Claims+in+the+Media+Sharon+10

=CLAIMS IN THE MEDIA - (Chantel Tilley)=
 * Source: "HIstory's forgotton voices", Age, The, Melbourne 15/07/06**
 * By: Anna Clark**


 * <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 17px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 25px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">'The views of students and teachers have been glaringly absent in the debate over **//what // //schools // //should // //teach // about our past and how they //should // //teach // it. **' **


 * This article talks and discuss the topic of 'how to teach history in schools across Australia'. Throughout this article John Howard interviewed random secondary students across Australia, to gather findings and insights on this particular topic. He **<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 17px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">spoke to students and teachers in high **<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 17px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">//<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 17px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">schools // **<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 17px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> across Australia as part of a research project funded by the Australian Research Council, to find out how they liked to learn best. The students stated with surprising articulation that "being taught a range of - often competing - perspectives made history interesting and relevant for them." These survey findings, also <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: 25px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">revealed student's ignorance of the very heritage they are about to inherit. Such research warned that the lack of national literacy among Australia's young could threaten the state of civic public life.

<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: 25px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">History teachers were initially enthusiastic about the prospect of a mandatory syllabus, but once it was implemented, they feared it was actually turning students off the subject. Post-compulsory history enrolments declined as a result of the compulsory subject in the junior years. In a submission to the History Teachers Association, one teacher said year 10 students were " finding this course boring and deadly dull!They have informed me that they will not be choosing modern history next year because they associate it with the sort of things they are studying this year!"

<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: 25px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I agree with this claim, because I feel that history (about one's country) is a very important topic that students should engage with and be taught. We need to know what students would like to hear, be taught and how they will best learn the in's and out's of this important topic/subject. It appears that many students do not know much about the history of their country, this is quiet a disconcerning thought. I feel that the only way we will really know how students and their teachers feel about this subject is to ask them. Perhaps History should be made compulsary into higher year levels?.

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.utas.edu.au/ehost/detail?vid=5&hid=9&sid=eccf0d35-aa46-4165-8dd5-d44b2d8d0d41%40sessionmgr111&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=anh&AN=SYD-5AG5JDGX094RT0AHBPI
= = = = = = = = =Claims in the media-Georgia McCristal=

__ http://www.liberal.org.au/Latest-News/Blog/2010/03/Is-the-national-curriculum-overdue-or-spoiled-by-PC.aspx __
Although it is obvious that the writer of this article is from opposing political background he raises valid points. He talks about the "serious concerns about the direction the curriculum drafters choose to take in a number of areas such as history and science." He argues that he has nothing against teaching primary school kids about aboriginals and their history, he believes it is a question of weight, priorities and perspectives as to when these students should be taught such themes. In relation to science he provides the point that students in year 9 will be taught chinese medicine before looking at the periodic table of elements which he believes is bizzare. He draws attention to the huge emphasis on history in the new curriculum and the need for universities to train students to teach it, stating there are only 16 universities that provide this training in Australia, ten of which are in NSW also stating that no money is being provided for training teachers for history. He ends his reports stating that all stakeholders need to have their say, that's if they can navigate their way around the curriculum website.

I believe that he has made some valid points, the input of the wider communities opinion can only be beneficial. Although it is a bias opinion, he is correct in bringing up the point the curriculum website is difficult to navigate around and leave your comments. I believe that the government needs to offer a system for those of the wider community who want to voice their opinion and have a say in the new curriculum should be able to, easily. 

=CLAIMS IN THE MEDIA - Donna Vlahos= SOURCE: “Schools should be free to teach what they want.” //March 2007; The Age; Berg, C.// // [] //

