Fostering cultural awareness in pre-service teacher education : an experiment in Asia literacy capacity building in an Australian university

This paper presents the findings of a small pilot study conducted with a group of final year pre-service teachers studying a secondary social science curriculum method unit in an Australian university. One of the study’s research objectives aimed at identifying how students responded to efforts to embed intercultural understanding through Studies of Asia in their final curriculum method unit. The unit was designed and taught by the researcher on the assumption that beginning social science teachers need to be empowered with pedagogical skills and new dispositions to deal with value laden emerging regional and global concerns in their Australian secondary school classrooms. This pilot study’s research methodology was located within the qualitative framework of a participatory action research model whereby the lecturer who designed, coordinated and taught the unit was also the researcher. Its scope was limited to one semester with volunteer students. The pilot study sought to investigate responses to several issues, and this paper reports on pre-service teacher reflections on the content, pedagogy and learning they experienced in their weekly sessions with specific reference to cultural understanding, Studies of Asia and the development of Asia literacy. It also reports on pre-service teacher reflections about their own evolving capacity as beginning teachers. The findings indicate that pre-service teachers valued the opportunity to engage with learning experiences which enhanced their conceptual understandings about culture whilst also extending their pedagogical and content knowledge.

Values, controversial issues and interfaith understanding

Values are fundamental to human activity. What makes us distinctive is our ability to understand the challenges we face in life, and to make choices about how to respond. Yet, as the Cheshire Cat from Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland observed, if we don’t care about how we make such choices, the outcome of our decision-making is diminished. Values education is a broad, complex and controversial area, and, while it has shifted in emphasis and focus, it continues to be an essential part of many education systems. For example, some international education systems are exploring the links between values education and student wellbeing. In Australia, the values basis for ethical behaviour is receiving emphasis as a general capability, or important component of education, that can be developed across the curriculum. Indeed, some syllabus and policy documents require that particular values are emphasised, while numerous schools aim to inculcate and foster a range of personal social, moral and spiritual values in their students, many of which are shared by members of the wider community. However, because values are also contested in the community, values education involves the exploration of controversial issues. Similarly, values education explores the underlying belief systems of different world views and how they influence value commitments, ways of behaving, and interfaith understanding in today’s globalised world. This chapter explores the significance and teaching possibilities of values, controversial issues and interfaith understanding.

Concept building

In this world of continuous change, there’s probably one certainty: more change lies ahead. Our students will encounter challenges and opportunities that we can’t even imagine. How do we prepare our students as future citizens for the challenges of the 21st century? One of the most influential public intellectuals of our time, Howard Gardner, suggests that in the future individuals will depend to a great extent on the capacity to synthesise large amounts of information. ‘They will need to be able to gather together information from disparate sources and put it together in ways that work for themselves and can be communicated to other persons’(Gardner 2008, p. xiii). One of the first steps in ‘putting things together’ so they ‘work’ in the mind is ‘to group objects and events together on the basis of some similarity between them’ (Lee & das Gupta 1995, p. 116). When we do this and give them a collective name, we are conceptualising. Apart from helping to save our sanity by simplifying the vast amounts of data we encounter every day, concepts help us to understand and gain meaning from what we experience. Concepts are essential for synthesising information and they also help us to communicate with others. Put simply, concepts serve as building blocks for knowledge, understanding and communication. This chapter addresses the importance of teaching and learning about concepts and conceptual development in studies of society and environment. It proceeds as follows: first, it considers how individuals use concepts, and, second, it explores the characteristics of concepts; the third section presents a discussion of approaches that might be adopted by teachers intending to help their students build concepts in the classroom.

Multicultural education, global studies and studies of Asia

Like other nations, Australia has experienced significant change in the past few decades as its society has become increasingly diverse. The new cultures and traditions that result from ethnic and religious diversity have both enriched Australian society and presented it with some challenges. Other challenges have resulted from increased globalisation. For example, the economic fallout from the recent global financial crisis indicates that global issues can impact across a range of levels, from multinational corporations and nation-states to local sites and individual livelihoods. Some suggest that Australia fared better than other nations during this economic crisis because of its export trade with China. Although this is disputed by economists, it highlights another facet of change that is impacting on Australian society and this relates to Australia’s growing engagement with the nations of Asia. There is increasing awareness in education systems that if young people are to achieve their potential as future citizens they need to be able to negotiate the cultural, social, political and economic ties that connect them to the global and regional community through work, leisure and citizenship. Multicultural education, global studies and studies of Asia play a particular part in helping young people to: • appreciate cultural diversity within and beyond their own nation • imagine with some accuracy how others view their world • participate in shaping a better future. This chapter explores the origins, distinctions and common features of each approach.

Fusing curricula : science, technology and ICT

Curriculum demands continue to increase on school education systems with teachers at the forefront of implementing syllabus requirements. Education is reported frequently as a solution to most societal problems and, as a result of the world’s information explosion, teachers are expected to cover more and more within teaching programs. How can teachers combine subjects in order to capitalise on the competing educational agendas within school timeframes? Fusing curricula requires the bonding of standards from two or more syllabuses. Both technology and ICT complement the learning of science. This study analyses selected examples of preservice teachers’ overviews for fusing science, technology and ICT. These program overviews focused on primary students and the achievement of two standards (one from science and one from either technology or ICT). These primary preservice teachers’ fused-curricula overviews included scientific concepts and related technology and/or ICT skills and knowledge. Findings indicated a range of innovative curriculum plans for teaching primary science through technology and ICT, demonstrating that these subjects can form cohesive links towards achieving the respective learning standards. Teachers can work more astutely by fusing curricula; however further professional development may be required to advance thinking about these processes. Bonding subjects through their learning standards can extend beyond previous integration or thematic work where standards may not have been assessed. Education systems need to articulate through syllabus documents how effective fusing of curricula can be achieved. It appears that education is a key avenue for addressing societal needs, problems and issues. Education is promoted as a universal solution, which has resulted in curriculum overload (Dare, Durand, Moeller, & Washington, 1997; Vinson, 2001). Societal and curriculum demands have placed added pressure on teachers with many extenuating education issues increasing teachers’ workloads (Mobilise for Public Education, 2002). For example, as Australia has weather conducive for outdoor activities, social problems and issues arise that are reported through the media calling for action; consequently schools have been involved in swimming programs, road and bicycle safety programs, and a wide range of activities that had been considered a parental responsibility in the past. Teachers are expected to plan, implement and assess these extra-curricula activities within their already overcrowded timetables. At the same stage, key learning areas (KLAs) such as science and technology are mandatory requirements within all Australian education systems. These systems have syllabuses outlining levels of content and the anticipated learning outcomes (also known as standards, essential learnings, and frameworks). Time allocated for teaching science in obviously an issue. In 2001, it was estimated that on average the time spent in teaching science in Australian Primary Schools was almost an hour per week (Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). More recently, a study undertaken in the U.S. reported a similar finding. More than 80% of the teachers in K-5 classrooms spent less than an hour teaching science (Dorph, Goldstein, Lee, et al., 2007). More importantly, 16% did not spend teaching science in their classrooms. Teachers need to learn to work smarter by optimising the use of their in-class time. Integration is proposed as one of the ways to address the issue of curriculum overload (Venville & Dawson, 2005; Vogler, 2003). Even though there may be a lack of definition for integration (Hurley, 2001), curriculum integration aims at covering key concepts in two or more subject areas within the same lesson (Buxton & Whatley, 2002). This implies covering the curriculum in less time than if the subjects were taught separately; therefore teachers should have more time to cover other educational issues. Expectedly, the reality can be decidedly different (e.g., Brophy & Alleman, 1991; Venville & Dawson, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers report that students expand their knowledge and skills as a result of subject integration (James, Lamb, Householder, & Bailey, 2000). There seems to be considerable value for integrating science with other KLAs besides aiming to address teaching workloads. Over two decades ago, Cohen and Staley (1982) claimed that integration can bring a subject into the primary curriculum that may be otherwise left out. Integrating science education aims to develop a more holistic perspective. Indeed, life is not neat components of stand-alone subjects; life integrates subject content in numerous ways, and curriculum integration can assist students to make these real-life connections (Burnett & Wichman, 1997). Science integration can provide the scope for real-life learning and the possibility of targeting students’ learning styles more effectively by providing more than one perspective (Hudson & Hudson, 2001). To illustrate, technology is essential to science education (Blueford & Rosenbloom, 2003; Board of Studies, 1999; Penick, 2002), and constructing technology immediately evokes a social purpose for such construction (Marker, 1992). For example, building a model windmill requires science and technology (Zubrowski, 2002) but has a key focus on sustainability and the social sciences. Science has the potential to be integrated with all KLAs (e.g., Cohen & Staley, 1982; Dobbs, 1995; James et al., 2000). Yet, “integration” appears to be a confusing term. Integration has an educational meaning focused on special education students being assimilated into mainstream classrooms. The word integration was used in the late seventies and generally focused around thematic approaches for teaching. For instance, a science theme about flight only has to have a student drawing a picture of plane to show integration; it did not connect the anticipated outcomes from science and art. The term “fusing curricula” presents a seamless bonding between two subjects; hence standards (or outcomes) need to be linked from both subjects. This also goes beyond just embedding one subject within another. Embedding implies that one subject is dominant, while fusing curricula proposes an equal mix of learning within both subject areas. Primary education in Queensland has eight KLAs, each with its established content and each with a proposed structure for levels of learning. Primary teachers attempt to cover these syllabus requirements across the eight KLAs in less than five hours a day, and between many of the extra-curricula activities occurring throughout a school year (e.g., Easter activities, Education Week, concerts, excursions, performances). In Australia, education systems have developed standards for all KLAs (e.g., Education Queensland, NSW Department of Education and Training, Victorian Education) usually designated by a code. In the late 1990’s (in Queensland), “core learning outcomes” for strands across all KLA’s. For example, LL2.1 for the Queensland Education science syllabus means Life and Living at Level 2 standard number 1. Thus, a teacher’s planning requires the inclusion of standards as indicated by the presiding syllabus. More recently, the core learning outcomes were replaced by “essential learnings”. They specify “what students should be taught and what is important for students to have opportunities to know, understand and be able to do” (Queensland Studies Authority, 2009, para. 1). Fusing science education with other KLAs may facilitate more efficient use of time and resources; however this type of planning needs to combine standards from two syllabuses. To further assist in facilitating sound pedagogical practices, there are models proposed for learning science, technology and other KLAs such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), Productive Pedagogies (Education Queensland, 2004), de Bono’s Six Hats (de Bono, 1985), and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1999) that imply, warrant, or necessitate fused curricula. Bybee’s 5 Es, for example, has five levels of learning (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate; Bybee, 1997) can have the potential for fusing science and ICT standards.

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.

David Hicks and Cathie Holden (eds.) (2007). Teaching The Global Dimension. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 212 pages.

Teaching The Global Dimension (2007) is intended for primary and secondary teachers, pre-service teachers and educators interested in fostering global concerns in the education system. It aims at linking theory and practice and is structured as follows. Part 1, the global dimension, proposes an educational framework for understanding global concerns. Individual chapters in this section deal with some educational responses to global issues and the ways in which young people might become, in Hick’s terms, more “world-minded”. In the first two chapters, Hicks presents first, some educational responses to global issues that have emerged in recent decades, and second, an outline of the evolution of global education as a specific field. As with all the chapters in this book, most of the examples are drawn from the United Kingdom. Young people’s concerns, student teachers’ views and the teaching of controversial issues, comprise the other chapters in this section. Taken collectively, the chapters in Part 2 articulate the conceptual framework for developing, teaching and evaluating a global dimension across the curriculum. Individual chapters in this section, written by a range of authors, explore eight key concepts considered necessary to underpin appropriate learning experiences in the classroom. These are conflict, social justice, values and perceptions, sustainability, interdependence, human rights, diversity and citizenship. These chapters are engaging and well structured. Their common format consists of a succinct introduction, reference to positive action for change, and examples of recent effective classroom practice. Two chapters comprise the final section of this book and suggest different ways in which the global dimension can be achieved in the primary and the secondary classroom.

From e-Government to online deliberative democracy

This brief presentation considered the possibilities and limitations of strategies to promote electronic democracy pursued so far. In particular it indicated that the problems encountered have only been in part due to technological limitations or even a lack of political will. The stronger set of issues concerns the question of 'why participate?', and how to best facilitate this. The capacity to extent the principals of deliberative democracy through online media is briefly canvassed in the presentation.

Uncertainties that matter : risk, response-ability, ethics and the moment of exchange in Live Art

This article examines the moment of exchange between artist, audience and culture in Live Art. Drawing on historical and contemporary examples, including examples from the Exist in 08 Live Art Event in Brisbane, Australia, in October 2008, it argues that Live Art - be it body art, activist art, site-specific performance, or other sorts of performative intervention in the public sphere - is characterised by a common set of claims about activating audiences, asking them to reflect on cultural norms challenged in the work. Live Art presents risky actions, in a context that blurs the boundaries between art and reality, to position audients as ‘witnesses’ who are personally implicated in, and responsible for, the actions unfolding before them. This article problematises assumptions about the way the uncertainties embedded in the Live Art encounter contribute to its deconstructive agenda. It uses the ethical theory of Emmanuel Levinas, Hans-Thies Lehmann and Dwight Conquergood to examine the mechanics of reductive, culturally-recuperative readings that can limit the efficacy of the Live Art encounter. It argues that, though ‘witnessing’ in Live Art depends on a relation to the real - real people, taking real risks, in real places - if it fails to foreground theatrical frame it is difficult for audients to develop the dual consciousness of the content, and their complicity in that content, that is the starting point for reflexivity, and response-ability, in the ethical encounter.

Experiencing higher degree research supervision as teaching

This article describes research higher degree supervisors’ experiences of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. While research education is considered central to the HDR experience, comparatively little is known to date of the pedagogical lenses adopted by supervisors as they go about their supervision. We worked with 35 supervisors engaged in discipline-specific and interdisciplinary research across architectural design, science, engineering, computer science, information systems and librarianship. Several of these supervisors conducted projects which interfaced with the social sciences and humanities. The pedagogies, constructed through the discussions and phenomenographic analysis, offer a picture of supervisors’ collective awareness of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. Supervision as a teaching and learning practice was experienced as: Promoting the supervisor’s development, Imparting academic expertise, Upholding academic standards, Promoting learning to research, Drawing upon student expertise, Enabling student development, Venturing into unexplored territory, Forming productive communities, and Contributing to society.

Producing better outcomes : music and public services

Music has played an important role in social life for thousands of years, and its varied forms of communication have significantly influenced the types of public services reported in this book. It is now time for practitioners and academics to sing songs of resilience that reinvigorate the public’s understanding of the positive role music can play in all of our lives, and for public services to better resource music projects. The last twenty years have seen major advances in studies of music and its affects on the brain’s neuroplasticity, but as yet no one has managed to provide a comprehensive response to Oliver Sachs’ (2006) question: why does music, for better or worse, have so much power? This chapter seeks to demonstrate the power of those music making experiences that bridge the gap between the physicaland social sciences across commercial, social and cultural contexts.

Another mango season

Short fiction

“What’s going on here?” The pedagogy of a data analysis session

Data analysis sessions are a common feature of discourse analytic communities, often involving participants with varying levels of expertise to those with significant expertise. Learning how to do data analysis and working with transcripts, however, are often new experiences for doctoral candidates within the social sciences. While many guides to doctoral education focus on procedures associated with data analysis (Heath, Hindmarsh, & Luff, 2010; McHoul & Rapley, 2001; Silverman, 2011; Wetherall, Taylor, & Yates, 2001), the in situ practices of doing data analysis are relatively undocumented. This chapter has been collaboratively written by members of a special interest research group, the Transcript Analysis Group (TAG), who meet regularly to examine transcripts representing audio- and video-recorded interactional data. Here, we investigate our own actual interactional practices and participation in this group where each member is both analyst and participant. We particularly focus on the pedagogic practices enacted in the group through investigating how members engage in the scholarly practice of data analysis. A key feature of talk within the data sessions is that members work collaboratively to identify and discuss ‘noticings’ from the audio-recorded and transcribed talk being examined, produce candidate analytic observations based on these discussions, and evaluate these observations. Our investigation of how talk constructs social practices in these sessions shows that participants move fluidly between actions that demonstrate pedagogic practices and expertise. Within any one session, members can display their expertise as analysts and, at the same time, display that they have gained an understanding that they did not have before. We take an ethnomethodological position that asks, ‘what’s going on here?’ in the data analysis session. By observing the in situ practices in fine-grained detail, we show how members participate in the data analysis sessions and make sense of a transcript.