Archive for category politics
Why it doesn’t matter that NSW keeps losing the State of Origin…
…GO YOU GOOD THINGS!
NSW deals national curriculum a blow
Adam Bennett (Sydney Morning Herald) August 9, 2011
[NSW Education Minister] Mr Piccoli on Tuesday announced the state government would postpone the implementation of the national curriculum by 12 months because of a lack of commonwealth funding and uncertainty about the content.
NSW will now introduce the Australian curriculum in English, Maths, Science and History in 2014, with the planning phase beginning in 2013.
Mr Piccoli said that while the NSW government remained committed to the reforms, schools couldn’t prepare for its introduction in 2013 with funding issues still unresolved and the curriculum’s content not known.
“Schools needed to know in June of this year precisely the content of the national curriculum and to know that there were funds available for professional development,” he told reporters in Sydney.
“The final document won’t be signed off until at least the ministerial council meeting in October, and that simply does not give the schools in NSW and the more than 100,000 teachers the opportunity to receive the professional development, and to be in a position to implement the national curriculum in 2013.”
Thank you New South Wales for Standing Up and Putting Your Foot Down, while the rest of the educrats and Ministers around this country smile and nod and agree to bring in a curriculum overnight when they Quite Frankly Should Know Better.
That’s MY State of Origin!
Foucault THAT.
Posted by kmcg2375 in books, education, english, learning community, Lit_Review, online tools, politics, reflections, research, social media, technology, university on July 28, 2011
I have a confession to make.
Lately, I’ve been cheating on my blog. (In a good way, I promise!)
A colleague at my university, Clare O’Farrell, has an established Ning that is home to members of the Poststructuralist Theory ‘Special Interest Group’ of AARE. Established it so well, in fact, that it is one of the few Nings I know of (along with the English Companion) that continued to have happy users after stupid-Ning made its stupid-serivce un-free. Hmph.
Anyway, I use my space and profile on the ‘Ed Theory Ning’ to brain-vomit about (on?) theory that I don’t understand yet.
And it’s proven #very illuminating.
Increasing my activity in various groups on the Ning has also proven fruitful. Particularly in the ‘Daily Writing Club’ (we have to do exactly as it says…!) and now also from browsing the ‘Foucault reading group’.
That’s where I was reminded to check out Clare’s actual blog, Refracted Input, which I hadn’t done for ages. This month she is discussing a quote by Foucault about ‘race and colonialism’, and in it I can see a relationship to contemporary discourses around changing technologies.
The term ‘folklore’ is nothing but a hypocrisy of the ‘civilised’ who won’t take part in the game, and who want to hide their refusal to make contact under the mantle of respect for the picturesque…
Man is irrevocably a stranger to dawn. It needed our colonial way of thinking to believe that man could have remained faithful to his beginnings and that there was any place in the world where he could encounter the essence of the ‘primitive’. (trans. Clare O’Farrell)Michel Foucault, (1994) [1963] ‘Veilleur de la nuit des hommes’ In Dits et Ecrits vol. I. Paris: Gallimard, p. 232.
You see, I’ve been worrying about the ethics of what could be seen as meddling with teachers or students who are comfotable in their print-material ways, trying to prod them along to explore new technologies. I have wondered, ‘am I being selfish?’, ‘what if they have it right?’, ‘what if I’m destroying something important?’, and ‘am I wrong to advocate for my view, should I just wait and see what happens instead?’. But then, Clare’s wise words:
One cannot buy into the romanticism of the primitive – which is assumed to be so much closer to pure truth and ‘nature’. Conversely one cannot make the colonial assumption that one civilisation or one period of history (now) is more advanced and more evolved than another.
That’s right. I don’t need to worry about whether I’ll ‘wreck’ anything, unless I’m thinking of the people I’m meddling with as OTHER. And I was using pronouns to construct myself in opposition to other through all those damn self-doubts. I don’t need to do that. FOUCAULT THAT!
*Sigh of relief*
NB: Clare also curates a website on Michel Foucault, which includes a glossary of KEY CONCEPTS and other wonderful gems (thanks Clare!).
Banned books
From a recent article at guardian.co.uk by Alison Flood:
From Suzanne Collins’s post-apocalyptic hit The Hunger Games to Stephenie Meyer’s vampire bestseller Twilight, American parents have been making it their mission to complain about some of the most popular books published in recent years.
