Case Study: The Pavilion School

Overview

The Pavilion School is a Victorian government flexible learning program operating as a sub-campus of Charles La Trobe P–12 College (CLTC) in Melbourne’s north. Founded in 2007, the school began with 20 students in a sporting pavilion in West Heidelberg in response to community concern that mainstream schooling was not serving a cohort of highly disengaged young people. It has since grown to approximately 220 students across two campuses in East Preston and Epping, while maintaining a consistent waitlist.

The Pavilion serves young people who have disengaged from or been excluded by mainstream schools, often due to complex circumstances including homelessness, family violence, mental health conditions, justice involvement and sustained educational disruption. Like Hester Hornbrook Academy, it does not serve a conventional middle-years cohort. It is included as a case study because it demonstrates how flexible learning models can be embedded within government provision rather than requiring independent or specialist school status. Its longevity under founding leadership and its integration within CLTC provide structural stability while preserving a distinct identity and pedagogical approach.

What The Pavilion Does Differently

As a Victorian government school, The Pavilion delivers accredited Victorian senior secondary pathways, including the Victorian Pathways Certificate (VPC) and VCE Vocational Major. Its distinctive approach lies in reorganising structure, staffing and relational continuity to meet the needs of learners who have experienced profound disengagement from schooling. Many students arrive with fractured relationships to education, and rebuilding trust is treated as the first educational task.

Students are grouped in multi-age classes of approximately 25 rather than by year level. Historically, smaller classes of around 20 students operated through a “triad” staffing model consisting of a teacher, youth worker and teacher assistant. This arrangement reflected the recognition that curriculum teaching, relational support and crisis response cannot easily be managed by a single teacher in high-complexity settings. Staff indicated that maintaining this staffing structure has become increasingly difficult due to resourcing constraints.

In practice, students are now supported through a collaborative team approach in which teachers work closely with youth workers and support staff to coordinate relational, wellbeing and academic support. This structure helps ensure that students remain connected to trusted adults even during periods of dysregulation, allowing learning to continue without immediate exclusion.

Students typically remain with their allocated teacher across multiple years, protecting relational trust and avoiding the annual reset common in mainstream secondary schooling. Referrals are accepted throughout the year, enabling young people who have disengaged from other settings to re-enter education without waiting for traditional enrolment cycles.

The school describes a whole-school instructional approach that integrates trauma-informed relational practice with explicit academic teaching (The Pavilion School, n.d.). Classroom instruction emphasises the development of foundational literacy and numeracy alongside structured learning routines. Students also opt into elective classes, VET courses, Koori Programs, excursions, and camps. Support from the wellbeing team includes counselling, mediation, restorative practices and health and wellbeing curriculum.

Pathways beyond school are supported through partnerships with organisations including Melbourne Polytechnic and La Trobe University’s Prepare Program, enabling students to transition into further education, training or employment.

Evidence of Impact

The Pavilion’s outcomes are difficult to assess using publicly available data because reporting is aggregated with the broader CLTC campus. As a sub-campus of CLTC, attendance, NAPLAN and Attitudes to School Survey data are reported at the combined school level. The CLTC principal notes on My School that aggregated figures reflect the inclusion of Pavilion students with known histories of disengagement and complex needs. Pavilion-specific quantitative data is therefore not publicly disaggregated.

Demand, longevity and recognition provide the clearest publicly available indicators. The school has maintained a waitlist since its founding in 2007. Enrolments have grown from 20 students at inception to approximately 220 across two campuses. Media reporting has also highlighted ongoing demand for places in flexible learning settings such as Pavilion, with some students unable to enrol due to limited capacity (Preiss, 2024). Pavilion received Victorian Education Excellence Awards recognition in 2009.

The school’s core impact is in supporting students who have disengaged from mainstream schooling to return to sustained participation in education.

Enablers

• Founding leadership continuity providing sustained vision and pedagogical coherence.
• Integration within Charles La Trobe P–12 College, providing structural stability and access to government school infrastructure.
• Triad staffing model (teacher, youth worker, education support worker) enabling simultaneous attention to learning, wellbeing and crisis response.
• Documented whole-school teaching model ensuring consistency across campuses.
• Koori Programs Team and dedicated Koori Hub embedding culturally responsive practice.
• Pathways partnerships (Melbourne Polytechnic, La Trobe University Prepare Program) providing visible post-school transitions.

Key considerations

Data aggregation within CLTC limits transparency. Pavilion-specific outcomes are not publicly disaggregated, creating potential for misinterpretation within performance comparisons.

Demand consistently exceeds capacity, signalling unmet system need. Expansion is constrained by staffing intensity, funding and resource parameters.

Balancing trauma-informed flexibility with academic acceleration remains an ongoing challenge.

The school’s embedded status within a mainstream P-12 structure raises system-level questions about how flexible learning settings are evaluated within conventional accountability frameworks.