Exploring Indigenous representations in Australian film and literature for the Australian Curriculum

The Australian Curriculum: English, v.5 (ACARA, 2013) now being implemented in Queensland asks teachers and curriculum designers to incorporate the cross curriculum priority (CCP)of Indigenous issues through Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures. In the Australian Curriculum English, (AC:E) one way to address this CCP is by including texts by and about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. With the rise of promising and accomplished young, Indigenous filmmakers such as Ivan Sen, Rachael Perkins, Wayne Blair and Warwick Thornton, this guide focuses on the suitable films for schools implementing the Australian Curriculum in terms of cultural representations. This annotated guide suggests some films suitable for inclusion in classroom study and suggests some companion texts (novels, plays, television series and animations, documentaries, poetry and short stories) that may be studied alongside the films. Some of these are by Indigenous filmmakers and writers, and others features Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island representations in character and/or themes.

A socially just rationale for an Australian curriculum? : a critical thematic policy analysis of political speeches in education (2007-2010)

In late 2007, newly elected Prime Minister Kevin Rudd placed education reform on centre stage as a key policy in the Labor Party's agenda for social reform in Australia. A major policy strategy within this 'Education Revolution' was the development of a national curriculum, the Australian Curriculum Within this political context, this study is an investigation into how social justice and equity have been used in political speeches to justify the need for, and the nature of, Australia's first official national curriculum. The aim is to provide understandings into what is said or not said; who is included or excluded, represented or misrepresented; for what purpose; and for whose benefit. The study investigates political speeches made by Education Ministers between 2008 and 201 0; that is, from the inception of the Australian Curriculum to the release of the Phase 1 F - 10 draft curriculum documents in English, mathematics, science and history. Curriculum development is defined here as an ongoing process of complex conversations. To contextualise the process of curriculum development within Australia, the thesis commences with an initial review of curriculum development in this nation over the past three decades. It then frames this review within contemporary curriculum theory; in particular it calls upon the work of William Pinar and the key notions of currere and reconceptualised curriculum. This contextualisation work is then used as a foundation to examine how social justice and equity have been represented in political speeches delivered by the respective Education Ministers Julia Gillard and Peter Garrett at key junctures of Australian Curriculum document releases. A critical thematic policy analysis is the approach used to examine selected official speech transcripts released by the ministerial media centre through the DEEWR website. This approach provides a way to enable insights and understandings of representations of social justice and equity issues in the policy agenda. Broader social implications are also discussed. The project develops an analytic framework that enables an investigation into the framing of social justice and equity issues such as inclusion, equality, quality education, sharing of resources and access to learning opportunities in political speeches aligned with the development of the Australian Curriculum Through this analysis, the study adopts a focus on constructions of educationally disadvantaged students and how the solutions of 'fixing' teachers and providing the 'right' curriculum are presented as resolutions to the perceived problem. In this way, it aims to work towards offering insights into political justifications for a national curriculum in Australia from a social justice perspective.

Playing with Grammar in the Early Years : Learning about Language in the Australian Curriculum : English

