Menzies Foundation
Understanding what keeps young people engaged in school
We partnered with the Menzies Foundation, Murdoch Children's Research Institute and the University of Melbourne to move beyond attendance metrics and hear directly from young people, teachers, and families navigating education systems designed without them in mind. Our research across two contrasting school contexts revealed that effective engagement responses are relational and structural, not curricular — reframing disengagement as a predictable outcome of systemic barriers, not student deficit.
Outcomes
- 57 interviews revealing that effective engagement responses are relational-structural, not curricular
- Nine key insights reframing disengagement as a predictable outcome of structural barriers, not student deficit
- Four intervention territories mapped across an opportunity framework ready for cross-sector workshops
- Illustrated journey personas centring the lived experience of students navigating mainstream and alternative education
- Workshop materials enabling informed collaboration between educators, researchers, and philanthropic partners
Services
- Design research
- Strategic Design
Sectors
When attendance metrics miss what matters
One in five Australian students leaves school before Year 12 — and the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged schools continues to widen. The Menzies Foundation wanted to understand what's really happening for the most disengaged students. They weren't seeking policy analysis — they wanted lived experience evidence from the people closest to the problem. Working alongside the Murdoch Children's Research Institute and the University of Melbourne, we set out to move beyond attendance data and hear directly from young people, teachers, and families navigating education systems designed without them in mind.
Hearing from students, teachers, and families across two worlds
Our research spanned two deliberately contrasting contexts: Katherine High School in the Northern Territory, where 70% of students are Aboriginal and many travel from remote communities; and Warakirri College in NSW, a trauma-specialised alternative school for students who've exhausted mainstream options. We conducted 57 semi-structured interviews — 28 students, 20 teachers and support staff, and 12 parents and carers. Rather than arriving with pre-formed hypotheses, we created space for people to describe engagement in their own terms. What emerged challenged the dominant policy frameworks entirely.
Get the relationship right first. Get the learning conditions right next. Then you can start working on learning.
— Carolyn Blanden, Principal, Warakirri College
Illustrated journey personas capturing the lived experience of students and teachers navigating mainstream and alternative education systems — from isolation to belonging, compliance to connection.
What we uncovered beneath the surface
Our research revealed something schools rarely name: the hidden labour of engagement. At Katherine High, an engagement officer described administering insulin daily — work far beyond any job description, yet essential for keeping students connected. At Warakirri, a parent searching for alternatives told us simply, "We've run out of schools."
We also found that 'engagement' itself was deeply contested. Across 57 interviews, we identified eight distinct — and often conflicting — definitions. Teachers measured attendance. Students described belonging. Parents talked about safety. These aren't just semantic differences; they shape what gets funded, what gets measured, and whose experience counts.
One student's words cut through the complexity: "I was always engaged. The system just couldn't see it until someone measured what actually mattered."
At my old school, I had no one. People were horrible to me. Here, people actually talk to me. I have friends. It sounds simple but it's everything.
— Student, Warakirri College
Our barriers and enablers framework mapped the systemic, relational, and individual factors that help or hinder school engagement across both research sites.
Engagement is relational, not curricular
Students didn't talk about curriculum — they talked about relationships. They articulated precise knowledge about what creates and destroys their capacity to engage: how a teacher's "I'll help you in a minute" becomes systemic failure when the period ends without help arriving; how trust-building follows predictable phases requiring sustained adult consistency; how individual progress from one day's attendance to three days is profound transformation that disappears in aggregate data. We synthesised our findings into an opportunity framework spanning four territories — personal connection, cultural safety and belonging, classroom practice, and infrastructure and policy — equipping the Foundation with evidence for cross-sector workshops that centre student voice as expertise essential to designing systems that actually work.
Now I understand I'm there to build relationships that make learning possible. The kids didn't change — I did.
— David, Teacher