So…how many of these have you read?
1. “And Tango Makes Three” by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson
2. “The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian” by Sherman Alexie
3. “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley
4. “Crank” by Ellen Hopkins
5. “The Hunger Games” by Suzanne Collins
6. “Lush” by Natasha Friend
7. “What My Mother Doesn’t Know” by Sonya Sones
8. “Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By In America” by Barbara Ehrenreich
9. “Revolutionary Voices” edited by Amy Sonnie
10. “Twilight” by Stephenie Meyer
For more information on book challenges and censorship, please visit the Office for Intellectual Freedom’s Banned Books Week Web site at www.ala.org/bbooks.
Say Cheese

Does anyone else look at this picture and mostly see material for Lie To Me?
NAPLAN is evil
Posted by kmcg2375 in education, english, politics, university on April 11, 2011
How, in just a sniff of time in just one lecture, am I going to be able to convey to my preservice teachers all of the evil in schooling that has come from NAPLAN testing?
I think I’ll start with this news article from today:
Parents of about 12 students in Year Nine at Miami State High School were asked last week to sign a waiver so their children did not sit the NAPLAN (National Assessment Program — Literacy and Numeracy) tests, to avoid stressing the teenagers.
The parents of one student who refused to withdraw their son were told they were the only ones not to sign the form, out of those contacted by the school .
When Alexandra Fox demanded her son Mathew, 13, sit the NAPLAN tests, she was told that Mathew was quite good at English so could sit those tests, but he was not as strong in maths so she should sign the waiver for those tests.
Mathew’s father, Anthony Jarrah, said his son had no medical condition or diagnosed learning difficulty that would require his exemption from the tests.
“He’s a normal kid, has no learning difficulties or anything. He’s just one of those kids who takes a bit longer to grasp things,” he said. “They’re not educating kids, they’re not doing their best.
“He’s already 13 and it’s not that long before he’s out of school. All they want to do is to hide him all through high school like they did in primary, then once he leaves school he’s not their problem anymore.”
(Ferrari, ‘School uges students to skip tests’ in The Australian, March 11, 2011)
Is it time yet to make the call? Seriously, the (yes, very valid, very real ‘if done properly’) diagnostic function of the NAPLAN test is being compromised so much here.
Your performance will only make our school look bad.
What a delightful message to send to the students of today.
Stuff I believe
Posted by kmcg2375 in education, politics, reflections, social media on March 21, 2011
It was interesting to follow the tweets of @BiancaH80 and @durk94 tonight, as they discussed the school funding data available on the MySchool website.
To be honest, in the interests of keeping myself in a positive and generative work state of mind I’ve avoided looking at the new MySchool site at all (and no, I’m not going to hyperlink to it because I don’t think it deserves the traffic). Next week I’m going to have to though, so I can talk about it with my students in class.
ohmmmmmmm…
Even though I now work at a university, which involves striving for curriculum excellence in schools in every sector, I maintain my firm commitment to the social justice agenda of supporting public education.
However, government departments of education tend to be clunky, inefficient, wheel-reinventing institutions. I know, I used to work in one. And if I returned to teaching you’d find me back there.
But while funding and resource benchmarks are a large part of the problem, a widespread lack of willingness to consider radically shifting our models of curriculum ‘delivery’ prevents the construction of a meaningful way forward, in my opinion. The composition of the local student ‘community’ and its relationship to the related local ‘campus’ needs to be significantly rethought.
So I’m posting my tweets for tonight up here, just for the record. I’d be interested in hearing other people’s visions for the school campus of the future. Will there still be a distinction between ‘public’ and ‘private’?
I hope not.
Women seal it with a kiss
Whether you liked the tone of Julia Gillard’s address to the US Congress or you thought it was an “unnecessary suck“, you can’t deny that she made some powerful statements. Her insistence that Trade = Jobs was a clear signal to Congress that a policy of trade with Australia would be of more benefit in the long run to the US economy than the protectionist farming subsidies that are currently under consideration.
