Claims+in+the+Media+Eve+03

=​​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)

Claims in the Media

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

 The article I read online regarding what should be taught in schools is called://"Teachers Warn Against Cutting Student Hours for Technology and Design" - Jessica Mahar. July 2010.//

 []

 The article is in relation to a proposal to cut the amount of hours, per week that students have direct access to design and technology subjects. The argument presented by critics to the idea was that if this subject is cut down in the curriculum that Australia will see less and less students aspiring to becoming technology teachers, engineers and designers in the future.  Another point made in the article was that cutting this subjects contact hours down will cut students access to a lot of other skills which can be acquired through the use of computers, such as numeracy and literacy.

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

 I agree completely with the teachers opposing the cut. The hours should be increased if anything. Technology and design ARE the future. There will be no job in Australia which doesn't require some if not highly advanced computer and technological skills.  If the curriculum for this subject is cut down and students have no interest in the topic, we will see a shortage of skilled technologists in our Country.  I think that there are ways for classroom teachers to include technological studies into their curriculum if the hours are cut. Using computers could be incorporated with any other curriculum area.

 Jess Beer

===Further to the above article, I Found an article in The Age dated, March 7, 2010 titled "Schools should be free to teach what they want" ===

===<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The article discusses the new National Curriculum and why the subjects of Science and History raise a lot of contention. Furthermore it discusses why or why not a national curriculum is suitable for all schools Australia wide. As the title suggests the writer Chris Berg, leans toward schools designing their own curriculum, and if having to adopt national curriculum, at least History should be flexible in regard to course material and what is taught. === ===<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">I agree in some respects with the writer's opinion as i do think Schools and students demographics vary so widely across this country, however I also see many benefits in a national curriculum and believe quality teachers are still capable of bringing a lot to a standardised curricula and using creativity to teach according to students' needs. ===

<span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">I found this article in the Geelong Advertiser: April 13th, 2010. <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;"> **TORY MAGUIRE: __Teach kids how to cook__** <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;"> [] <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">**<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Tory writes about how obesity has now passed smoking as the leading cause of illness and death in Australia. She thinks it’s time we teach our kids how to cook; make cooking compulsory for both boys and girls in our schools. Until we do this, she thinks there will always be myths that take away food is a cheaper and easier option. ** <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;"> Tory makes reference to Practising dietician Julie Gilbert’s remarks. Julie Gilbert discusses how parents are confused about food, food labels, and some parents don’t even know where to begin, when it comes to preparing a meal. She mentions how a whole generation of parents have missed opportunities to learn how to cook as it was considered sexist in schools. She comments that there is a pretty simple solution to this problem, “Make the boys learn too.” She feels it is now time to re-educate society in cooking and meal preparation and include cooking in our school curriculum.
 * <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">Tory Maguire states “all those arguing over which version of history should be contained in the national curriculum might want to think about a subject that could mean our current generation lives long enough to achieve some level of appreciation of that history.” **

<span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">I do agree with the claims made in this article. I believe we do need to educate our children about food, its nutritional value, and how we prepare and cook it. I agree that Obesity is a major issue in Australia and we do need to change this. I think a good starting point for solving this problem is educating society; beginning with the children in our schools, so the future generations can benefit from this. But in saying so, I think we need to educate parents as well, so they begin to model healthy and nutritious food practices within the family home. I believe education about food and food preparation may be the only way we as a society may overcome this problem.
 * <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">Tory's final statement says that “ **<span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">There's a happy place in between gourmet and fast food and the only place left to ensure we continue to get there is our schools.”
 * <span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Do you agree with this claim? Why/ why not **

<span style="color: #244061; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;"> (Leeanne Marriner)

I have attached my claims on the media piece under the discussions page, hopefully this is acceptable :). (Vicky Muises-Khoury)


 * <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="color: #404040; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 81%;"> The article I read online was by Chris Berg who is a research fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs, it was published in the Sunday Age on 7/3/2010. Berg is advocating flexiblity over the national curriclum's one-size-fits-all futility, it is titled, schools should be free to teach what schools want. ==== ====Berg states, that although the Liberals are arguing against the national curriculum and some of its content, it was Julie Bishop as Education Minister who in 2006 suggested a national board of studies. He gives warning to political parties that what you start may not always be yours to own forever and a new government may take what was yours and turn it into theirs.==== ====He argues that some of the content is not to his liking that it is not an awful curriculum which is about all he can say about it. Berg proposes that schools should have control of the curriculum to tailor the curriculum to the needs and profile of their student body. He does not think that the 3.5 million students should be made to squeeze themselves into the national curriculum when the minority of 80,000 students may benefit from the national curriculum.==== []

