Claims+in+the+Media+Jenna+07

=Week 3 - What Should We Teach?=

Claims in the Media
If you wish to develop this Wiki to be a useful tool for ongoing sharing of work and for collaboration you can use this page to post your response to the Week 3 activity on stakeholders and the claims made in the media about what should be taught in schools.


 * Report on one claim you have seen in the media about schools and what should be taught.


 * Do you agree with this claim? Why/why not?

Please ensure that you have expressed yourself clearly.

When making your entry to this wiki please use a subheading to keep this page organised.

NB: Hi Guys - please also click on the 'Discussions' link at the top of this page to view some of your other colleagues postings, which were inadvertantly posted on the wrong spot. (Sharon Fraser)

**Teachers warn against cutting student hours for technology and design- Peta Fletcher **

This article, by Jessica Mahar, highlights how one particular Australian curriculum area, Technology and Design, is being influenced by key stakeholders. It is reported that the new Australian Technology and Design Curriculum will significantly reduce the teaching time for Technology and Design. There are a range of stakeholders identified such as the Institute of Industrial Art Technology Education, Sydney Technical High School, NSW technology teachers and the Australian Catholic University.

Stakeholder’s views

The general manager of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority was also quoted his key message was that the Technology and Design Australian Curriculum has not been written yet and the time allocation represented,” minimum learning entitlements”.
 * NSW teachers **
 * Large reduction in hours from 200hours to 80hours
 * Institute of Industrial Art Technology Education **
 * Cuts to hours will result in the student’s ability to do, “meaningful practical projects”.
 * Australian Catholic University **
 * As a result of the reduced hours in Technology and Design subjects there will be, “Fewer students aspiring to be technology teachers, engineers and designers”.

Questions need to be asked about the motivation of this article; if the Australian Curriculum – Technology and Design has not been written why report on its future impact.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">I believe this article is, an excellent, example of key stakeholders that are ensuring that their concerns and views about what should be included into the Australian Curriculum are heard. By highlighting their concerns publicly more influence can be put on the curriculum writing team.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Reference List <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Mahar, J. (2010 July 20)//.// Teachers warn against cutting student hours for technology and design //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved on 30 July 2010 //<span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">[]

**'Curriculum's narrow focus leave students bereft of big ideas.' - The Age Newspaper, March 2nd, 2010 - Katie Newman**

In her article, published in the age newspaper in March, Libby Tudball criticised the current curriculum and the draft national Australian curriculum for using a back to basics approach which failed to equip children living in the 21st century. The main claim made by Tudball in this article was that:

'While maths, science, history and english - the disciplines the draft giev priority to- are all critically important, they do not cover many areas of significance for the 21st-century learners. Curriculum must pay attention to questions and issues that confront the world today, such as climate change, economic issues, refugees, social dislocation among young poeple and the challanges of a technology- driven world.' (Tudbal, 2010)

I completely agree with this claim. I understand that whilst the core subjects such as literacy and numeracy and science must be at the centre of the curriculum, there must also be considerable attention payed to aspects which affect todays younder generation. After all it has been said that the curriculum is about preparing children for their life outside of school, and in order to face such a future; these children need to be equipped with all the relevant knowledge and skills.

Tudball then went on to say that children of the 21st century require different knowledge than those children from previous centuries, stating that ; 'politics, muliticulturalism, water shortages, increasing violence and under age drinking are vital concerns in their lives.'(Tudball, 2010).

She suggested that, 'studetns need to develop the knowledge and skills to be active and informed citizens who know how to think critically and how to respons to ocntemporary issues.' (Tudball, 2010).

I agree with all of the claims mentioned above. I agree with such claims because I feel that students need to aquire the skills that are relevant to the world they are living in. They need to aquire the skills and knowledge at school which will help them to cope once they leave school and enter society and the workforce. They need not only to be literate and numerate, but also know how to act socially, understand the challenges of the current times and function as informed citizens in their communities.