The other powerful statement of course was the flaming red/orange (let’s call it vermilion?) jacket that she wore for the speech. It had such a visual impact, drawing the eye straight to her, guaranteeing she was the focus. It was so bright that it dulled the red in her own hair, and it also occurred to me that it was near enough to ‘Labor red’ to count as an attempt at branding.
Why am I so interested in Julia’s clothes?
I recently watched a TED Talk given by Madeleine Albright about being a woman and a diplomat. She told an excellent story about how and why she started using her jacket pins (or brooches) to symbolise her stance and attitude while she was Secretary of State. It’s a fascinating idea. On one hand of course so infuriating that women have to pay such close attention to their costume while men’s choices in business attire very rarely attracts a second glance. This only goes so far though – I guarantee that if a dude showed up to address congress in a bright red jacket, we’d be talking about it!
But the potential for using costume intentionally to codify our position or beliefs…I can’t say that I would rather we all wore grey suits cut from virtually the same cloth. And in this increasingly visual age isn’t it natural for us to increasingly draw on visual codes and conventions to communicate meaning?
If you haven’t come across Madeleine Albright’s talk before, I recommend it. It’s a 13 minute long interview and contains one of my new favourite quotes of all time:
There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.
Enjoy!
Good News Day
This front page made me smile so much yesterday I broke my usual rule and bought The Australian:
PRIVATE SCHOOLS’ FURY OVER MYSCHOOL WEBSITE
Turns out the poor buggers have found some inaccuracies in the way their finances are reported. It makes it look like they are getting paid WAY too much money for the services they provide, or something totally unbelievable like that.
I say: suck it. Where were you last year when NSW public school teachers and unions were the only ones out there willing to put their neck on the line to criticise the MySchool website? Sitting quietly on their hands and calling us whingers, that’s where.
STATE REJECTS PM’s CURRICULUM AS SUBSTANDARD
Which state you ask? Oh, that’d be NSW. Again. As far as I can see, the only state with the balls to take a stand against ACARA. Again.
Now, I realise full well that teachers in every state and territory think that their curriculum is ‘the best’. But that’s not what this is actually about. This is not just about some east-coast superiority complex. This is about (in the case of English, at least) the inadequacy of the curriculum on offer.
I love my new home in Queensland, but for sheer determination to kick against the pricks, I am proud to say ‘go the Blues!’ On National Curriculum issues, NSW is proving well and truly to be the big sister of Australia – she might not always be right, but at least she’s brave enough to fight for what she thinks is right (inaccurate newspaper reporting be damned).
SIDDLE BLOWS ENGLAND AWAY WITH HATTRICK
OK, so any real Australian knows that this was the only real story of the day.
If you don’t know what a hattrick in cricket is, it’s when a bowler gets three batsmen out in a row. It’s very hard to do. Since the start of the Ashes in 1877 there have only been eight other hattricks, making Siddle’s the ninth. And it was his birthday!
What a good news day!
Noam Chomsky on the Role of the Educational System
Posted by kmcg2375 in education, politics, university on November 11, 2010
Chomsky argues that schools are a system of indoctrination of the young:
Even the fact that the system has a lot of stupidity in it, I think has a function. You know, it means that people are filtered out for obedience. If you can guarantee lots of stupidity in the educational system, you know like stupid assignments and things like that, you know that the only people who’ll make it through are like me, and like most of you I guess, who are willing to do it no matter how stupid it is, because we want to go to the next step. So you may know that this assignment is idiotic and the guy up there couldn’t think his way out of a paper bag, but you’ll do it anyway because that’s the way you get to the next class and you want to ‘make it’ and so on and so forth.
Well there are people who don’t do that, you know. There are people who say ‘I’m not gonna do it, it’s too ridiculous’. Those people are called behavioural problems.
Thanks for the link Bianca – I love getting angry with Noam.
Jules Rules?
On 24 June 2010, the Hon Julia Gillard MP was sworn in as Prime Minister by the Governor-General, succeeding the Hon Kevin Rudd MP.
I have been eager to blog about this, but rather than attempt an analysis of the politics that have gone down this week, or of Gillard’s capacity as a leader, I wanted to hear from other young women about how they felt about the event. So, I sent out a message on Facebook to some of my ex-students asking them
as fine young women with the world at your feet, what are your thoughts on having a female Prime Minister?
What follows is a pastiche of my experiences, their thoughts, and my reaction to their thoughts on the promotion of a woman to the highest leadership post in the nation.
