The Federal Opposition is concerned a proposed national curriculum will dilute traditional science and humanities taught to young Australians in favour of what it calls a "lowest common denominator" position.
The proposed curriculum is being released for public consultation next week and is expected to cover teaching content for children from early primary school to year 10.
Opposition education spokesman Christopher Pyne says the Coalition is concerned that under the new curriculum events such as Sorry Day could be given unwarranted importance.
"If, as the papers have reported today, days like Sorry Day have been raised to the same standard and elevated to the same importance as Anzac Day, then we will have a thorough review of that curriculum when we get into government," he said.
The implementation of the curriculum is part of the Government's push to nationalise Australia's school system.
Speaking at the National Press Club on Wednesday, Education Minister Julia Gillard said it would have a strong focus on grammar.
The Opposition has seized on reports that the proposed curriculum will cover subjects such as Chinese medicine and natural therapies.
This is a fucking nothing story! The new national curriculum has not yet been released and the fucking ABC gives the Lieberals a free kick at the govt. I love this bit from the poodle:
They tried for years and couldn't get a national curriculum up! No talent at all in Lieberal Party! It was Mesma at the end had agreement from all parties incl union and still couldn't get a national curriculum up!
There is no news yet, so why run a story for Payne to get a kick in? Why not wait for the curriculum to actually get out?
Phonics K-A-T Cat will be taught (not whole word recognition) and the Dreamtime included in the science curriculum, wha?
“students from primary school through to Year 10 be taught the scientific knowledge of different cultures, primarily indigenous culture, including sustainable land use and traditional technologies…
The curriculum is organised into three inter-related strands of science: inquiry skills, about the collection of data; science as a human endeavour, about the history and nature of science; and science understanding, which teaches fundamental concepts…”
Anybody that really knows about this (i.e. Celly) will hopefully chime in--not something I know anything about.
Not much more important a subject than education--any parents here want to comment? They can give feedback for 3 months, we can work it up here if you like.
This is such a magnificent achievement. . .business will be able to recruit from anywhere knowing the new recruit has been taught the standard curriculum, likewise Unies can look for good students from anywhere. And if parents have to move interstate their kiddies can just pick up easily in their new school.
One thing not so good but I guess will have to live with. . .no extra money for training teachers in the new curriculum. Impressive Julia, dismantled the vile WC (that would have seen pensions decrease in long term as wages headed south) and introduced a new national curriculum!
And the last 3 or 4 Liberal education ministers have a policy of complete failure. What did Julie Bishop achieve? Nelson’s achievement was flag poles. Dr Kemp achieved about $1.5 billion pulled out of universities. Vanstone achieved massive increases in HECS fees.
I am alway stentative about any nationalisation fo anyhting- btu that article does not make the proposed curriculum look too bad- assumign ti also includes tradiotional science- and surely that is only the science curriculum document? There must be others.
Yes, the Dreamtime etc stuff is taught early to sensitise students I guess to the fact even primitive people know their environment and can draw conclusions from it.
OK, during commercial breaks I was able to learn that she thinks that the continuity will be a good thing - currently, a new kid turns up from interstate (which is very common today) and they can be at all different stages of learning for their age because of diffences across the states. Also, QLD runs some programmes that the other states do not. These will not be affected, we will be allowed to keep them as is. Other than that, she doesn't know much about it as yet.
If the instrumental music teacher is there tomorrow I will ask him. He is the QTU rep so will have some knowledge.
Students taking modern history in high school could soon be required to study an Asian country as part of a proposal for the draft national curriculum.
The draft curriculum for year 11 and 12 students proposes common courses to be taught in maths, science, English and history.
LaTrobe University's Dr John Hirst, who helped devise the syllabus for modern history, says students who choose modern history will be required to do a unit on World War I and a unit on Asia.
"Of course the hope is that since history is now to be compulsory for everyone up until year 10, there'll be a stronger flow-on of students into years 11 and 12," he said.
"There's a compulsory unit where students have to study one Asian country and Australians' relations with it, like China, Japan, Indonesia or India.
Dr Hirst says the strength of the new history curriculum is that it always places Australia in a broader context.
"Students sometimes have had far too much Aboriginal history and that can be a bit of a turn-off," he said.
"But now, under the new curriculum, they're encouraged to compare the history of settler conflict in Australia with the settler conflict and the struggle over Indigenous rights in another country."
THE new national curriculum has been comprehensively panned as overcrowded, incoherent, inadequate and lacking depth.
The national curriculum authority has accepted the criticism, promising to correct problems raised in 26,000 submissions from all states and territories on its plans.
The overwhelmingly negative feedback will be presented to the nation's education ministers in Canberra today. The response has forced the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority to go into overdrive since July to fix the problems by December when education ministers are due to meet to approve the final version of the curriculum.
The NSW Board of Studies and teaching associations for science, maths, English and history have all raised serious concerns about the draft curriculum, saying it is inferior to existing NSW standards and should not go ahead in its present form.
OK this is the only education thread I could find so it will have to do. Another good move from the govt:
Nationally, enrolments from people with poorer backgrounds have grown by 13 per cent since 2009, while those from medium socio-economic backgrounds increased 10 per cent, and those from wealthier backgrounds rose 5 per cent.
The Gillard government has set a target that by 2020, 20 per cent of undergraduate enrolments should be from students from low socio-economic backgrounds.
This year's budget contained $708 million over four years for measures to help universities attract, support and retain students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Apparently the number of students studying science subjects at senior HS levels has crashed from 84% to 51%. (ABC local radio)
This is very concerning! Without an adequate number of people having an understanding of science we will be more and more reliant on importing overseas doctors, scientists and engineers. Not a healthy situation.
I don’t know what the breakdown is of those students who do science, is it still the same number but a lower percentage because school leaving age has been raised to 16? Are more people staying at school because the jobs market for young people is very limited? A breakdown of science students over the last 20 years by sex/IQ and as related say to the numbers entering HS each year may tell a different story.
Completely backward looking govt is going to do harm to our kids and economy that will roll down the decades.
Get some tobacco apologist rightwing moron to “review” a curriculum only introduced this year and get stupidity like this:
“Cutting the development of fundamental computational thinking so necessary for the jobs of tomorrow is equivalent to reducing the capabilities of school leavers to second class citizens on a global scale.”
“This move (if implemented) will have long-term effects on student capabilities as well as our future economy that increasingly depends on digitally focused jobs.”
Professor Miliszewska says the proposed change is the more difficult to understand, “as only today did the government release its competitiveness blueprint”.
“The policy has international competitiveness and commercial innovation at its heart and, among other measures, it plans to champion new programs to enhance the standing of science, technology, engineering and mathematics in schools, and produce workers with the skills that industry needs.”