What does the review of the Australian Curriculum mean for History in the Primary Years?

The recent introduction of the Australian Curriculum: History as a timetabled school subject has enhanced the teaching of history in the primary years. Previously, history was integrated with geography, economics and civics and citizenship; however, in the new curriculum students are introduced to history from their first year at school. The review addresses significant concerns about the scope and content in history in an over-crowded primary curriculum (Donnelly & Wiltshire, 2014; APPA, 2014). However, the history curriculum provides a rare opportunity to explore distinctive content and develop agency by investigating personal, local, national and international contexts. This paper examines the recommendations of the review and the implications for history in the primary years.

Re-imagining and re-imaging the nation through the history curriculum.

Nationalism is not a naturally occurring sentiment, but rather needs to be carefully nurtured and sustained in the social imaginary through the production and circulation of unifying narratives that invoke the nation’s imagined community. The school curriculum is crucial in this process, legitimating and disseminating selected narratives while de-legitimating and marginalising other accounts and their voices. Certain watershed events in nations’ histories have always posed political problems in history curricula (Cajani & Ross, 2007) –however the pressures and concerns of current times now suggest political solutions in history curricula. This paper briefly examines recent political debates in Australia to argue that the school history curriculum has become a site of increasing interest for the exercise of official forms of nationalism and the production of a nostalgic, celebratory national biography. The public debates around school history curriculum are theorised as nostalgic re-nationalising efforts in response to the march of cultural globalisation and its attendant uncertainties.

Rethinking the notion of culture in the national history curriculum

Major global changes are placing new demands on the Australian education system. Recent statements by the Prime Minister, together with current education policy and national curriculum documents available in the public domain, look to education’s role in promoting economic prosperity and social cohesion. Collectively, they emphasise the need to equip young Australians with the knowledge, understandings and skills required to compete in the global economy and participate as engaged citizens in a culturally diverse world. However, the decision to prioritise discipline-based learning in the forthcoming Australian history curriculum without specifically encompassing culture as a referent, raises the following question. How will students acquire the cultural knowledge, understandings and skills necessary for this process? This paper addresses this question by situating the current push for a national history curriculum, with specific reference to the study of Indigenous history and the study of Asia in Australia.

Civics and citizenship education in the national history curriculum : conducting the same music or rehearsing an incomplete tune?

This paper raises some questions about teaching and teacher education in the social sciences in response to the decision to implement a national curriculum in Australia. In particular, it contends that the decision to focus on discipline-specific knowledge in the social sciences will not necessarily meet the hopes of the Melbourne Declaration and deliver a 21st century curriculum that prepares students for the future. In doing so, it suggests that social educators need to engage with the broader discourse and political context shaping the push for curriculum reform in Australia and makes reference to the marginalisation of civics and citizenship education in the latest draft of the Australian curriculum: History.

“More tick-the-box”: the challenge of promoting interdisciplinary learning in the middle years through the Australian history curriculum

The Australian Curriculum marks national reforms in social science education, first with the return to the disciplines of history and geography and second, through a new approach to interdisciplinary learning. This paper raises the question of whether the promise of interdisciplinary learning can be realised in the middle years of schooling if teachers have to teach history as a discipline rather than within an over-arching integrated curriculum framework. The paper explores the national blueprints and considers the national history curriculum in light of theories of teachers’ knowledge and middle school education. Evidence from teacher interviews indicates that historical understanding can be achieved through integrated frameworks to meet the goals of middle schooling.

"More tick-the-box": the challenge of promoting interdisciplinary learning in the middle years through the Australian history curriculum

The Australian Curriculum marks national reforms in social science education, first with the return to the disciplines of history and geography and second, through a new approach to interdisciplinary learning. This paper raises the question of whether the promise of interdisciplinary learning can be realised in the middle years of schooling if teachers have to teach history as a discipline rather than within an over-arching integrated curriculum framework. The paper explores the national blueprints and considers the national history curriculum in light of theories of teachers’ knowledge and middle school education. Evidence from teacher interviews indicates that historical understanding can be achieved through integrated frameworks to meet the goals of middle schooling.

The purposes of history? Curriculum studies, invisible objects and twenty-first century societies

A new intellectual epoch has generated new enterprises to suit changed beliefs and circumstances. A widespread sentiment in both formal historiography and curriculum studies reduces the “new” to the question of how knowledge is recognized as such, how it is gained, and how it is represented in narrative form. Whether the nature of history and conceptions of knowledge are, or ought to be, central considerations in curriculum studies and reducible to purposes or elevated as present orientated requires rethinking. This paper operates as an incitement to discourse that disrupts the protection and isolation of primary categories in the field whose troubling is overdue. In particular, the paper moves through several layers that highlight the lack of settlement regarding the endowment of objects for study with the status of the scientific. It traces how some “invisible” things have been included within the purview of curriculum history as objects of study and not others. The focus is the making of things deemed invisible into scientific objects (or not) and the specific site of analysis is the work of William James (1842-1910). James studied intensely both child mind and the ghost, the former of which becomes scientized and legitimated for further study, the latter abjected. This contrast opens key points for reconsideration regarding conditions of proof, validation criteria, and subject matters and points to opportunities to challenge some well-rehearsed foreclosures within progressive politics and education.