As teacher/researchers interested in the pursuit of socially-just outcomes in early childhood education, the form and function of language occupies a special position in our work. We believe that mastering a range of literacy competences includes not only the technical skills for learning, but also the resources for viewing and constructing the world (Freire and Macdeo, 1987). Rather than seeing knowledge about language as the accumulation of technical skills alone, the viewpoint to which we subscribe treats knowledge about language as a dialectic that evolves from, is situated in, and contributes to a social arena (Halliday, 1978). We do not shy away from this position just because children are in the early years of schooling. In ‘Playing with Grammar’, we focus on the Foundation to Year 2 grouping, in line with the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s (hereafter ACARA) advice on the ‘nature of learners’ (ACARA, 2013). With our focus on the early years of schooling comes our acknowledgement of the importance and complexity of play. At a time where accountability in education has moved many teachers to a sense of urgency to prove language and literacy achievement (Genishi and Dyson, 2009), we encourage space to revisit what we know about literature choices and learning experiences and bring these together to facilitate language learning. We can neither ignore, nor overemphasise, the importance of play for the development of language through: the opportunities presented for creative use and practice; social interactions for real purposes; and, identifying and solving problems in the lives of young children (Marsh and Hallet, 2008). We argue that by engaging young children in opportunities to play with language we are ultimately empowering them to be active in their language learning and in the process fostering a love of language and the intricacies it holds. Our goal in this publication is to provide a range of highly practical strategies for scaffolding young children through some of the Content Descriptions from the Australian Curriculum English Version 5.0, hereafter AC:E V5.0 (ACARA, 2013). This recently released curriculum offers a new theoretical approach to building children’s knowledge about language. The AC:E V5.0 uses selected traditional terms through an approach developed in systemic functional linguistics (see Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) to highlight the dynamic forms and functions of multimodal language in texts. For example, the following statement, taken from the ‘Language: Knowing about the English language’ strand states: English uses standard grammatical terminology within a contextual framework, in which language choices are seen to vary according to the topics at hand, the nature and proximity of the relationships between the language users, and the modalities or channels of communication available (ACARA, 2013). Put simply, traditional grammar terms are used within a functional framework made up of field, tenor, and mode. An understanding of genre is noted with the reference to a ‘contextual framework’. The ‘topics at hand’ concern the field or subject matter of the text. The ‘relationships between the language users’ is a description of tenor. There is reference to ‘modalities’, such as spoken, written or visual text. We posit that this innovative approach is necessary for working with contemporary multimodal and cross-cultural texts (see Exley and Mills, 2012). We believe there is enormous power in using literature to expose children to the richness of language and in turn develop language and literacy skills. Taking time to look at language patterns within actual literature is a pathway to ‘…capture interest, stir the imagination and absorb the [child]’ into the world of language and literacy (Saxby, 1993, p. 55). In the following three sections, we have tried to remain faithful to our interpretation of the AC:E V5.0 Content Descriptions without giving an exhaustive explanation of the grammatical terms. Other excellent tomes, such as Derewianka (2011), Humphrey, Droga and Feez (2012), and Rossbridge and Rushton (2011) provide these more comprehensive explanations as does the AC:E V5.0 Glossary. We’ve reproduced some of the AC:E V5.0 glossary at the end of this publication. Our focus is on the structure and unfolding of the learning experiences. We outline strategies for working with children in Foundation, Year 1 and Year 2 by providing some demonstration learning experiences based on texts we’ve selected, but maintain that the affordances of these strategies will only be realised when teaching and learning is purposively tied to authentic projects in local contexts. We strongly encourage you not to use only the resource texts we’ve selected, but to capitalise upon your skill for identifying the language features in the texts you and the children are studying and adapt some of the strategies we have outlined. Each learning experience is connected to one of the Content Descriptions from the AC:E V5.0 and contains an experience specific purpose, a suggested resource text and a sequence for the experience that always commences with an orientation to text followed by an examination of a particular grammatical resource. We expect that each of these learning experiences will take a couple if not a few teaching episodes to work through, especially if children are meeting a concept for the first time. We hope you use as much, or as little, of each experience as is needed. Our plans allow for focused discussion, shared exploration and opportunities to revisit the same text for the purpose of enhancing meaning making. We do not want the teaching of grammar to slip into a crisis of irrelevance or to be seen as a series of worksheet drills with finite answers. Strategies for effective practice, however, have much portability. We are both very keen to hear from teachers who are adopting and adapting these learning experiences in their classrooms. Please email us on b.exley@qut.edu.au or lkervin@uow.edu.au. We’d love to continue the conversation with you over time.

Cultural content matters: A critical sociology of language and literacy curriculum

A theoretical rationale, policy analysis and research agenda for a critical sociology of language and literacy curriculum, outlining the agenda for a political economy of textbooks.