Where were you when…
The evening of Wednesday the 23rd was a fascinating time to be part of the Twittersphere as possible, then definite news of the leadership spill was tracked and commented on by everyone who happened to have their ear to the ground. The #spill hashtag was promptly applied, and we all joined the ruckus in what felt like an impromptu election night party!
I was giddy with excitement. A female Prime Minister! And all the talk pointed in one direction – it wasn’t just a challenge for the sake of it, it was a fait accompli.
Having spent the past few weeks staying up into the wee hours to write my thesis, there was little chance I’d be able to wake up at 9am for the leadership spill. So, an all-nighter was on the cards! (On the upside this also meant that I got to watch the Socceroos play their last World Cup match against Serbia live, which normally I cbf doing at all…it was great fun! It also meant that I felt a deep connection with journalists like Annabel Crabb who appeared on tele for news coverage in the morning after pulling all-nighters themselves…)
That’s what she said!
After sending out my Facebook message to the youngens, it became clear that their thoughts were of a certain, less excited flavour. Here’s some extracts from what they said:
It’s great that we have now have a female prime minister but to be brutally honest the fact that she was elected in a back room of the labor party rather than by the people doesn’t sit well with me. It almost gives women in general a message that the only way to get to the top is by going behind others backs and in todays soceity where women are already fighting within their ranks this only reinforces that it’s ok. This leadership doesn’t feel legitimate because we as the people didn’t have our say and in a democratic society thats kinda the main facet.
The belief that Gillard’s election was somehow undemocratic was a common theme:
My opinion is that it really doesn’t count, since she wasn’t democratically elected. Furthermore, I think it is a disgraceful way to become Prime Minister, that is, after backstabbing the former Prime Minister and taking his spot, despite being in the same party and undoubtedly having, if not encouraged, supported every decision he has made throughout his time as PM.
…along with the implications for how women are perceived as political operators:
The fact that she wasn’t elected by the public, I believe, reflects poorly on the fact that she is the FIRST female Prime Minister that wasn’t even elected democratically, which undermines the fact that a woman is finally Prime Minister of Australia; a position acheived through backstabbing and underhanded behaviour. A reflection of the ONLY way women can break through the glass ceiling? I personally don’t believe so.
…but this toughness in politics also received some admiration, and one made the point that the spill wasn’t all Gillard’s doing:
As a person, she has had the determination, dedication, and dare I say balls to get to where she is. She is definitely a strong woman who is going to get to where she is going. As [another respondent] said, she has done away with the societal expectation to be a mother before her career. I really respect that about her. As for the betrayal of Rudd, this wasn’t something that she came up with on her own. There were other people involved in the take-down of Rudd, but she just has to bear the brunt of it all because she is the one that took his job.
Some of the girls just weren’t that moved by Gillard’s election as being a powerful representation of change in gender stereotypes:
I really don’t believe that a female becoming Prime Minister is causing is as big of a deal as it could of been a few years ago. Personally, I’ve grown up surrounded by strong women and seeing women moving into top positions so from the perspective of someone not old enough to vote yet, it’s not that much of a stir.
…and some worried about the possible adverse effect on feminism:
I think that it is a great thing for women that we finally have a female PM, however, will this now mean that any feminist movements will be effectively told to ‘shut up’ because we now have a female leading our country?
…while one made an insightful observation about remaining cultural barriers:
I don’t think it really matters whether she is female or male. They’re all the same to me. Now, if we got a Muslim up there, THAT would be something 😉
But some of the girls did find powerful messages in what Gillard represents for women:
Firstly, ‘Scandal’ of the process of getting Gillard to be PM aside, I think she will do a decent job and wish her every success. It’s not an easy job for anyone to be successful in politics, let alone be PM. It is undeniably harder for a woman to be prime minister. That’s a big thing to say, I realise, as we all obviously believe in equality here. However, i’m making the point that it is harder for a woman to give up other responsibilities, and ‘expectations’ as a woman to become successful in such a career field. Women are ‘expected’ to become mothers and hold onto a career simultaneously. In fact, women are expected to be mothers overall. I’m not saying it’s like the ’50s again or anything drastic, but think about the societal expectation on women to reproduce, nurture, teach and care for children: it does exist ! Gillard has chosen not to have children in order to further her career- a move considered to be very bold and risky (for most). I admire her dedication to her work, and that she does not feel the need to define herself by children, or by expectation. I think by doing this she is breaking the gender expectations…of couse i’m not bashing mothers – I admire their job as well – but non-mothers/archetypal ‘career women’ get bashed about just as much. Good on her 🙂
Surprisingly not many of them had much to say about Gillard specifically, but those who did weren’t positive:
My thoughts are that, when a female prime minister happened, I wanted it to be a female that I could be proud of to represent my gender. However, Julia Gillard is definitely not that person. At all.
