Abstract: This presentation (and the accompanying paper) will explore the construct of disadvantage and advantage in remote schools. It is based on qualitative findings from the CRC-REP’s Remote Education Systems (RES) project. ‘Indigenous disadvantage’ is often discussed in the media and politically axiomatically, as if it were a universal and absolute truism. Educational disadvantage in remote contexts is often discussed alongside phrases such as ‘poor attendance’ and ‘academic failure’. The language used to describe the experience and outcomes of remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students is replete with descriptions of deficits. The RES research team has spent the last three years gathering data from remote education stakeholders across remote parts of Australia. In particular the project sought the views of local people living in remote Aboriginal communities, what they thought education is for and what success looks like. The results show a picture of success and purpose that sometimes differs depending on respondents’ positions as locals or non-locals. Given the largely unsuccessful attempts of non-Indigenous stakeholders to improve attendance and outcomes, retention rates and transitions to employment, it may be that within the context of remote communities, it is the non-local who is disadvantaged. Further, responses from remote stakeholders do not present themselves as being disadvantaged. Rather, the data shows that the three main purposes of education (whether it be at school or outside) are about supporting language, land and culture; about ensuring young people know who they are and where they belong; and about young people being ‘strong in both worlds’ (the world in community and the world outside). Many non-local school leaders and teachers express their own inability (disadvantage) when responding to these imperatives for a successful education. Some implications of these findings will be discussed during the presentation and there will opportunity for participants to ask questions and challenge the conclusions afterwards.