Next generation filmmaking and media arts in the Australian curriculum

Media education has been included as a mandatory component of the Arts within the new Australian national curriculum, which purports to set out a framework that encompasses core knowledge, understanding and skills critical to twenty-first century learning. This will position Australia as the only country to require media education as a compulsory aspect of Arts education and one of the first to implement a sequenced national media education curriculum from pre-school to year 12. A broad framework has been outlined for what the Media Arts curriculum will encompass and in this article we investigate the extent to which this framework is likely to provide media educators the opportunity to broaden the scope of established media education to effectively educate students about the ever-changing nature of media ecologies. The article outlines significant shifts occurring in the film and television industries to identify the types of knowledge students may need to understand these changes. This is followed by an analysis of existing state-based media curricula offered at years 11 and 12 in Australia to demonstrate that the concepts of institutions and audiences are not currently approached in ways that reflect contemporary media ecologies.

Curricula integration : identifying and locating engineering education across the Australian curriculum

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) has become an educational package emerging throughout the world (e.g. UK, China, US & Australia). Although science, technology and mathematics are taught in schools and engineering education occurs in universities, there appear to be few if any explicit engineering education programs in primary and junior secondary schools. A stronger inclusion of engineering education at these levels could assist students to make informed decisions about career opportunities in STEM-related fields. This paper suggests how engineering education can be integrated with other key learning areas such as English, mathematics, science, history and geography within the new Australian Curriculum.

Diversity or perversity?: Award-winning children's literature and the Australian curriculum

Two of the three cross-curriculum priorities for the national Australian Curriculum prescribed by the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) are focussed on what might be called diversity education: “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and culture”, and "Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia” (ACARA, “Cross”). One need not be versed in complex rhetorical theory to understand that, laudable and legitimate as such priorities are, their existence implies that mainstream education in Australia has been or is characterised by the marginalisation or erasure of Australia's history—the original Indigenous cultures are not only living and vibrant today, but also have tens of thousands of years’ “head start” on Australia’s settler cultures—and of its geography—Australia is, after all, located in some physical proximity to Asia. Some might even suggest that Australia is in Asia. These temporal and spatial “forgettings” constitute a kind of cultural perversity which the cross-curricular priorities both seek to address and serve to reinscribe. Even as ACARA requires Australian school students to engage with Aboriginal and Asian histories, cultures, societies, they imply that such histories, cultures, and societies are “diverse”, that they are not those of the students in Australian classrooms; producing them as objects of study rather than as lived experience. This should not necessarily be surprising. Michael W. Apple has provocatively argued that: “one of the perverse effects of a national curriculum actually will be to ‘legitimise inequality.’ It may in fact help create the illusion that whatever the massive differences in schools, they all have something in common” (18). In the Australian context, attempts to mitigate such perversity are articulated via the selection of literary texts. As educators move to resource ACARA’s cross-curricular priorities, ACARA notes that “Teachers and schools are best placed to make decisions about the selection of texts in their teaching and learning programs that address the content in the Australian Curriculum while also meeting the needs of the students in their classes” (ACARA, “Advice”). This assertion appears on a webpage called “Advice on selection of literary texts” which is notable first and foremost for its total lack of any literary texts being named, and its list of weblinks pointing to lists of texts compiled elsewhere, by other organisations, and in the main, compiled to serve agendas other than the Australian curriculum. One of the major resources referred to by ACARA for literary text selection is the Children’s Book Council of Australia (CBCA). Of course, the CBCA’s annual book awards do not share ACARA’s educational priorities, but do have a history of being drawn upon by schools as a curriculum resource. In this paper, I consider the literary texts which have been prized by the CBCA in recent years attending to their engagements with Aboriginal cultures.

Great Expectations : stability and change in English teaching : the teacher as chameleon

Curriculum is always in a state of flux and so often the moves to ‘reform’ it are political rather than pedagogical. So often in these days of accountability we focus on the learner. I want to focus on the teacher in this presentation. As English educators we have to ‘fit’ whatever new policy model comes our way. The Australian curriculum seems to have tried to please every stakeholder in its process and as such has been formed without a single, unifying coherent theoretical basis. How do we challenge this paper tiger? We have to find the pedagogical models within the current framework and see what still works in practice. At the chalk-face there are still teaching, learning and assessment practices in English surviving from the last few decades of pedagogical change; and there is also room for accommodating new practices. Embracing and adapting the old and the new may be the key to staying creative and passionately engaged with our subject area.

