“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.

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.

Desperately seeking Asia through China: Reading ‘China’ in the Australian Curriculum: History through children’s literature

This paper considers how Asia can be meaningfully studied and understood in the first national history curriculum to be implemented in Australia. Its focus is on how empathy might be conceptualised as part of the process of becoming ‘Asia literate’ and the ways in which an empathetic understanding can be developed in the Australian Curriculum: History by engaging students with children’s literature. We argue that stories about Chinese experiences in Australia from particular episodes in the nation’s past can be utilised for their potential to prompt historical inquiry and empathetic engagement in the classroom.

Positioning the Arts in the Australian National Curriculum

In 2008 the Australian Government embarked on the development of a National Curriculum. To date, announcements about development of learning areas in Phase 1 (English, mathematics, science and history) and Phase 2 (geography and languages) have been released. But where are the arts positioned? This article traces the advocacy strategy employed by Drama Australia and the National Advocates for Arts Education (NAAE) in the fight for the arts to be included in National Curriculum Board (NCB) timeline for development, trial and implementation.

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.

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.

Will the Australian national curriculum up the intellectual ante in classrooms?

A critical review of the current and potential impacts of the Australian National Curriculum on the enacted curriculum in primary schools, with specific attention to issues of equity and social justice.

Surveying the state of higher education in energy efficiency, in Australian engineering curriculum

This paper presents the method and results of a survey of 27 of the 33 Australian universities teaching engineering education in late 2007, undertaken by The Natural Edge Project (hosted by Griffith University and the Australian National University) and supported by the National Framework for Energy Efficiency. This survey aimed to ascertain the extent of energy efficiency (EE) education, and to identify preferred methods to assist in increasing the extent to which EE education is embedded in engineering curriculum. In this paper the context for the survey is supported by a summary of the key results from a variety of surveys undertaken over the last decade internationally. The paper concludes that EE education across universities and engineering disciplines in Australia is currently highly variable and ad hoc. Based on the results of the survey, this paper highlights a number of preferred options to support educators to embed sustainability within engineering programs, and future opportunities for monitoring EE, within the context of engineering education for sustainable development (EESD).

Studio teaching in Australian planning curriculum

Planning studio pedagogy has long been a part of planning education and has recently re-emerged as a topic of investigation. Scholarship has: 1) critically examined the fluctuating popularity of studio teaching and the changing role of studio teaching in contemporary planning curricula in the USA and New Zealand; 2) challenged conceptualizations of the traditional studio and considered how emerging strategies for blended and online learning, and ‘real world engagement’ are producing new modes of studio delivery; 3) considered the benefits and outcomes of studio teaching, and; 4) provided recommendations for teaching practice by critically analysing studio experiences in different contexts (Aitken-Rose & Dixon, 2009; Balassiano, 2011; Balassiano & West, 2012; Balsas, 2012; Dandekar, 2009; Heumann & Wetmore, 1984; Higgins, Thomas & Hollander, 2010; Lang, 1983; Long, 2012; Németh & Long, 2012; Winkler, 2013). Twenty-three universities in Australia offer accredited planning degrees, yet data about the use of studio teaching in planning programs are limited. How, when and why are studio pedagogies used? If it is not a part of the curriculum – why?, and has this had any impact on student outcomes? What are the opportunities and limitations of new models of studio teaching for student, academic, professional and institutional outcomes? This paper presents early ideas from a QUT seed grant on the use of studio teaching in Australian planning education to gain a better understanding of the different roles of studio teaching in planning curricula at a National level and opportunities and challenges for this pedagogical mode in the face of dilemmas facing planning education.

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.