-Tudball, L. (2010, March 2nd). Curriculums narrow focus leave students bereft of big ideas. //The Age Newspaper​//

//**(Katie Newman)**//

=
I agree with this even though it is another subject to be taught at school. I think the younger someone is taught to drive, the more experience they gain and the better, more skilled driver they will become.======

=
It will reduce the road toll and the $17 billion that road trauma costs the government every year. “More than 80 per cent believe that driver training would have a much greater impact on cutting the road toll than increasing the driving age.” This is a huge figure and something that may potentially help and save all drivers on the road.======

=
Young adults who have never been behind the wheel before, generally believe it is an easy task to drive. Not knowing how to drive a car properly, including driving on a skid pan, at a “young age is a quick way to kill yourself if you’re really stupid behind the wheel and you have no idea what you’re doing”.======

=
I believe it will not only save on money that is used for trauma but it will save valuable lives, save families and friends from the grief from losing a loved one through a drivers inexperience on the road.======

Jess Brookes
<span style="color: #0070c0; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> Should we Teach Feminism in School? (Emma Callanan)

<span style="color: #0070c0; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">I decided to search online for newspaper and journal articles about what ideas are around about what should be taught in schools. There were plenty to choose from and it seems that the curriculum is a controversial issue in many countries. I found many articles from Australia, the UK and the USA about what should be taught and these articles appeared from many sources: teachers, business leaders, politicians and church leaders to name a few.

<span style="color: #0070c0; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">One of the articles I found most interesting was a piece in a journal about a teacher who had wrote to President Obama asking for feminism to be taught in schools. Her argument was that by teaching feminism you teach both girls and boys about social injustices, the struggle to get equality among the sexes, social bias and this will lead to new and developed thinking. The journalist went on to suggest that feminism would never be taught as it was too controversial a subject. The article had produced many comments from readers and they posed some interesting comments both for and against. One I found very interesting was from a lady who said that at her High School a class was offered in African-American studies but the only students who took this were African-American students. She felt that in feminism class only girls interested in feminism would attend; hence the subject would not be wide reaching.

<span style="color: #0070c0; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">I believe that feminism should be taught but by being incorporated into Social Science and History classes. Feminism can be incorporated alongside other historical issues and ideologies. I agree with the comments made that if it is taught as an elective class at High School then very few students will take it up.

<span style="color: #0070c0; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Jimenez, I. (2010, February 9). Should we teach feminism in school? //Jezebel.// Retrieved from [|http://www.jezebel.com]


 * Media Claim Response**

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">The Advertiser newspaper posted the article //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">What about our own dinosaurs?, // December 2009. The article states that 'Schools should teach children about Southern Hemisphere dinosaurs and other strange beasts, not just about the ones from the Northern Hemisphere'. Professor Pat Vickers-Rich from the Monash University says "It always surprises me that a lot of people are still not aware that there is a whole bunch of stuff known from Australia,''

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">The article goes on to outline that new Australian dinosaurs found by Professor Vickers-Rich since the late 1970's are unlike any dinosaurs found anywhere else in the world. ``There is a really beautiful dinosaur here from Antarctica that has a decoration on its head unlike anything that any other dinosaur in the whole, wide world has.'' says the Professor.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%;">I chose this article because I thought it seemed light and trivial compared to some of the more in depth articles I was reading. However, I think there can be some important points draw from it all the same. I know that my knowledge of Australian dinosaurs is fairly limited; to be honest I couldn't name one dinosaur that roamed our country. I agree that there should be perhaps more emphasis on history and geography in the student's classrooms today. We spend a lot of time learning about the Europeans settling in Australia and the history of the Aboriginal owners of the land, maybe we could spend some time learning about the amazing animals that came before us and the environment they lived in. I feel that learning about Australian dinosaurs and their impact on the world today would be a fun and imaginative topic that could be added to the rest of our important histor <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%; line-height: 115%;">y <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;">. (Simon Calvert)