…and, like me, specific thoughts turned to Jules’ education policy:
As a politician, she lost my support long ago when she brought in the ‘myschools’ website. This is something that I strongly disagree with. I must admit, I don’t know a great deal else about her policy, but this effects my family and I most of all, and this was enough to turn me against her.
I had a couple of points of information to share in response to the comments I got back from my fantastic female students.
Firstly, the fact that in Australia we don’t vote for the Prime Minister. We vote for an MP in our electorate and the party with the majority of seats wins Government. So, when the Labor party decides they want to change who their leader is, the system is there to support this. Technically you didn’t vote for Rudd, you voted for Labor…and Labor have to do their best to be the best Government they can.
Secondly, having said that, you can’t ignore the fact that people DO cast their vote in their electorate in part (at least) based on their preferred Prime Minister. Up here in QLD, Anna Bligh was the first female Premier – she ‘inherited’ the job after Peter Beattie retired, but when it came around to the next election and she was chosen ‘by the people’ it made all the difference. She became much more credible, and her title as ‘first female Premier’ became more meaningful.
One for the history books?
Ultimately though…my thoughts?
So little of what happens in politics filters down to the public psyche. But people do notice the big things, and the big things matter.
I was fortunate to be in the United States when Barrack Obama was sworn in as President, and the power of that event as a representation of a nation moving beyond the discrimination and segregation of its past was undeniable.
I do think that the intentional, informed election of our first Female Prime Minister at the polls later this year (I believe) will transform this historic occasion into something of equally undeniable significance. But for me, for now, I am moved. Truly moved.
Perhaps it is generational – was I perhaps among the last generation in Australia to feel that women were still being oppressed? The comments from my students suggest this may be the case. Perhaps I am just relieved to no longer carry the burden of my award at my Year 10 formal as “Most likely to become first female Prime Minster”!
But, I cannot help but want to remind everyone of a few milestones that are relatively recent when you consider how long ‘society’ has been doing business, and politics:
- as many people know, women obtained voting rights in Australia in 1901 with the formation of the Commonwealth
- (unless they were Aboriginal, in which case they had to wait until 1967)
- women were not eligible for election to the State parliaments until the end of the First World War – Edith Cowan became the first woman parliamentarian in Australia in 1921
- the first woman to be elected a world leader was Sirimavo Bandaranaike who was elected PM of Ceylon/Sri Lanka in 1960
- we still do not have 50 per cent representation in any part of parliament or local government in Australia
- before the introduction of The Married Women’s Property Act in 1870, women weren’t allowed to own property in their own right, or open a bank account of their own
-
women in the 1960s were routinely asked to have their husband or a male guarantor sign for a loan, even when they were the sole earner
- as recently as 1989, the appointment of a woman general manager was so unusual, that Westpac issued a press release!
When you consider how recently women have been acknowledged, and how slowly women have been accepted as ‘equals’ in our society, the election of Julia Gillard by her Party to the position of Labor leader and Prime Minister is a momentous act.
Three days later I am still buzzing with pride for my country, and for ‘womyn’ everywhere. And with that I’ll sign off with an extract from Ani DiFranco’s spoken word piece ‘Grand Canyon of Light‘:
People, we are standing at ground zero
Of the feminist revolution
Yeah, it was an inside job
Stoic and sly
One we’re supposed to forget
And downplay and deny
But I think the time is nothing
If not nigh
To let the truth out
Coolest f-word ever deserves a fucking shout!
I mean
Why can’t all decent men and women
Call themselves feminists?
Out of respect
For those who fought for this
I mean, look around
We have this.








Recent Comments