Analysing children’s persuasive texts : the use of hedging and intensification

Research Quality This is a dialogue between two Australian literacy scholars about two persuasive writing techniques that posed difficulty for the students in our research. This dialogue flows from the analysis of Year 6 writing samples from an ARC Linkage Project, URLearning (2009-2013) - the focus of the symposium. We use vivid examples of writing from students’ handwritten persuasive texts on topics that were chosen by teachers. The persuasive structure in the texts followed the Toulmin (2003) model: a thesis statement, three arguments with evidence, and a conclusion. The findings show that to realise the effective power of rhetorical persuasion, students need an expanded lexicon that does not rely on intensifiers, and which employs a greater range of advanced hedging techniques to use to their advantage. National & International Importance The study is potentially of national and international relevance, given that argumentation or persuasion is a key life skill in many professional, personal, and discourses. It is also a requirement in the International English Language Testing Systems (IELTS) tests, which are a critical gateway for tertiary studies in many English-speaking countries (Coffin, 2004). Timeliness The research is timely given the Australian Curriculum English, in which persuasive texts figure prominently from Preparatory to Year 10 (ACARA, 2014). The recommendations are also timely in the context of educational policies in other parts of the world. For example, in the United States, the Common Core Standards: English Language Arts, mandates the teaching of persuasive texts (Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association, 2013) Implications for practice/policy The findings of the study have specific practical implications for teachers, who can address the persuasive writing techniques of hedging and intensification with which children need targeted support and explicit instruction. The presentation is positioned at the nexus of teacher practice to better address the national priorities of the Australian Curriculum: English (ACARA, 2014), while having implications for applied linguistics research by identifying common problems in students' persuasive writing.

Linking pedagogical knowledge practices and student outcomes in STEM education for primary schools

STEM education is a new frontier in Australia, particularly for primary schools. However, the E in STEM needs to have a stronger focus with science and mathematics concepts aligned to the presiding curricula. In addition, pedagogical knowledge practices such as planning, preparation, teaching strategies, assessment and so forth need to be connected to key concepts for developing a STEM education. One of the aims of this study was to understand how a pedagogical knowledge practice framework could be linked to student outcomes in STEM education. Specifically, this qualitative research investigated Year 4 students’ involvement in an integrated STEM education program that focused on science concepts (e.g., states of matter, testing properties of materials) and mathematics concepts (such as 3D shapes and metric measurements: millilitres, temperature, grams, centimetres) for designing, making and testing a strong and safe medical kit to insulate medicines at desirable temperatures. Eleven pedagogical knowledge practices (e.g., planning, preparation, teaching strategies, classroom management, and assessment) were used as a framework for understanding how teaching may be linked to student outcomes in STEM education. For instance, “planning” involved devising a student booklet as a resource for students to understand the tasks required of them, which also provided space for them to record ideas, results and information. Planning involved linking national and state curriculum documents to the STEM education activities. More studies are required around pedagogical knowledge frameworks to understand what students learn when involved in STEM education, particularly with the inclusion of engineering education.

Introduction to Point and Counterpoint: What does the Review of the Australian Curriculum mean for History?

The April 2015 edition of Curriculum Perspectives has a special focus and casts light on the continuing development of the Australian Curriculum. This paper provides an introduction to a series of papers in the Point and Counterpoint section of this edition on the Review of the Australian Curriculum with reference to History. It makes clear that History is one of the most contested areas of the curriculum and that whilst politicians and policy makers are concerned with the importance of history in relation to national identity and nation building, history serves other purposes. The paper reiterates the need to pay attention to the particularities of discipline–based knowledge for the study of history in schools and the central role of inquiry for student learning in history. In doing so, it establishes the context for the five papers which follow.