Curriculum draft 'C'Grade The Age 26/4/2010

This very blunt article has been critcised by a Victoiran education chief that the national curriculum risks overcrowding and increases expectations of what schools should teach particular examples of learning table manners and children drowning in rips because schools didn't teach the children where rips were are given. The main driver of this article though, is global competence and whilst the new national curriculum is covering areas of engagement between Australia and Asia the article indicates the curriculum should cover all areas of global competence shuch as the Middle East. I totally agree with this statement we are a digital nation and just look what technology has done in the past century students are now conversing on face book globally and many businesses are conducted online with international counterparts. I also think it is very valuable to learn other languages how easy was it that K.Rudd was able to speak mandarin when he was dealing with his international counterparts! I am not assuming that every student in our class has political aspirations such as K Rudd but look how valuable that was to him in his career. Along with language comes the understanding also of different cultures, backgrounds, ways of living, sustainability all of which is so important to understand where we fit in the world and where we would like to fit in the world.(Belinda Vallerine)

[|Gillard defends curriculum content]​ (The Age, 02/03/10) by Bonny Symons-Brown for AAP
This newspaper article discusses the views of education spokespeople and leaders of the two major political parties in Australian politics and balances that with coments from Independent Education Union spokeswoman Christine Cooper. This article is an good example of how different stakeholders in a curriculum have very different views about it.

The Liberal party's Christopher Pyne "complained the document made no reference to the Magna Carta or the Westminster parliamentary system, on which Australia's political system was based." (AAP, The Age, 02/03/10) Why does a politican want students to learn about the parliamentary and political systems? This seems to be a good example of a particular stakeholder having a paticular interest and promoting that interest into the new national curriculum.

The Labour party's education minister at the time Julia Gillard defended Pyne's comments by saying that: "it was obvious Mr Pyne hadn't read the draft curriculum, which would explicitly teach children about the nation's administrative system and how it came to be." (AAP, The Age, 02/03/10) This kind of argument about what seem to be very minor aspects of the new national curriculum is made a joke of by Independent Education Union spokeswoman Christine Cooper as the article reports: "Ms Cooper called for all jurisdictions to urgently establish broad stakeholder consultation committees, to examine the local implementation needs." (AAP, The Age, 02/03/10) I think that this view shows a balanced reponse to the debate by saying implying that the curriculum is more important than the two arguing political parties.

I agree with both political parties that it is important for students to have a basic understanding of our political system and where it's origins lie. By students understanding the origins and past of our country may help their understanding of present day Australia and the parliamentary/political system is no different. This may also help school children understand the benefits of Australia's system compared to other past and present political systems from around the world.

For my own interest I looked at the draft national curriculum for history and whilst I could not find any explicit references to 'Magna Carta' or the 'Westminister Parliamentary System', there were numerous mentions of 'Australia's political development', 'The Making of the Australian Nation' and an 'Overview of Australia in the Modern World' (ACARA draft national curriculum for history, viewed @ []) I think that as future teachers we are going to be well equipped to make a decision about what important events/processes should be explored within the framework of the new national curriculum. Simon Moore

__“Think tank proposes Australian students be taught positives about Islam and Muslims” From: The Sunday Mail (Qld) July 11, 2010__

This article talks about a booklet, Learning From One Another: Bringing Muslim Perspectives into Australian Schools, that has just been published by the Australian Curriculum Studies Association and The University of Melbourne’s Centre for Excellence in Islamic Studies which contains a proposed plan by an education think tank that says “Every Australian school student would be taught positive things about Islam and Muslims and that Australia was a racist country.”

I do not agree with this at all. Children already have enough to learn at school. Introducing a subject such as the example above will upset a lot of people with differing religious beliefs. Why should children who are, say a Catholic, be required to learn about a totally different religion? The comments that were made regarding this article made it pretty clear that it would be widely unpopular. My own opinion is that I believe religion is a personal choice and it should not be taught to children at school unless you choose to send your child to a religious school. Let kids be kids and let them make up their own mind when they are old enough to do so. Kirsty Hughes

**__ Parks can be used for Environment Education (EE) __** (Jennifer Copley, June 28 2010)

This article is about taking the classroom out into the environment such as parks and gardens to create a hand on approach. Jennifer explains that the EE program increases test scores and reduces behaviour issues. The article indicated that since one particular school adapted the EE program that there was a decrease of 54% suspensions than their peers that were not involved in the EE program. It often included after school activities that keep the students occupied and reduced the crime committed in the community in the afternoons. I agree with all the areas that the EE program is promoting and that is-