<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%;"> I agree with most of his claims, although I am not sure how it would be to regulate if schools did have control of the curriculum ot tailor the curriculum to the needs and profile of their student body. I certainly think that schools should have some input or influence on the curriculum in their school and be able to have it match their school community and not have to try to accommodate an awkard fit for them.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> Do we need a national curriculum I think yes, I do not think Berg is convinced. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> (Lisa Hitchcock)


 * <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%;">The article I read was published in the Herald Sun on March 26th, 2010 and was written by former footballer Gary Ablett Snr.

<span style="color: #008000; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/what-kind-of-world-do-we-want-to-live-in/story-e6frf7jo-1225845501207

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> Gary makes the case that Intelligent design and Australia's Christian heritage need to be taught in schools. He writes " Our culture struggles under the massive weight of increasing problems associated with hatred, anger, violence, alcohol and drug abuse, depression and suicide, family breakdown, the devaluing of human life and dignity, and a growing disrespect for law and order, to name just a few" <span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">He believes that "we have shifted further and further away from the inclusion of anything godly in our planning, decision-making and policy-setting; so while we watch our standards crumble and our moral foundations erode away, we somehow simultaneously manage to sit back and wonder why society has no sure and stable footing left on which to build a strong and solid culture?"

Gary asks why evolution is taught as fact in our schools, when even according to Michael Dentin in his book; //Evolution, A Theory in Crisis//, Charles Darwin himself stated, that he had no concrete evidence, or the science to prove that evolution was indeed a fact.

<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%;"> I agree with Gary, that evolution should not be taught as fact when there is not enough evidence to prove it is the ultimate answer. If it must be taught then it should be taught as a theory alongside Intelligent Design, so that students can make up their own minds about what they believe.

(Natalie Lonsdale)

I found this article online regarding what should be taught in schools. It goes under the heading **“//Draft national school curriculum a disaster waiting to happen, says Opposition Education spokesman Christopher Pyne.”//** From AAP, Herald Sun, by Phillip Hudson, Steve Larkin, March 01, 2010 12.00 AM.

[]

The article expresses Christopher Pyne’s disgust in the draft national curriculum and Julia Gillard’s explanations of why topics have been included.

Christopher Pyne said that the coalition supports a national curriculum but not what the present government has included in it.

He states that the draft national curriculum “has been skewed to a black armband view of Australian history.” Mr Pyne is unhappy with the large content of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander culture contained in the draft history curriculum and the lack of more important aspects of Australia’s history. He goes on to express his concerns to include Sorry Day, which is to be taught to year 3 students. There were reports suggesting Sorry Day be given the same significance as Anzac Day.


 * Do I agree with this Claim? Why/why not? **

I was pleased to see both parties agreeing that there was a need for a national curriculum. My concerns are every time there is a shift in leadership; will there be changes in what our children are to be taught? Kevin Rudd was the “Sorry” leader so the Labor government wants to include this. Was this a politically motivated statement and not an historical one? I do agree we should include a more balanced history curriculum including our aboriginal history but keep the politicians out of the decision making of what goes into our curriculum if possilbe.

What really concerned me was My Pyne’s statement “A coalition government would review the curriculum and if the review confirms our very serious doubts, then we will scrap the national curriculum and will start again.” I hope he doesn’t mean the lot, surely they can agree on some aspects. I don’t think it is hard to see the impact this would have on our curriculum and purse.

(Jenni Hogan)

<span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">The Article I’m responding to is Lesson in healthy eating” <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Authors: <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> |slrl','');|By Medical Writer JILL PENGELLEY <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> Source: <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> |jdbanhjnh||ssJN "Advertiser, The (Adelaide)"||sljh','');|Advertiser, The (Adelaide) ; 07/09/2004 <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.utas.edu.au/ehost/detail?vid=17&hid=104&sid=1d078e8e-fcc4-4362-ad74-e469397f983a%40sessionmgr112&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=anh&AN=200409071015587918