Exploring with Grammar in the Primary Years: Learning about Language in the Australian Curriculum: English

This new volume, Exploring with Grammar in the Primary Years (Exley, Kevin & Mantei, 2014), follows on from Playing with Grammar in the Early Years (Exley & Kervin, 2013). We extend our thanks to the ALEA membership for their take up of the first volume and the vibrant conversations around our first attempt at developing a pedagogy for the teaching of grammar in the early years. Your engagement at locally held ALEA events has motivated us to complete this second volume and reassert our interest in the pursuit of socially-just outcomes in the primary years. As noted in Exley and Kervin (2013), we believe that mastering a range of literacy competences includes not only the technical skills for learning, but also the resources for viewing and constructing the world (Freire and Macdeo, 1987). Rather than seeing knowledge about language as the accumulation of technical skills alone, the viewpoint to which we subscribe treats knowledge about language as a dialectic that evolves from, is situated in, and contributes to active participation within a social arena (Halliday, 1978). We acknowledge that to explore is to engage in processes of discovery as we look closely and examine the opportunities before us. As such, we draw on Janks’ (2000; 2014) critical literacy theory to underpin many of the learning experiences in this text. Janks (2000) argues that effective participation in society requires knowledge about how the power of language promotes views, beliefs and values of certain groups to the exclusion of others. Powerful language users can identify not only how readers are positioned by these views, but also the ways these views are conveyed through the design of the text, that is, the combination of vocabulary, syntax, image, movement and sound. Similarly, powerful designers of texts can make careful modal choices in written and visual design to promote certain perspectives that position readers and viewers in new ways to consider more diverse points of view. As the title of our text suggests, our activities are designed to support learners in exploring the design of texts to achieve certain purposes and to consider the potential for the sharing of their own views through text production. In Exploring with Grammar in the Primary Years, we focus on the Year 3 to Year 6 grouping in line with the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s (hereafter ACARA) advice on the ‘nature of learners’ (ACARA, 2014). Our goal in this publication is to provide a range of highly practical strategies for scaffolding students’ learning through some of the Content Descriptions from the Australian Curriculum: English Version 7.2, hereafter AC:E (ACARA, 2014). We continue to express our belief in the power of using whole texts from a range of authentic sources including high quality children’s literature, the internet, and examples of community-based texts to expose students to the richness of language. Taking time to look at language patterns within actual texts is a pathway to ‘…capture interest, stir the imagination and absorb the [child]’ into the world of language and literacy (Saxby, 1993, p. 55). It is our intention to be more overt this time and send a stronger message that our learning experiences are simply ‘sample’ activities rather than a teachers’ workbook or a program of study to be followed. We’re hoping that teachers and students will continue to explore their bookshelves, the internet and their community for texts that provide powerful opportunities to engage with language-based learning experiences. In the following three sections, we have tried to remain faithful to our interpretation of the AC:E Content Descriptions without giving an exhaustive explanation of the grammatical terms. This recently released curriculum offers a new theoretical approach to building students’ knowledge about language. The AC:E uses selected traditional terms through an approach developed in systemic functional linguistics (see Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) to highlight the dynamic forms and functions of multimodal language in texts. For example, the following statement, taken from the ‘Language: Knowing about the English language’ strand states: English uses standard grammatical terminology within a contextual framework, in which language choices are seen to vary according to the topics at hand, the nature and proximity of the relationships between the language users, and the modalities or channels of communication available (ACARA, 2014). Put simply, traditional grammar terms are used within a functional framework made up of field, tenor, and mode. An understanding of genre is noted with the reference to a ‘contextual framework’. The ‘topics at hand’ concern the field or subject matter of the text. The ‘relationships between the language users’ is a description of tenor. There is reference to ‘modalities’, such as spoken, written or visual text. We posit that this innovative approach is necessary for working with contemporary multimodal and cross-cultural texts (see Exley & Mills, 2012). Other excellent tomes, such as Derewianka (2011), Humphrey, Droga and Feez (2012), and Rossbridge and Rushton (2011) provide more comprehensive explanations of this unique metalanguage, as does the AC:E Glossary. We’ve reproduced some of the AC:E Glossary at the end of this publication. We’ve also kept the same layout for our learning experiences, ensuring that our teacher notes are not only succinct but also prudent in their placement. Each learning experience is connected to a Content Description from the AC:E and contains an experience with an identified purpose, suggested resource text and a possible sequence for the experience that always commences with an orientation to text followed by an examination of a particular grammatical resource. Our plans allow for focused discussion, shared exploration and opportunities to revisit the same text for the purpose of enhancing meaning making. Some learning experiences finish with deconstruction of a stimulus text while others invite students to engage in the design of new texts. We encourage you to look for opportunities in your own classrooms to move from text deconstruction to text design. In this way, students can express not only their emerging grammatical understandings, but also the ways they might position readers or viewers through the creation of their own texts. We expect that each of these learning experiences will vary in the time taken. Some may indeed take a couple if not a few teaching episodes to work through, especially if students are meeting a concept or a pedagogical strategy for the first time. We hope you use as much, or as little, of each experience as is needed for your students. We do not want the teaching of grammar to slip into a crisis of irrelevance or to be seen as a series of worksheet drills with finite answers. We firmly believe that strategies for effective deconstruction and design practice, however, have much portability. We three are very keen to hear from teachers who are adopting and adapting these learning experiences in their classrooms. Please email us on b.exley@qut.edu.au, lkervin@uow.edu.au or jessicam@ouw.edu.au. We’d love to continue the conversation with you over time. Beryl Exley, Lisa Kervin & Jessica Mantei