As a teacher I would love the opportunity to embrace this teaching technique into the learning process. Being in the natural environment would stimulate the mind along with creating a pleasant casual outlook. I can say from my experience when at school I certainly didn’t enjoy being locked up in a classroom looking at the same things on the wall and a great big black board. As a parent I feel that my boys would really benefit from the EE program especially my 13 year old in year 7. He has very low concentration ability and gets board very easily and his creativity and curiosity gets lost in the classroom. Being out in the fresh air in amongst nature is always a great thing, isn’t it? (Karina Frank)
 * Social skills, where they will have to work together to complete projects
 * Critical thinking and decision making, they would be using their knowledge to solve real – world problems
 * Active participation, having hands on activities
 * Community orientation, having a sense of connection to their communities.
 * Personal responsibility.

Article retrieved from http:/educationalissues.suite101.com


 * __Maths ability at 'dangerously low' levels, The Age, 10/03/2010, written by Farrah Tomazin__**

//In this article Farrah reports on a report commissioned by the Group of Eight (Go8) universities which include Melbourne and Monash Universities which painted a very bleak picture of maths in Australia. The report cited trainee teachers suffered "mathematics phobia" and that high school students were dropping the subject to try and maximise their tertiary entrance scores. The report went on to say that Australia was facing a twin problem, a severe shortage of maths teachers, and not enough students doing the subject at the more advanced levels. Go8's chairman has said that the review's findings would be considered in a bid to "attempt to arrest the decline".//

//The review of mathematics education came after Education Minister Julia Gillard launched early in March the new national curriculum that will bring consistency to the four core school subjects: English, maths, science and history. Under the changes, maths will be scaled back from prep to year 10 so that fewer topics are covered, but three main "content strands" — numbers and algebra, measurement and geometry, statistics and probability — will be covered more comprehensively."//

I chose this article because I have recently become a volunteer adult literacy and numeracy tutor and I am dealing regularly with the product of Australia's decisions and practises of teaching mathematics from early education through to a tertiary level. I thought the phrase "mathematics phobia" was particularly insightful, as many people indeed do feel overwhelmed at the thought of what they perceive to be maths. The term "maths will be scaled back" I thought could be construed as fairly emotive, as many people in our community feel that not enough emphasis is being placed on maths as it is, however as I have learned through my volunteering, there is a great difference between maths and numeracy. Mathematics is in layman's terms at the more advanced end of the scale, areas such as algebra, geometry and statistics. Numeracy involves a much more day to day use of and approach to numbers, for example when used in day-to-day life activities such as reading a clock, going shopping, using a recipe, comparing food labels etc.

As a society I believe we need to cover both ends of the spectrum. We need to equip our children with basic numeracy skills and hopefully nurture a passion for discovering more about the possibilities of mathematics, particularly as so many industries now require a fairly high level of mathematics understanding to be considered for entry. So ultimately I agreed with this report, I think the writer reported quite accurately the Go8 group's report and response after some research of my own and I believe that whilst there were emotive words and phrases used in there such as "dangerously low levels" and "bleak" the claim that Australia is experiencing a shortage of maths teachers and that less students are taking up mathematics at tertiary levels or dropping out prior to then is true and of huge concern to all of us.


 * //Erin Bowerman//**


 * “Children are at school to learn, not 'think critically'”, by Chris Woodhead**
 * The Sunday Times, 25/07/2010**

A column by Chris Woodhead (2010) published in the UK newspaper “The Sunday Times” expressed the point of view that schools should not be teaching critical thinking skills. Specifically, Woodhead states “The aim should not be to develop "critical thinking skills" and they should not be encouraged to express their opinions on the texts. Who cares what they think or feel?”

