now, and I am demonstrating my skills as a rule-breaker here, because I have heard it said that one must never, ever put statistics into speeches. But here I go, I’m breaking the rules – and I think you’ll see why.
These statistics come from the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, and they are:
Seven hundred,
eighteen,
ninety to one hundred,
three to one and
four to nine. (700, 18, 90 – 100, 3:1 and 4 – 9).
Did I hear someone up the back say ‘Bingo’? Perhaps those numbers may immediately mean something to you, but if not don’t worry – I will expand.
700 is the number of new neural connections per second that are created in the first few years of life. Such connections are especially formed through “serve and return” interactions with adults, and it is these connections that build the foundation upon which all future learning, behaviour and development depend.
18 months is the age at which disparities in vocabulary begin to appear. These disparities depend on whether children have been exposed to a language rich environment. By age three, children who have been in a language-rich environment can be expected to have a vocabulary 2-3 times larger than their peers.
90 – 100 percent is the chance of developmental delays when children experience 6 to 7 compounding risk factors. Risk factors such as poverty, caregiver mental health issues, and abuse.
3 to 1 are the odds of adult heart disease after 7 – 8 adverse childhood experiences. We see this increased risk because these early childhood experiences actually get into the body, with a lifelong effect on physical as well as cognitive and emotional development. There are also links to an increased risk of diabetes, hypertension, stroke and obesity.
$4 – $9 is a figure that refers to the return for every dollar invested in early childhood programs. Economists have shown that high quality early childhood programs bring impressive returns on investment to the public purse. Not only do the children earn higher incomes as adults (and of course that means they pay higher taxes too), there is a saving in reduced education, welfare and crime costs. This is real win-win stuff.
Recent long-term follow-up studies in the US have indicated figures as high as a $17 saving for every dollar invested. And of course it is not only about the money, it is the improved quality of life resulting from early investment that counts.
It seems so obvious, but worth stating, that serious matters such as child abuse and child trauma are not problems that stay in childhood. The impact is felt throughout the lives of those affected.
The delivery of effective parent education programs, in particular, offers the means to increase the number of people in a child’s life who are champions who are maximising quality early interactions. Attending parenting courses should be encouraged and supported with all the resources necessary to develop the home and early childhood centre partnership to support children.
I’ve heard it said that every child needs someone who is absolutely crazy about them, and as it happens that will not always be one of their parents.
When it comes to curriculum matters, clearly I am speaking to a room full of experts! But in looking toward finding ways of including students with disabilities alongside their non-disabled peers at any age, there needs to be flexibility and creativity applied to make it work.
The place to start is with each individual school teacher, education leader, policy maker and curriculum developer – and the launching point is to ask each of you to look within yourselves to see the way you have constructed students with disabilities.
I invite you to reflect on that and to examine whether you are beginning with an individual, or if you are beginning with a deficit model.
And I invite you to examine whether your first inclination is to see a problem to be fixed, or a person to respect and to work alongside?
I think it is that basic. If we agree that we need to find ways to ensure that education is accessible for, and inclusive of, students with disabilities, then it starts with individuals being aware of the capacity and ability of students with disabilities.
And I think it needs to be acknowledged that some of the experts in this matter are people with disabilities who need to have their voices heard about what works for them.
There is an adage that has been used throughout the history of disability activism: “nothing about us without us”. Including and valuing the lived experience of people with disabilities would make such a difference. So in working out how best to adapt and deliver an inclusive curriculum I have come up with some questions you may like to consider:
• Who is in the room or accessing the virtual classroom?
• What do these individuals require?
• To deliver the content to them, what do I need?
• Who are the experts I can call on?
And it also occurs to me that it may be important to consider the “processing speed”, to use a computer term, of the individual.
Simply knowing that someone has a disability will never give you enough information to know what their ability is, what they are capable of achieving is a product of both their own ability and the expectations – be they high or low – others place on them.
It will take longer for many students with disabilities to master various tasks and content, but I strongly urge provision of age-appropriate material to support them to do so. Again, this comes back to the respect for the individual student. In teaching basic maths or English, for example, it wouldn’t be appropriate for a nine or ten year old to be using resources designed for a four or five year old.
It takes as long as it takes, for students with intellectual disabilities to reach a level of competency. I heard someone say recently that you wouldn’t give up on a child who had not learned to tie their shoelaces by the age of five, for instance. Yet all too often, students with disabilities are not supported and encouraged and actively engaged in learning although they have the ability to develop their skills and knowledge.
It seems rather obvious, but educators need to be aware of the range of individual differences of students and become more responsive to that range of backgrounds and abilities.
With new innovations in technology some of the barriers to access education will be overcome, eye-gaze assistive technology is now readily available for instance. And when it comes to voice recognition software, I can tell you as a consumer of it, that it has moved past the really annoying development stage to now be of real assistance. And of course this technology will only get better as time goes on.
There are many catchcries these days around diversity, and when the concept of diversity is unpacked, disability is one of the component parts that tumbles out.
A Deloitte study for the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission in 2012 suggested that a combined focus on both diversity and inclusion in the workplace can result in better business performance. The report found that disability plus inclusion equalled
• an eighty three percent improvement in the ability to innovate;
• a thirty one percent increase in responsiveness to changing customer needs and
• a forty two percent increase in team collaboration.
The results are certainly very clear and impressive that when organisations take action to include their staff and embrace diversity they improve innovation and performance.
But, you know that valuing diversity in the community needs to be much more than a “box ticking” exercise. Because until we can move beyond a tokenistic engagement with people from diverse backgrounds, we risk falling into the trap of only using them as examples to fulfil our own need to tick those boxes.
I heard a quote recently, that when you have met one person with Aspergers…you have met one person with Aspergers. Well it made me smile, because that’s true of all of us, we are individuals.
Now, I think it can be said that politically I don’t have much in common with George W. Bush, – but he used a phrase to describe institutional discrimination and bias that seems as apt today as when he spoke it, back in 2000. He described it as the “soft bigotry of low expectations” – the soft bigotry of low expectations. And that is out there, right now, as I speak in 2015 in Australia and it is forming a barrier around people with disability every day and in all aspects of their lives.
In education, of all sectors, we still need to guard against this culture of low expectation. It is our educators who need to be the ones to guide students and families to the solid ground of achievement matched to ability.
Every day, I am contacted by people in crisis – often due in part to the disproportionate chunk of their lives people with disabilities spend battling bureaucracy just to gain fair access to the world.
It may surprise some of you that, as a politician, my primary goal is to make myself redundant. And this goal will be reached when having a disability in South Australia no longer constitutes a full-time job. In every sense, I exist in my current position as a member of parliament to ensure that we get a paradigm shift within our society which results in a deep understanding of what it does, and does not, mean to live with a disability. It is about breaking down those attitudinal barriers.
So, today I have taken the opportunity to talk about my own advocacy, the ongoing social justice work of Dignity for Disability in parliament, and the need to shift thinking around this thing called disability that tumbles out of the diversity box.
In closing, it seems that even with the best will in the world, many people – and I have to say, this includes people within the education sector – do not respect the rights of people with disabilities.
The personal is political. I will leave you with my three keys to getting it right.
They are: “fairness, innovation, and respect”.
Fairness because everyone deserves a fair go.
Innovation because one important way forward is to work together to discover the synergy of creative solutions, and
Respect because it doesn’t matter whether or not you can help someone, showing them respect means we can all hold our heads high.
We are all in this together, and as leaders in our community, I hope we can take every opportunity to set ourselves the highest standards.