The Australian curriculum: The arts - intent and big ideas for implementation

For the first time all Australian students having an entitlement to be engaged in all five art forms in Primary school. The Australian Curriculum: The Arts is based on the principle that all young Australians are entitled to engage fully in all the major art forms and to be given a balanced and substantial foundation in the special knowledge and skills base of each. This will have enormous implication on the expectations of what can be achieved in secondary schools, in tertiary institutions and ultimately on the cultural life and heritage for Australia.

Exploring the Potential to Educate “Good Citizens” through the Australian Civics and Citizenship Curriculum.

This chapter examines the ways in which notions of ‘a good citizen’ and ‘civic virtue’ have been conceptualized in the new Civics and Citizenship Curriculum for students in Years 3 – 10 in Australia. It argues that whilst Civics and Citizenship Education (CCE) has, over time and in various ways, been recognized as a significant aspect of Australian education, only recently has attention been given to the relational and multidimensional conceptions of citizenship. Considerations of ‘morality’, ‘a good citizen’ and ‘civic virtue’ offer possibilities to engage with multidimensional notions of citizenship, which acknowledge that citizenship perspectives can be affected by personal, social, spatial and temporary situations (Cogan & Derricott, 2000). In the current statement on national goals for schooling in Australia, which informed the development of CCE, the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008) called for young Australians to be educated to “act with moral and ethical integrity” and be “committed to national values of democracy, equity and justice, and participate in Australia’s civic life” (MCEETYA, 2008, pp. 8–9). The chapter claims that this maximal emphasis (McLaughlin, 1992), based on active, values based and interpretive approaches to democratic citizenship which encourage debate and participation in civil society, was evident in the new Civics and Citizenship Curriculum. However, it contends that the recommendations of the recent Review of the Australian Curriculum: Final report (Australian Government, 2014a & b), will now limit CCE’s potential to deliver the sort of active and informed citizenship heralded by the Melbourne Declaration. This is because the Review advocates for a content-focused minimal (McLaughlin, 1992) emphasis on civic knowledge, with diminished attention to citizenship participation and processes. In doing so, the Review foregrounds conceptions of the ‘good citizen’ in more limited terms of responsibility, obligations and compliance with the status quo.