Thinking about Australia and its location in the modern world in the Australian Curriculum : history

The first national history curriculum is being implemented in Australia from 2013. As with the curriculums of other nations, this curriculum has evolved in response to a range of factors and its merits continue to be debated. In critiquing the sort of history education approach encapsulated in the new curriculum, I discuss some of the contextual factors and debates that have shaped the Australian Curriculum: History v0.3 (ACARA, 2012). In doing so, I also explore some of the recent international literature on how students think and learn about history in the classroom. In the third and final part of the paper, I raise some logistical issues and also question how students might engage with the notion of Australia as a nation in the modern world rapidly reshaped by the transformations occurring in Asia and share some concerns about the curriculum’s ‘world history approach’ for Year 10.

What does the review of the Australian Curriculum mean for Senior Modern History?

In this paper we briefly explore some of recommendations of the Review of the Australian Curriculum Final Report (Australian Government, 2014a), henceforth referred to as the Review, with reference to Modern History in the senior secondary Australian Curriculum. We also refer to the invited papers provided by history subject matter specialists, Professor Gregory Melleuish and Mr Clive Logan, published as the Review’s Supplementary Material (Australian Government, 2014b). In doing so, we note that both documents devote most of their attention to critiquing the Australian Curriculum: History in the compulsory years from Foundation (F) to Year 10.

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.

“I am a secondary teacher and I teach history and SOSE” : negotiating pre-service teacher identities in times of curriculum change

Secondary social education in Australia is set to change with the new national history curriculum but integrated social education will continue in the middle years of schooling. Competing discourses of disciplinary and integrated social education approaches create new challenges for pre-service teachers as identification with a teaching area is an important aspect of developing a broader teacher identity. Feedback on a compulsory, final year curriculum studies unit revealed the majority of secondary pre-service teachers identified with at least one social science discipline. However, only a small number listed the integrated social education curriculum of Studies of Society and Environment (SOSE), even though SOSE was an essential part of their brief. More complex identities were revealed in post-teaching practice interviews. In times of curriculum change, attention to pre-service teachers’ disciplinary knowledge is critical in developing a stable subject identity.

Anna Clark (2008) History’s Children: History Wars in the Classroom. UNSW Press, Sydney, 178 pages

“History’s Children” stems from Anna Clark’s 2004 postdoctoral research into the ways in which Australian students connect with the past, and aims at bringing some classroom perspectives into the public debates about Australian history education. Although the title makes reference to the “History Wars”, there is little evidence of contestation, engagement, passion or intellectual excitement in Clark’s conclusions about what happens in history classrooms. Rather, Clark’s small focus groups with 182 high school students in 34 high schools around Australia indicate that “it got a bit dismal hearing student after student being so dismissive of Australian history” (p. 143). Apart from some enthusiasm for the study of Australians at war, a sort of resigned boredom seems to characterise what students have to say about learning Australian history, despite their acknowledgement that it is important to “know about” it.

History in the Australian Curriculum F-10 : providing answers without asking questions

This paper examines the most recent version of the Australian Curriculum: History F-10. It does so in two ways. First, it explores some of the strengths and weaknesses of this curriculum with reference to the decision to frame aspects of Australian history within the context of a world history approach. Whilst the positioning of Indigenous Histories is applauded, the curriculum’s lack of attention to the significance of the recent history of Australia’s Asian neighbours, and Australia’s relationship with them, is critiqued. This part of the paper also emphasises the need for comparative approaches and calls for greater emphasis on providing students with opportunities to critique and contest the construction of narratives about the past. Second, the paper introduces four invited articles that examine different aspects of the Australian Curriculum: History. Collectively these papers reiterate the significance of the richness of integrated and child-centred approaches and the importance of developing historical thinking, empathy and the historical imagination in the classroom.

A situated approach to historical thinking in the Australian Curriculum : History

This paper focuses on the importance of foregrounding an emphasis on the development of historical thinking in the implementation of the Australian Curriculum: History as a way of making the study of history meaningful for their students. In doing so, it argues that teachers need to take up the opportunity to situate the study of Asia as a significant component of the curriculum’s ‘Australia in a world history approach’. In the discussion on the significance of historical thinking, the paper specifically addresses those seven historical concepts articulated in the new history curriculum by drawing from the international scholarship in the field of history education on the ways in which children and adolescents think about historical content and concepts.