The Australian state of Victoria’s opposition proposes a reform to the school curriculum

The Australian is reporting that the Victorian opposition Liberal Party have proposed a reform to the school curriculum. I am uncomfortable about the framing of this reform and I believe it carries potential risks as well as some opportunities.

The politics

I am concerned that the way the report in The Australian is written represents more of an appeal to the base of the Liberal Party* than a reasoned position that could start a conversation across the political divide. The term, ‘back-to-basics,’ is not only politically loaded, it is misleading. There is nothing ‘basic’ about a curriculum that utilises the best research on teaching reading, writing and mathematics, so what is this intended to signal? I also don’t believe that it is the job of schools to, ‘teach students to be proud,’ of anything. As I made clear in a recent post, students should be presented with concepts and allowed to make their own decisions about what to believe and what to internalise.

The risks

Talk of an attempt to ‘de-clutter’ the curriculum is a particular concern. I wish to see a rich curriculum full of powerful knowledge. When the Australian curriculum was last reviewed, the same language was deployed as justification to degrade the humanities content while leaving the airy and pointless general capabilities untouched. These capabilities include things like ‘critical thinking’ which cannot be taught in a vacuum. Either critical thinking is already being taught as a key component of every subject, and so adding it as a general capability is redundant, or the intention is to mistakenly try to teach critical thinking in some general sense.

The opportunities

Nevertheless, it is a good time to start asking questions about the curriculum. Australia in general, and Victoria in particular, would be better served by a clear curriculum document that was specific about the knowledge that children are expected to learn. At present, the Australian curriculum is exceptionally vague, with exhortations that children should pose questions and conduct investigations. Nailing down the substance would be good. Dr Jennifer Buckingham, a past researchED speaker, will be asked to conduct the curriculum review if the Liberals win the November election. Buckingham has campaigned for better reading instruction and has the capacity to see past the political slogans.

Hopefully, this renewed policy focus will prompt a response from the Labor government, placing the quality of curriculum back on the political agenda and offering us a clear choice at the election.

*For those outside Australia, The Liberal Party spans the centre-right to right section of the political spectrum, similar to The Conservative Party in the UK and the Republicans in the US. It often forms a coalition with The National Party, a group that focuses in country issues.

Standard

6 thoughts on “The Australian state of Victoria’s opposition proposes a reform to the school curriculum

  1. Tempe says:

    I saw Jennifer Buckingham might be involved with the reforms, should they happen. I believe Jennifer is well informed and does understand how important knowledge/facts are to a robust curriculum. I hope she gets the opportunity to guide the curriculum to a better place. We don’t need less content, we need more. If we do away with the silly capabilities that will free up much needed time.

  2. Janita Cunnington says:

    As you say, this is an opportunity for Labor to counter with a fearless critique, informed by evidence, of the existing curriculum, with the explicit intention of doing away with the present waffly pieties and focusing on content instead. It’s time Labor returned to its mission of ensuring that all children are beneficiaries of the Enlightenment tradition, regardless of social class.

  3. Article is paywalled for me, but I always roll my eyes when I see the words “back to basics”. This is a cheap political catch-cry which is usually intended to garner fawning headlines in the Murdoch papers. The politicians who say it generally don’t have the first clue about what is required to improve curricula beyond their own inane slogans.

  4. Stan says:

    I thought it would be interesting to see what is out there in the market. That is if you try to see what people currently pay for how good is the description of the curriculum.

    Looking at a top end Australian private school it is a bit sad.
    https://www.ggs.vic.edu.au/School/Academic/Curriculum-Guide-2018/Year-11-and-12—IB/Group-5—Mathematics-HL

    You would have no idea from this what aspects of probability are covered. It is just a topic. The presentation is not clear either it doesn’t look like people are expected to examine the list of what is covered to make an informed decision.

    Oddly I find my favorite site aops.com does a much better job

    Click to access calculus-description.pdf


    This shows exactly what you get for your time and money.

    Why is that so hard for everyone else?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.