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 10pt; text-align: justify;">The writer of this article addresses the National Curriculum currently in the process of being implemented. The writer, Chris Berg, voices his belief that the curriculum is a bad idea and has been created without considering the difference in needs of a well fund school of 500 and a remote school of just 25. The writer includes that he would like schools to be able to tailor their own curriculum to the profile and social status of their student body without their being any minimum standard for schools. For example, Berg believes that the interpretation of History should be left to the discretion of schools. After much consideration into the author of the article’s views, I disagree with the position he has taken. I think a National Curriculum is setting the minimum standard for what should be taught to children in school. Schools should not be able to tailor this to suit their status or social standing, leaving students in some schools disadvantaged or learning from an influenced point of view. There is nothing that stops a school or teachers from adding to the curriculum. By allowing flexibility with subjects such as history, are we not just opening the door for people to be taught only certain aspects of society? For example, what if we allowed such flexibility and students were not taught of the history between Aboriginal and European Australians? Or only a one sided view of that part of our history? And, in turn, won’t our values and ideas about this topic regress to how they previously were, over 60 years ago, as a result? I believe no matter how large or small, or how high or low a school’s social standing may be rated as, all of Australia’s youth deserve equal opportunities to learn and develop in a diverse environment.

<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">This story is reporting on the creating of the national curriculum and how the professed reason for is because it’s for the 80,000 students that move interstate each year which is just 2.3% of the total student population. The article states “It is supposed to equally serve the needs of students attending Camberwell South Primary School, with 496 relatively well-off students, and those at Gochin Jiny Jirra School, a remote school in the Northern Territory with just 25.” The article also states “if we really wanted a revolution in education, we’d give schools flexibility to tailor the curriculum to the needs and profile of their student body.” <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">I disagree with this article, it has made a point that it is only going to benefit the 2.3% of students that move interstate each year but is missing the point that it is also going to benefit the teacher that decides to move interstate. It is going to make an easier job transition because they are going to know exactly what is expected of them and therefore be fully qualified to teach in that state – more qualified teachers equals better educated students. =Week 3 - What Should We Teach?= A.B.C. news Draft National Curriculum unveield By Samantha Hawley and David Mark Monday 1st March 2010
 * __<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Claims in the Media – Natalie Pauly __**
 * <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Schools should be free to teach what they want - **<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">[]

In this article it states that over 80,000 students move interstate each year and a national curriculum would make it easier for these students. I agree with this statement as my family and I moved from Victoria to Queensland. My children had to move up a year and therefore would finish school a year earlier than all their friends in Melbourne there was no testing done to determine their levels just reports from their previous school. They were placed according to their age. If there was a national curriculum then the transition between states would be a lot smoother and less anxiety for both students and parents. The article also discusses that the new curriculum is to be rolled out in 2011 and that no budget allowance has been made for professional training to support teachers. The concerns with the national curriculum are who will train the existing teachers in these areas. This is a very valid point and one to be taken seriously as there is a definite demand for a national curriculum, however it needs to be implemented in the correctly. If this stage is rushed and not researched to reflect the needs of all students as individuals then it will not serve its purpose and will fail in my opinion. The curriculum needs to be flexible and have the ability to engage all students in their learning based on their developmental needs. The expectation placed on the teachers when this is rolled out is to teach a document that they are expected to be fluent in, however without appropriate training this will be a very difficult ask I will be very interested to see what steps are to be put in place to train our existing teachers. I am very happy to be training now as it will become a part of our learning. There are some positives that will assist us as teachers as it will provide a bench mark that will be reflected throughout Australia which will allow us to achieve a certain standard that is reflected state-wide. I look forward to seeing the national curriculum I just hope that it is implemented correctly with the appropriate training. [] <span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Kayelene Theodore Tutorial group 10

Claims in the Media
<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">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.


 * <span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Report on one claim you have seen in the media about schools and what should be taught.


 * <span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Do you agree with this claim? Why/why not?

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Please ensure that you have expressed yourself clearly.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 96%;">When making your entry to this wiki please use a subheading to keep this page organised.