I strongly disagree on a fundamental level. The development of critical thinking skills from an early age is crucial to raising children to be strong independent learners who are fully prepared for higher study should they choose to do so. Of course, not every student will go on to become an academic, but critical thinking is an essential attribute for young people growing up in an increasingly complicated world. While I am sure that Woodhead would not disagree that the primary purpose of the curriculum is to benefit the students, he demonstrate a complete lack of concern for the opinions of these key stakeholders. Woodhead seems to advocate a return of teaching by “rote learning” - that is, according to the Macquarie Dictionary (2005), “memorisation by repetition without explanation of principles." This utter disregard for the opinions of students seems to suggest that Woodhead is interested only in maintaining educational doctrines long since passed, ignoring decades of progress of both educational research and cultural development. Judging from his opinions in the article, Woodhead seems fixated on the past and unable to focus on the future. This is obviously an extremely poor outlook for anybody seeking to have a say in what we teach to the next generation of students.

In his article, Woodhead is specifically addressing the English literature curriculum, where he refers to Shakespeare, Keats, Austen, and Dickens. His position is that teaching dry facts about these authors and their works is preferential to developing the skills that are needed for students to critically assess the content for themselves. However, if a student elects to continue their studies of literature at a tertiary level, they will find that critical thinking skills are exactly what they will need. When a student is asked to write a critical evaluation of the themes explored within a book, they will be valued more for their ability to develop their own arguments, rather than regurgitating facts about the plot that they memorised in a high school class.

Steven D. Schafersman (1991) quotes Clement and Lochhead (1980) saying "We should be teaching students how to think. Instead, we are teaching them what to think." I believe this to be a crucial point in deciding on the direction we take when teaching students. To quote a well-known proverb: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

//References:// //Rote Learning. (2005). Macquarie Dictionary (4th ed.) New South Wales: Macquarie University// //Schafersman, S. D. (1991). An introduction to critical thinking. Retrieved from [|http://www.freeinquiry.com/critical-thinking.html]// //Woodhead, C. (2010, July 25). Children are at school to learn, not 'think critically'. The Sunday Times, p. 9.//

//(I know the referencing unnecessary for this task, but practice makes perfect!)//
 * //Liam Batchelor//**

Schools Rewriting Prehistory Courier Mail August 1st 2010

Primary School students are being taught that man and dinosaurs walked the earth together and that there’s fossil evidence to prove it. Fundamentalist Christians are hijacking religious instruction classes despite education experts saying creationism and attempts to convert children to Christianity have no place in state schools. Students have been told that Noah collected dinosaur eggs to bring on the Arc, and Adam and Eve were not eaten by dinosaurs because they were under a protective spell. Critics are calling for the RI program to be scrapped after claims emerged Christian lay people are feeding children misinformation. About 80 percent of children at state primary schools attend one half hour instruction a week, open to any interested lay person to conduct. I must admit that I agree with the Critics on this one. Spells are a fantasy that we see in the movies they aren’t real, although make believe is a wonderful thing, we don’t need to be teaching our children this. Religion is a tricky subject in schools and is one that needs to be left to the Church to teach. Therefore being a personal choice. That half hour a week could benefit students in many ways learning fact not fiction from a qualified teacher. There is plenty of time for fiction in stories, movies and of course children’s imagination. (Louise Griffiths)

__**‘Bushfire safety lessons to be taught at school.’ – Herald Sun, August 3, 2010**__

This article written by Peter Mickelburough for the Herald Sun, reports the call from the Bushfires Royal Commission, with the 2009 Black Saturday bushfire tragedy, for bushfire history and safety to be taught in schools. Mickelburough reports a quote from the commission that:

“Engendering in school children an understanding of bushfire and the attendant risk should be seen to be as important as ensuring that all Australian children learn to swim.” (Mickelburough, 2010)

The main claim that Mickelburough makes in this article is of the Commissions findings of the need for awareness of bushfire behaviour and the commissions hope of it being included in the new national curriculum.

I agree with the commissions claim as I believe that most schools with support of the local fire department already teach a portion of fire safety to primary children, it would be great to see this extended to all ages of students to reduce loss of life in any future bushfires. In most Australian areas we are in danger of being caught in these fires and it would be great, as quoted above, to not only teach our children to swim but to be fire safe.

- Mickleburough, P. (2010, August 2nd). Bushfire safety lessons to be taught at school. //Herald Sun// //[]//

**(Sally Medwin)**