Mr. Waycott wrote a letter to Mr. Davies questioning claims made about student attendance in remote schools. Mr. Waycott analyzed enrollment data from 75 remote schools from 2009 to 2013 and found the average loss in enrollment from February to August was 4%, compared to Mr. Davies' claim of 1.3%. The percentage of students attending less than 90% of classes also increased more for remote schools between February and August than Mr. Davies stated. Non-remote schools saw smaller changes in enrollment and attendance over this period. Mr. Waycott contends improving attendance in August should be a priority for the education department.

1. 23/3/14
Mr Davies,
Your response to my concerns about remote students struggling to get back to school at the end of July is
contradicted by the evidence of the E & A tables on the department’s website.
There are 75 remote schools, but information on the department website does not name the 28 schools you refer to
as very remote. As a consequence I have analysed all 75 schools, but I have not identified the sub-group of “very
remote” you refer to.
You claim a fall in remote school enrolments from February to August of 1.3%. You claim the figure is higher for
“very remote” schools.
My figure for all 75 remote schools, including the very remote schools, is 4%, and is based on years 2009 to 2013.
In non-remote schools there is a gain in enrolment from February to August (2009 to 2013) of 91, which is .36% of
the 25,023 non-remote school enrolments.
The percentage of remote students attending less than 90% is much worse for August than for February.
26% of remote students are attending less than 90% in February; but in August this problem is much worse as
indicated by a rise in students attending less than 90% of 661, with the total number of poor attenders reaching 36%
of August enrolments.
Compare this to non-remote schools which have 2% of students attending less than 90% in February, and 4% in
August.
I contend it is important the department target August in E & A initiatives and strategies.
I provide the following four tables for your convenience.
Murray Waycott

2. 1. 75 remote & very remote schools - raw enrolment
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Average
February Enrolments 75 Remote
Schools* 8220 8193 8348 8170 8389 8284
August Enrolments 75 Remote
Schools 8044 8155 7913 7835 7939 7978
Loss 176 38 435 335 450 306
% loss Feb to Aug 2% 0% 5% 4% 5% 4%
*Includes 28 Very Remote schools. List of schools provided by the education department at
http://www.teaching.nt.gov.au/remote/ but names of the 28 Very Remote schools is not available at
this website.
2. 75 remote & very remote schools - effective enrolment (raw enrolment by average attendance) and
insufficient attendance
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Average
February Effective Enrolments 75
Remote Schools 5602 4876 5290 4926 5064 5171
August Effective Enrolments 75
Remote Schools 4673 4210 4170 4093 3834 4197
Loss 930 665 1120 833 1230 974
% loss Feb to Aug 17% 14% 21% 17% 24% 19%
Attending <90% in Aug 2574 3050 2875 2882 3234 2840
Attending <90% as % Aug enr 32.0% 37.4% 36.3% 36.8% 40.7% 35.6%
Attending <90% in Feb 1751 2433 2173 2359 2424 2174
Attending <90% as % Feb enr 20.9% 29.6% 26.5% 28.3% 29.7% 25.9%

3. 3. 74 non-remote schools – raw enrolment
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Average
February Enrolments 74
Non-remote Schools 25204 24577 24637 25479 25042 25023
August Enrolments 74 Non-
remote Schools* 25520 24765 25010 25352 24922 25114
Loss -316 -188 -373 127 120 -91
% loss Feb to Aug -1.25% -0.76% -1.51% 0.50% 0.48% -0.36%
4. 74 non-remote schools - effective enrolment (raw enrolment by average attendance) and insufficient
attendance
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Average
February Enrolments 74 Non-
remote Schools 22375 21867 22212 22837 22353 22350
August Enrolments 74 Non-
remote Schools* 21994 21352 21875 21979 21621 21764
Loss 381 515 337 858 732 585
% loss Feb to Aug 1.70% 2.35% 1.52% 3.76% 3.27% 2.62%
Attending <90% in Aug 1181 993 751 923 886 950
Attending <90% as % Aug enr 5% 4% 3% 4% 4% 4%
Attending <90% in Feb 456 496 456 475 492 474
Attending <90% as % Feb enr 1.8% 2.0% 1.9% 1.9% 2.0% 1.9%