Schools Should Teach What They Want
The Age reports on an argument that schools should be free to teach what they want rather than having a national reform. I particularly agree with one paragraph in being in agreeance with a National curriculum which is broad in subject areas relating to the whole of students educational needs addressing cultural and world issues. "The professed reason for the national curriculum is that there are 80,000 students who move interstate each year. But there are 3½ million students all up. The curriculum is being imposed for the convenience of just 2.3 per cent of the student population." I moved interstate in my high school years and struggled greatly with the different stages and subject matter taught at the four high schools I attended in different states. I unfortunately have had to move my daughter and luckily the schools I have moved her to have been supportive in making the transition easier for her, however the cost of different text books in itself was a burden. My daughter being very bright has managed to adapt but it would have been so much easier for her to move into a class doing the same work. <span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">CHARMIAN COLE []

'Black armband' view risks national curriculum - [] On the 2nd of March 2010, Dan Harrison wrote an article in 'The Age' on the views that politicians have over the proposed National Curriculum.
 * __Claims in the media - by Jacquie Coad__**

Opposition education spokesman Christopher Pyne said the curriculum was unbalanced and seemed to push a black armband view of history he also said While there are 118 references in the document to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people and culture, there is one reference to Parliament, none to 'Westminster' and none to the 'Magna Carta', he said. Grade 9s will consider the personal stories of Aboriginal people and examine massacres and 'indigenous displacement', without any reference to the benefit to our country of our European heritage and the sacrifice of our forebears to build a nation.

So how do you decide what part of history is more important to teach? For example: Should it be the story of the land that we now live on or how our country developed from English settlement?

I know from my personal experience I remember learning about the First Fleet and the fun we had looking through archives and discovering how our ancestors arrived here. There was much discussion on whether we came here as a convict due to our Historic Port Arthur Settlement. We went and stayed down at Port Arthur and my most vivid memory would definitely be the ghost tours! What a shame if our future kids don’t have this wonderful opportunity at school.

While I agree with the need for our children to learn about our Indigenous past, I think the National curriculum must have a balanced approach and allow teachers the opportunities that surround them to help teach our history. Eg. **Tasmanian** children should have the opportunity to learn about Truganini but also the history of Abel Tasman.

<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">**__Claims in the media - Mellina Scavone__**

<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">**Should manners be taught in schools?** <span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">**[]** <span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">**This article from The Daily Telegraph that I found claims that students in the UK will have a class on manners introduced to secondary school to 'reverse the rudeness and violence that many feel have become endemic among the young'.**

<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">**I agree with this, but feel this is something that should be introduced into primary school and continue on through a child's schooling. The subject of manners and fairness could be included in the curriculum through health and wellbeing or studies of society and environment, as it is an important skill for any member of society to have and a skill that many children (from my observations) do not seem to value.**

<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Claims in the media (Nicole Wojcik)

<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Curriculum Draft 'C Grade' [] This article has been published in Melbourne's, 'The Age.' This article speaks of Mr Howes grading the new national curriculum with a 'c'. Mr Howes says 'Time is not an elastic phenomenon we need to get consenses on what school should be teaching, schools cannot do the lot.' I agree with Mr Howes statement I feel that there are many matters that should be taught at home rather than at school. Teachers simply do not have enough scheduled time to teach their students matters such as 'reading where rips are,' as Mr Howes states. Mr Howes also makes abother point, 'there was no definition of what it was that should be taught.' I agree with this statement also. I believe that there should be a balanced curriculum that should be put into place, however as we are living in an ever-changing society it is difficult to pin point exactly what a student should be educated on.

**__Claims in the Media – Sara Hugen__** Religion in schools to go God-free [] This article by Michael Bachelard from 2008 discusses how the Victorian State Government wants to introduce “humanist applied ethics” classes to students in place of traditional religious lessons. Thus giving students the ability to decide for themselves.

I have to agree with some areas of this article. However, changing from a white view of religion to a black one is definitely not the answer. Having being brought up myself in a catholic school I understand the limitations of specific religious study on the larger understanding of worldly views. With all this talk of a national curriculum to suit the whole of Australia; is it not possible to include religion also? Why can’t we base the lessons on “humanist applied ethics” but further the discussions into a variety of religions? Therefore deflecting the focus from one religion solely and allowing children to “make decisions for themselves.” If parents feel so strongly about religion and enforcing their beliefs on their children these children should be enrolled in private schools that offer a more “focussed” education on their selected religion. I believe mandatory lessons in religion and ethics are extremely important in these changing times. I see the intolerance of others all around me, and it is because we are ignorant to others beliefs. We don’t understand it or know anything about it so we automatically don’t like it. Teachers are taught that we should be readying our children to be lifelong learners. Thus, we should be teaching them everything there is to know, and religion is a part of that, so that they can make their own decisions.

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">**__ Claims in the Media - Brooke Gordon __** <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">[] <span style="color: #000080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">**Primary school children 'should be taught technology, not tradition'** <span style="color: #000080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">This article which I found on the internet was written by Alexandra Frean and published in **The Times** in December 2008. The article is based on the opinion of Sir Jim Rose, a former schools inspector and senior government education adviser. He is recommending a new approach to learning, "moving away from the teaching of traditional subjects, such as history, geography, music and RE, towards a focus on teaching organised around six general themes: English communication and languages; mathematics, science and technology; human, social and environmental understanding; physical health and wellbeing; and art and design". He believes that “we need to teach important things, but we need to give children opportunities to apply them across subjects.” Sir Jim Rose also speaks about how literate young students are with computers in this day and age and that they should be learning in Primary what is now taught in secondary. <span style="color: #000080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">Further in the article John White, of the Institute of Education, said that, "Sir Jim's six areas of learning were “too academic” and did not allow enough space to focus on children's personal development." <span style="color: #000080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">I found myself agreeing with John White's opinion over Sir Jim Rose. I don't think that there needs to be an enormous amount of computer technology skills taught in primary schools. My opinion, based on what I see in the classroom, is enough for the children to know exactly how to use a compuer and its programs. The tasks they are given in most of the subject areas, for example; geography, history, literacy, etc, incorporates using a computer anyway, whether it be typing up the assessment/work or even researching the task/issue first. I think also that a lot of students, depending on the school, already use computers and technology a great deal in their home and personal lives, so it would be 'overkill' to fill the cirriculum with more and more computers and technology. <span style="color: #000080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">In regards to Sir Jim Rose's opinion on the cirriculum being based around six general themes, although I think this could work, I believe the following statement made by John White in the article “what could happen is that you are just replacing one set of categories of learning with another, without looking at what learning is for,” is an excellent response. Afterall, you are replacing one with another. No matter what the subject areas are called or primarily based around I think that all students, parents and teachers want our children/students to achieve the same outcome. As long as the cirriculum covers all of these areas which I think it currently does, then there is no need to spend more time and money changing it.

__**Claims in the media - Emma Cornick**__ [] This article, History program dated, was printed in **The Age,** June 16 2010. Writer, Dan Harrison discusses the need for history to be updated under the proposed national curriculum. Harrison states that 'terrorism, popular culture, technology and globalisation should be included in the national curriculum to make the subject more interesting and relevant to students' which adds questions as to why are these areas not going to be included and who decides what is classed as history, many of these areas are relevant to modern history and don't children have a right to learn about these important issues? Or are they not considered part of our history? Are they not 'old' enough? Even the president for The History Teachers Association of Australia states that there is 'a desperate need' for more social history. Shouldn't this body of people be having a say in the proposed curriculum seeing as they are the association representing history teachers, I am sure they would have a valuable insight as to what is working in classrooms and what is not. Harrison also mentions that enrolments are down in NSW in this area and that the subject 'had changed little in NSW in two decades'. Well we all know that history does not change as such but surely with the enrolment numbers down in this subject, it must not be ignored, its a cry for help, it is evidence that it needs a shake up, things need to be reassessed, paths need to be created to allow for more creative, interesting ways to present the curriculum. The proposed curriculum should have incorporated all these areas, they could have learnt from the past mistakes because all children have a right to know their history including modern history, our future politicians, doctors, care givers, mothers and fathers should all know their countries and their worlds history because without it we would not be where we are today. I feel very strongly about this article but I would be very disappointed if the proposed curriculum does go ahead without adopting any new measures or shaking up the curriculum so people will be wanting to learn and not just feel that it is of no relevance to them seeing as it is only the past.
 * History program 'dated.'**

[|aderrick1] This media release looks at the national curriculum and how students with special needs are not being catered for. Fiona Forbes is quoted in the release and represents the Australian Special Education Principals Association (ASEPA) as its National President. She highlights the deficiencies of a national curriculum which should be a document that includes ALL Australian students. The release declares that 5% of Australian students have special needs and that this new curriculum will not ensure that necessary skills will be taught. Ms Forbes believes that changes are vital if we are to produce an inclusive curriculum document for all Australian students.

This report does not specify WHAT should be taught, however, if the ASEPA has serious concerns, it is hoped that those developing the new national curriculm are listening.

ASEPA represents over 1000 leaders in the area of special needs education for students of Australia.

Reference: Media release: National curriculum. Misses the mark for students with special needs in our schools. Retrieved 20th July, 2010, from: www.asepa.org.au

I found another report that looks at the effect of digital media on young children's learning. Research has been conducted in this field and reveals that '...developmental milestones are changing as young peoples' access to mobile and digital technologies grows, which positively impacts on their learning'.

This is a fantastic claim! The report goes on to say that the use of digital media is '... transforming language practices which, (through its use), is providing students with the opportunity for personal and global connectedness'.

Reference: The digital world of young children: Emergent literacy. Retrieved 20th July, 2010, from []

I agree with this claim. It used to be thought that computers will 'never catch on', but this and many other ICTs are getting more and more advanced with a wide range of applications. It's our job to keep up with this technology if we are to teach our students - or are they going to teach us!!?

This article is stating schools need to be teaching core values within the learning environment and cannot operate as "value free zones" I found the introductory claim interesting. Edition: 1 - First with the news Section: News, pg. 013
 * Move to teach core values**
 * []**

Schools should teach values such as tolerance, respect and social justice as part of the curriculum, a Federal Government report has recommended.

A trial values education program conducted at 69 schools nation-wide has produced a list of 10 core values for consideration in the development of a national values framework for Australian schools.

The list also included responsibility, excellence, freedom, inclusion and trust, care, honesty and being ethical. This to me is facinating because aren't schools and teachers already doing this? I think these values are and should be the core of any person,teacher,student and school alike, yes they should be implemented with the community involved as the article states. Why do we need these "trials" run in schools only, I thought one of the main things taught in schools were values, I know the one I work for certainly tries to teach the meanings of these "values" everyday, including our No Dole Ledger. The issue are not always with the students or what is left for the education department to teach but rather the environment in which these students live. Lower income areas, peers and a poor community involvement with schools are all factors in which values can be dissmissed. The area in which I work can be alikened to the bronx, unfortunately it is hard enough keeping these students interested in coming to school everyday, therefore I feel the families/carers and community need to step up and reiterate these values, at home, within the community so they are not lost as soon as the student leaves the classroom. The Federal Government can then turn its attention on other areas of the curriculum, but also focusing on these bronx like conditions that seem to extinguish these sacred values in which they feel our students do not have.

__ Claims in the media by Melanie Anning __ Title: //__ NEW GUIDELINES TO HELP COMBAT OBESITY IN SCHOOL CHILDREN; __// Lesson in healthy eating Advertiser, The (Adelaide), SEP 07, 2004 Database: Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre The article states that new healthy eating guidelines have been implemented to help schools combat obesity. The guidelines suggest that schools should:

I agree with this article. An estimated 1.5 million people under the age of 18 are considered overweight or obese. This means that about 20-25% of Australian children are overweight or obese. It costs more than $56 billion a year to care for the nation’s overweight and obese people. Health risks include: The health risks go on and on. Childhood obesity can interfere with social functioning. It can have a major impact on how children feel about themselves and how they interact with others. It can cause poor self- esteem, which may impact on other aspects of children’s lives, most particularly the development of friendships and competency at school.
 * Teach nutrition as a part of the curriculum.
 * Enable students to grow, choose and prepare food.
 * Support community programs to provide breakfast for children who do not have breakfast at home.
 * Make healthy foods available in canteens.
 * Type 2 diabetes
 * Eating disorders
 * Orthopedic disorders
 * Liver problems
 * Respiratory disorders

I think that breakfast programs in schools are a great idea. Research has shown that that as many as one in four children go to school hungry. Eating breakfast can help improve a person’s mood, increase concentration, mental performance and memory. Of course it would be better if parents ensured that their children had breakfast before coming to school, but the facts are that many parents do not, mostly due to early work commitments. Breakfast clubs are not a cost for the taxpayer or the school. Parents pay a small amount so that their child can be dropped off early and have a warm drink and a piece of toast before school starts.

Teaching children to grow and prepare food at school has enormous benefits for the students, the school and the community. Some of these benefits include:

The article states: ‘While the feeding of children and adolescents is primarily a family responsibility, a significant amount of time is spent at school and preschool, and health-enhancing behaviors should be learned, practiced and supported there.’ I think this is true. Times have changed. More women are choosing to enter the work force, instead of working at home. The stress and pressures at home, I believe, are greater, with mothers trying to be super mums, working, keeping a perfect home and taking children to dozens of extra curricular activities. There are just not enough hours in the day for parents to do everything they want. With all the benefits that kitchen gardens, breakfast clubs and healthy eating provide for the students, teachers, the school and the community, why wouldn’t everyone want this happening in their school?
 * Developing new skills in the kitchen and garden that equip students to lead lives that are not dependent on processed foods.
 * Experience new foods, flavors and textures.
 * Develop social skills for example sharing food and conversation at the table.
 * Develop a practical understanding of environmental issues such as soil health, water management, seed saving and organic pest control.
 * Build students’, families’ and local communities’ pride in their school, which can lead to less vandalism and increased enrolments.
 * Connect diverse people with common interests, through volunteer participation and local business sponsorship.

Claims in the media. Theresa Blizzard
Source: [|www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/is-the-national-curriculum-overdue-or-spolied-by-political-correctness] written by Senator Brett Mason, former university lecturer and Shadow Parlimentary Secretary for Education and School Curriculum Standards.

This article plays with the thought that while the idea of a National Curriculum is overdue, the reality of its implementation and lack of funding for current teachers to upskill in areas that they will need to teach, is lacking. Senator Mason goes onto say that he sees the problem with the draft curriculum is the decision to weave through all the subject areas three "cross-curriculum perspectives no matter how relevent these overacrching themes are to each subject." He sees that we should be teaching our childrenabout the indigenous perspective, committment to sustainable patterns of living and emphasis on the Asia and Australia's engagement withthe region. He questions however, the weight, priorities and perspectives as to how much, when and in what context students are required to learn about these themes.

My thoughts are similar but not as negative about the whole thing. I think his are so negative because his political views are not the same as the Government's. However, that being said, I wonder what the response will be from teachers when a child asks them about something like where do babies come from? will this be answers by the child who is wanting ananswer then and there, or will they be told to wiat until grade 2? (If it is even going to be covered) I guess I just would hate to see childrens enthusiasm be squashed becasue it's not time to learn about that topic yet, or will common sense prevail, and children's thirst for knowledge be quenched as required? As far as the political correctness goes, I think it has gone too far a long time ago. Can't we teach the facts from all side as they happen so that children can form opionons for themselves. For example Aboriginal heritage and culture is always a big topic in the news at least twice a year and more, if a 'significant' landmark is discovered, ie the Midlands bypass, Sorry Day and Australia Day. Why can't teachers present the facts. We can't change history, but we can influence the future thinking on such topics. We can make a difference with our children. Yes they need to know about the discovery of Australia by White settlers and the casualities suffered as a result to Aboriginal people. They need to know about the large convict presence, the stolen generation, federationand so on. A little bit of everything to show how we became the counrty we are today. But do it as the chidlren are interested in it, and at their lvel of understanding, so as to maintian theri enthusiasm. Australia is made up now of many cultures it is what makes us the country that we are. Would it not be respectful to teach our children a little about all religions, that there is not one right or wrong, but that they are just different. When do we stop and say it is what it is, lets move on and make it better everyone on equal ground. Let our children be given all the facts, use it as a teaching tool for respect, diversity, morals, critical thinking, history, culture, politics etc. A manhole is a manhole not a person hole. In my current role I am referred to as an educator, which is fine with me, but it was also fine for me over the past 17 years to be called a carer. I think the idea of being called an educator is great for the profession for early childhood as it riases the profile for us all who are doing that, but if someone was to call me a child carer today, that would be fine by me, I'm proud of what I do, no matter what the name. It's the same job. I would also like to see each current teacher be able to do a skills audit on themselves against the draft curriculum, and identify areas of weakness, and then be trained up in that area. But hten there is the time factor, do you offer a student free day, pay them for attendence over school holiday times, do it after hours or get a number of relief teachers in for a day spread across the week - Kinder Mondays, Gr 1 Tuesday etc? The roll out of such training would be enormous and costly, but if the Governemnt is committed to making this work, then in my opionion they need to back it up with some obvious support to the teachers delivering it.

__**Claims in the Media by Carole Goldsmith**__
Source - Malcolm, C. (n.d). Move to teach core values. Courier Mail, The (Brisbane), Retrieved from Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre database.

The article refers to a Federal Government report that reccommends schools include lessons on tolerance, respect, inclusion, responsibility and other core values, in the Curriculum. According to the article the Governement Report suggested that schools could not operate as 'value free zones', but also acknowledged that the Governement could not "impose" values on school communities.

The article cites a comment from Dr Brendan Nelson who says "Education is as much about building character as it is about developing specific skills..." The article also referred to a Government Trial run in a number of schools trialling the specific teaching of these core values.

It would intersting to actually read about the "Trial" and how the lessons were implemented specifically to teach core values. It seems unneccessary to teach specific values as I personally don't see how any school can operate without imposing or expecting some values in education. It would seem common sense that schools could not operate successfully without imposing some core values and expectations of complying behaviours. In all situations I have worked in (from preschool to Grade Six) - children are expected to show respect for their class mates - initially through listening quietly and politely responding in a sharing circle. Children are taught to respect other children's differences - (tolerance and inclusion) and are expected to take responsibility for their actions - as consequences imposed for unacceptable behaviour. Children are required to be honest and teachers offer trust to those that are. All these values are essential in the classroom to maintain order and establish a positive environment for all children.

I am not sure that there needs to be specific lessons to teach values as they are automatically encorporated into the general day to day classroom operations. Although a focus on these values with clarification of specific terms could be a valuable lessons for some groups of children and could be intergrated into various learning areas, ie HPE, or SOSE, historicalo enquiry or Literacy. Schools should not operate as a segregated environment, but blend into their community and endeavour to help produce young people with good values in accordance with family, extended family and community. I believe it would be be neglectful if schools did not attempt to teach their students core values to assist them in becoming valuable citizens of their community. For some students school may be the only place that they do learn values such as responsibility, honestry and respect. In, these circumstances it would be beneficial to have these values cleverly intergrated into the curriculum in an attempt to steer vulnerable students in the right direction.

Claims in the Media Tamatha Creely

DAMIEN BROWN March 02, 2010 12:01am []
 * School curriculum trial secrecy**

Basically the report starts out by utilising the new national curriculum with the trial phase announced so that draft can also have trial and error reported back to ACARA, before national roleout. This will then allow for any changes needed and resources to be added when and where required. The heading is such that it draws you into the article, with the reader thinking there may be contraversal findings. The article continues with groups not being happy with the implementation and the time frame with which to be ready and accountable for lack of preparation. However, something the article's heading doesn't convey is that Tamanian premier, will endorse more time for preparation despite federal government's mandate on when the implementation will occur.

Surprisingly there aren't many responses to the article, although I feel that many readers would be confused about the hidden agenda of the media representation or have become over satuarated with all the publicity at this time with regard to the article. One comment states however the reasoning behind why Tasmanian teachers are feeling overwhelmed by it all. Three education overhauls in 8 years along with changes in teaching practise would be unsettling to us all when trying to implement structure to the classroom and being comfortable teaching with the new directions. Teachers take quite some time to plan topics/lessons for the betterment of their students. Not to mention implementing new assessments and reporting proceedures.

This article also touches on the contraversal Tasmanian Tomorrow implementation for year 11-12's, so as to further add flavour to the debate of the new national curriculum.

I agree in principle that education should be the same in all states, and be able to move around the country, knowing there isn't any gaps in education. This is also primarily the responsibilty of parents to ensure they research the local schools and values, so as to make an informed choice of education for their children. However, we should also expect that what is being taught in one school, is the same as the next one in another suburb.