<span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> The Article was about healthy eating being included into guidelines in South Australia to try and reduce obesity in school children. The article stated that good eating patterns have to be learned and we need good role models (Parents, Teachers ect.) to encourage children to eat the right foods. It included an example of a school that has a ‘garden to table’ program that the principle said was very well supported by the parents. In another school (Secondary) a home economics teacher said that ‘some parents were not doing their job.’ She then went on to say that it shouldn’t be the responsibility of schools to teach things like, healthy eating and sex education, but parents are to ‘time poor’ so it is being left to the teachers


 * <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Do you agree with this claim? Why/why not? **

<span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> I agree with this article, that schools have to implement healthy eating programs to reduce the risks of obesity in children because some parents are not setting very good examples. But I also agree with the home economics teacher that it shouldn’t be the responsibility of the schools to teach things that children should be learning at home from their parents. I think it is sad, as good eating habits should be learnt at home from a very early age (1 and 2 year olds). <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> The need to educate children about healthy eating has come to rest with the schools but it would be nice to see this change in the future, but I’m not sure that it will. <span style="color: #548dd4; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> (Rachelle Collins)

**Claims in the media**
The article that I am responding to was written by Heath Gilmore HIGHER EDUCATION. Sydney Morning Herald, The, 27/11/2009; (AN SYD-5S0OOO0D9LKM1XJMCFT) and was found in the ANZ Reference Centre Database [|http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.utas.edu.au/ehost/resultsadvanced?vid=2&hid=105&sid=f77756c1-bbc1-4ac4-8a99-e9f1d34cf66d%40sessionmgr114&bquery=(schools+should+teach+indigenous+culture)&bdata=JmRiPWFuaCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl]

In the article Gilmore claims that the new national curriculum will include Indigenous Australian culture. The author goes on to explain how subjects such as english, science, maths and history will soon contain an indigenous perspective. The author continues to state how inportant it is that school children are aware of indigenous culture and history. Gilmore states that Aboriginal leaders have criticised professionals who have before excluded them from the development of the curriculum.
 * Do you agree with this claim? Why/Why not?**

I would have to say that I do agree with this article to some extent. I agree that it is very important that students learn about Aboriginal history and culture. I also feel that it would be beneficial for Aboriginal leaders to also contribute their thoughts into the development of the curriculum. Indigenous culture is an interesting and important part of Australian history, and it should be taught is schools in an interesting and hands-on way. An example that Gilmore used in his article was that in maths, teachers could use counting methods from Aboriginal tribes to solve problems that relate to Aboriginal data. This would be a good example of the way that Indigenous culture could be incorporated into the curriculum.

(Erin Sell)

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">Report on one claim you have seen in the media about schools and what should be taught
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> The article I read regarding what should be taught in schools was an article about ‘teaching specific religion education in schools’ the article was written by KYLIE ORR. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> [] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> She states ‘specialise in only one religion at a non-religious school is a little odd’

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> I do not believe specific Religion Education should be taught at schools; because Australia is a multicultural society and that there are many religions/faiths and beliefs within our society so religious freedom should be respected. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> It's more important to bring religious communities together then to drive them apart, and teaching specific religion in schools will divide students and drive them apart further. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> Further to the above article I found an article written by Michael Streich and in his article he argues that general religion should be taught in schools. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> [] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> He states ‘Several different approaches can be taken in the development of meaningful religion classes that are not tied to any particular faith.’ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> ‘Courses can follow a general curriculum such as:’


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">Contemporary World Religions
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">The Literary Traditions of Major World Religions
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">The Literature of Ethics in Religious Studies
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">Comparative Religion
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">The Bible and the Qur’an as Historical Documents
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">War and Peace in Historical Religions

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> I agree with the Michael Streich’s article because I don’t think Religion should be left out of the curriculum all together. Students should learn about different religious practices and when it’s done in an academic way, children will then learn of the similarities that these religions hold and not focus on the differences. When children are educated about the religious beliefs of others, they become more tolerant individuals because Intolerance is bred from misunderstanding so the more understanding we have of each other, the more we become a united community. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;"> (Hawraa Al Mosawy)

_ = = = Curriculum's narrow focus leaves students bereft of big ideas =

** LIBBY TUDBALL **
March 2, 2010

In this article Libby Tudball discusses the need for the Australian curriculum to address issues that are relevant to Australia and the rest of the world. Areas which include climate change, economic issues, refugees, technological challenges and social dislocation of youth.

