I'm all for a positive story about remote education, but it shouldn't be at the expense of accuracy and probably not one where the only side you hear is from non-Indigenous education department staff.
The article's premise is that innovative programs at Ngukurr School are contributing to better student outcomes. A quick look at the Myschools website shows that attendance at Ngukurr School has unfortunately dropped in recent years (a trend across many remote schools, as reported here). Looking at NAPLAN, results appear mixed - some areas improved in 2016, while others dropped. (Have a look for yourself by sifting through results provided on the MySchools website). So maybe Ngukurr School has innovative programs, sure. But can they be linked to better outcomes? There doesn't seem to be the evidence for that.
|Data source: www.myschool.edu.au|
Ngukurr kids deserve success, but it's preferable to have that success supported by evidence and accurate information as well as local/Indigenous perceptions on what constitutes success.
And in case you think I'm saying all this because of a chip on my shoulder, the lack of journalistic quality is apparent to others - even when they have no attachment to Ngukurr: