In The Conversation (12.8.15), Jennifer Charteris considers Christopher Pyne’s proposal for a pared back curriculum. She concludes:
‘The “basic” curriculum, with its reduced focus on narrow conceptions of literacy and numeracy, is at the expense of a broad and rich Australian curriculum. Education is a social good, a mechanism for social justice and a vehicle for social mobility.
‘The “basic” curriculum, with its reduced focus on narrow conceptions of literacy and numeracy, is at the expense of a broad and rich Australian curriculum. Education is a social good, a mechanism for social justice and a vehicle for social mobility.
‘We run a significant risk that the divide between the haves and have-nots will widen even further through the “back to basics” approach advocated. The private sector will offer an enriched curriculum whereas the public sector will provide a second-tier “basic” focus.
‘It is questionable whether a “dumbed down” curriculum of this ilk can offer the complexity required to address Australia’s needs as we progress in the 21st century.’
- We lose more than we gain by paring back the curriculum »
- Kids learn best when you add a problem-solving boost to ‘back-to-basics’ instruction »
- A ‘crowded curriculum’? Sure, it may be complex, but so is the world kids must engage with »
- The proposed new maths curriculum doesn’t dumb down content. It actually demands more of students »
- Dumbed-down curriculum means primary students will learn less about the world and nothing about climate »
- How to implement a whole-school curriculum approach: a guide for principals
- Australian education in long-term decline due to poor curriculum, report says
- The Australian Curriculum is copping fresh criticism – what is it supposed to do?