Nationalist historiography, Nation-state making and Secondary School History: Curriculum Policy in Zimbabwe 1980-2010

This paper studies the curriculum policy trajectories that have characterized the teaching of secondary school History as a subject that is historically enmeshed in the politics of nation-state making in post-independence Zimbabwe. Through content analysis, the paper examines the ways in which the post-independence History syllabi, namely 2166 and 2167, have drawn from recent historiographies to frame both the aims and content of school History. The argument developed is that both syllabi have been deployed to serve the envisaged nation-state project; with Syllabus 2166 associated with the socialist nation-state project of the 1980s and 2167 with patriotic history since 2000. The paper concludes that such (mis)uses of school are not unique to Zimbabwe, but represent the political instrumentalization of school History that has become prevalent throughout the world.

The Voice of History and the Message of the National Curriculum: Recontextualising History to a Pedagogic Discourse for Upper Secondary VET

In the reform by the liberal-conservative government of Swedish upper secondary education in 2011, history was recognized as an important part of citizenship education and was introduced into the curriculum for vocational education and training (VET) tracks. Through the concepts of classification and framing, this article explores the process of constructing the history syllabus for VET. The data consist of archived material from the working group responsible for the history curriculum under the Swedish National Agency for Education. The analysis shows that there are competing discourses concerning the relative emphasis on competencies and skills and concerning the emphasis on contemporary and modern history. Although historians, history teachers and other agents are invited to respond to the content of the curriculum, the respondents have no influence on the knowledge structure of the curriculum, which is controlled by agents of the dominant educational ideology. From a critical perspective, this article suggests that the curriculum reflects the instrumental and neoconservative message of the reform through strong classification and framing and through the emphasis on general abilities and a contemporary history that has a more direct explanatory value to contemporary society.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Thi paper writer 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.

Contested notions of civics and citizenship education as national education in the Australian curriculum

Civics and Citizenship (CC) education is a contested concept and a learning area that creates curriculum and implementation challenges for schools in many nations. The current development of the first national curriculum to be implemented in Australia, the Australian Curriculum, provides a national opportunity for educators to rethink curriculum priorities and to decide on new emphases for learning in schools, in response to policy that emphasizes the importance of CC for all young Australians. In this paper, we discuss the contested notion of citizenship education as ‘national education’ in Australia, the development of this learning area and some challenges schools will encounter implementing CC in the Australian Curriculum.

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.

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.

Animal magnetism and curriculum history

This article elaborates the impact that crises of authority provoked by animal magnetism, mesmerism, and hypnosis in the 19th century had for field formation in American education. Four layers of analysis elucidate how curriculum history’s repetitive focus on public school policy and classroom practice became possible. First, the article surveys external conditions of possibility for the enactment of compulsory public schooling. Second, “internal” conditions of possibility for the formation of educational objects (e.g., types of children) are documented via the processes of différance that were generated from within the experiences of confinement. Third, the article maps how these were interpenetrated by animal magnetic debates that were lustered and planished in education’s emerging field, including impact upon behavior management practices, the contouring of expertise and authority, the role of Will in intelligence testing and child development theories, and the redefinition of public and private. Last, the article examines implications for curriculum history, whether policy- or practice-oriented, especially around the question of influence, the theorization of child mind, and philosophies of Being.

Historical Consciousness and the Construction of Inter-Group Relations: The Case of Francophone and Anglophone History School Teachers in Quebec

Cette thèse s’intéresse aux effets de la conscience historique sur les négociations de l’ethnicité et la structuration des frontières intergroupes chez les enseignants d’histoire nationale au Québec. L’ambiguïté de dominance ethnique entre Francophones et Anglophones contextualise la façon dont les enseignants de ces groupes historicisent les significations du passé pour se connaître et s’orienter « ethniquement. » Selon leurs constructions des réalités intergroupes, ils peuvent promouvoir la compréhension intergroupe ou préserver une coexistence rigide. Le premier article théorise comment les capacités à historiciser le passé, ou à générer des formes de vie morales pour une orientation temporelle, soutiennent la construction de l’ethnicité. En développant un répertoire des tendances de conscience historique parallèles et égales afin de comprendre les fluctuations dans le maintien des frontières ethniques, l’article souligne l’importance de la volonté à reconnaître l’agentivité morale et historique des humains à rendre les frontières plus perméables. Le deuxième article discute d’une étude sur les attitudes intergroupes et les traitements mutuels entre des enseignants d’histoire Francophones et Anglophones. Alors que la plupart des répondants francophones sont indifférents aux réalités sociales et expériences historiques des Anglo-québécois, tous les répondants anglophones en sont conscients et enseignent celles des Franco-québécois. Cette divergence implique une dissemblance dans la manière dont les relations intergroupes passées sont historicisées. La non-reconnaissance de l’agentivité morale et historique des Anglo-québécois peut expliquer l’indifférence des répondants francophones. Le dernier article présente une étude sur la conscience historique des enseignants d’histoire francophone à l’égard des Anglo-québécois. En mettant le répertoire de conscience historique développé à l’épreuve, l’étude se concentre sur la manière dont les répondants historicisent le changement temporel dans leurs négociations de l’ethnicité et leurs structurations des frontières. Tandis que leurs opinions sur l’« histoire » et leurs historicisations des contextes différents les amènent à renforcer des différences ethnoculturelles et à ne pas reconnaître l’agentivité morale et historique de l’Autre, presque la moitié des répondants démontre une ouverture à apprendre et transmettre les réalités et expériences anglo-québécoises. La dépendance sur les visions historiques préétablies pour construire les réalités intergroupes souligne néanmoins l’exclusion de ce dernier groupe dans le développement d’une identité nationale.