Libby Tudball suggests that while going back to “basics” with English, maths, science and history is important, it is a narrow approach. She voices her concern that broad social issues are under threat of being passed over in the rush to develop a national curriculum.

= http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/by/libby-tudball =


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

I do agree that we need to address the broader social issues that our children will face in the future. Our children need to understand and be prepared for an ever changing world, one which most certainly will hold some serious challenges for them. We need to teach them more than to read, write and count. We need to teach them how to enquire about their world, how to sustain it. We need to teach them how to learn. Giving our children current and contentious issues to deal with will assist them to understand the world they live in and hopefully engender a desire to participate in its future. A narrow focus is just that and I dread to think it will produce students whose thought processes are also just that – “narrow”. (Mahala Pirpiris)

__** 'TEACH CHILDREN TO DRIVE' **.__ I found this article in the Herald Sun on Friday 23rd of July. Former racing driver, Allan Moffat says "Children as young as 12 should be taught how to drive as part of the school curriculum. He believes that "by not learning how to drive at a young age is a sure way of killing yourself if you have no idea what you are doing and being stupid". A survey by the Confederation of Australia Motor Sports shows that 72% of their members want driving to be compulsory in secondary school. 80% believe that driver Ed would impact on the road toll more so than increasing the diving age. The driving curriculum would include an all day initial driving course with refresher sessions during the year. Trinity Grammar Principal, Richard Tudor believes that a compulsory program would every unlikely, but he supports the idea of voluntary sessions after school. He however said "the issue of drink-driving should be an essential part of the school curriculum" __** DO I AGREE? **__ I do not think that this is a subject that should be in our curriculum. I think this is one of those things that is up to the parents to teach. It's about teaching them to be responsible, know the real dangers of driving and making good choices for themselves. Driving in the curriculum would be in a controlled environment, it might teach how to give way or do a hand brake start, but unless the children are being taught out on the roads in real life situation, (impossible for 12 year olds), what would be the point? Another reason I object is because it would be crowding an already crowded curriculum and some aspects of being socially responsible are being covered in SOSE. (Narelle Pitts)

Part 1: Claims in the media

Curriculum draft ‘C grade’, was written by Jewel Topsfield education editor and appeared in The Age (26/04/10). Topsfield reports on claims that were made by David Howes, the general manager of curriculum at Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, that the national curriculum runs the risk of being overcrowded. Howe claims that ‘rather than singling out Australia’s engagement with Asia, the curriculum should talk about “global competence”. Howes indicates that he agrees with the inclusion of ‘inter-cultural understanding in the national curriculum.’

I agree with most of the points that Howe makes. There is a need for ‘inter-cultural understanding’ which one would assume would tie in with perspectives of ‘global competenc[y].’ I do however, disagree with Howes point about not ‘singling out Australia’s engagement with Asia,’ as I believe that if we are creating a curriculum meets the needs of the future, we need to fully acknowledge and explore our ties with Asia. It is my belief that this engagement will equip our students with the skills and knowledge to participate in future business and cultural dealings with Asia.

<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">What should be taught in our schools?
===<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">I found an article "ANZAC values taught to high school students" By Natalie Poyhonen ABC News Apr 20, 2010. The article acknowledged that students of today should recognise and respect what these men and women did for our country and that we should be proud of where we came from and how it came about. ===

<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">"I think we are a really small, proud country that does big things," she said.
===<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;"> "I think remembering where we've come from and what we can achieve just from sheer spirit and courage is extremely important, especially today's times where it's like a little bit more, a little bit more lost than what it was. ===

<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">Do I agree?
===<span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">I agree that all students should know our history and value and respect the people that helped make our country a better, safer place to live. But I don't see it being an individual part of the curriculum, it would be included in History in the later years of school. It would be good for students to learn about it from an earlier age. ===

=
In this article by Rachel Browne titled ‘Schools Must Teach thinking,’ she is of the opinion that we need to focus on teaching appropriate thinking skills to students in the curriculum that equip them too function effectively in today’s world. In particular she argues that we should promote happiness and positive thinking in our schools because Australia, alongside other countries have shown a decrease in happiness. =====

=
I do not agree that students should not learn history because it is something that they can use to reflect on former decisions made by people of former generations that have helped shape our country. =====

I also think that teaching positive thinking is not the teacher’s sole responsibility although important, but parents and society in general should encourage this important communication skill.
Emily Oliver.