Posts Tagged curriculum

The Australian Curriculum for English

As we have already heard from our trusty newspapers (who magically had obtained copies prior to release) we have much to look forward to in the Australian Curriculum for English:

The curriculum takes a more traditional view of literature than has been apparent in some states in the past decade or so. – Justine Ferrari in The Australian 27 Feb

Senior educationists believe the new curriculum for students in kindergarten to Year 10, due to come into force next year, has been infiltrated by fringe lobby groups seeking to include issues such as multiculturalism, indigenous rights, ethical behaviour and sustainable living. – Joe Hildebrand & Bruce McDougall in Daily Tele 27 Feb

GRAMMAR will be front and centre of the federal government’s new national English curriculum.Stephanie Pealting in SMH 28 Feb

AUSTRALIA’s new national school curriculum is to be unveiled today in a long overdue recognition of the need to return the three Rs to the classroom. – Editorial in The Herald Sun 28 Feb

Though, we already knew all this earlier in the week from Julia Gillard’s address to the National Press Club.

ALL states and territories will be forced to follow a set program for teaching reading under the first national English curriculum, which stipulates the letters, sounds and words students must learn in each year of school. – Justine Ferrari in The Australian 25 Feb

Education Minister Julia Gillard told the National Press Club yesterday that, for the first time, grammar would be taught at all levels of school and parents would have a chance to comment directly on what their children would learn. – Scott Hannaford in The Canberra Times 25 Feb

Actually, we have known that this was coming ever since the release of the National Curriculum Shaping Paper [PDF link] back in May 2009.  The Shape of the Australian Curriculum: English paper proposed that K-10 curriculum in English be organised around three interrelated strands:

  1. Language: The Language strand involves the development of a coherent, dynamic and evolving body of knowledge about the English language and how it works.
  2. Literature: Students learn to interpret, appreciate, evaluate and create literary texts such as narrative, poetry, prose, plays, film and multimodal texts, in spoken, print and digital/online contexts.
  3. Literacy: Students apply their English skills and knowledge to read, view, speak, listen to, write and create a growing repertoire of texts.

The separation of these strands sure is nice and neat.  Cute even…the alliteration could appeal to some English teachers.

But while these separate strands might be neat, they have resulted in precisely what English teachers feared: a regression to a 100 year old teaching approach that divorces the learning of the mechanics of ‘language’ from the learning of the feelings, values and ideas it represents.  We’re trying to teach communicators, not copy-typists!  But, predictably, here are some of the content descriptors for what students must learn from the Language strand of the 7-10 curriculum for English:

  • Resources for creating cohesive texts including identifying reference items, the use of substitution and ellipsis, relationships between vocabulary items, and the role of text connectives (Year 7)
  • Understanding spelling rules including origins, word endings, Greek and Latin roots, base words, suffixes, prefixes, spelling patterns and generalisations (Year 7)
  • Sentences can consist of a number of independent and dependent clauses combined in a variety of ways (Year 8 )
  • Purpose of  devices used by authors  including symbolism, analogy and allusion (Year 8 )
  • Language can be multi-layered, resulting in varying interpretations (Year 9) (…a bit late to learn this?)
  • Information can be condensed by collapsing a clause into a noun phrase (nominalisation) (Year 9)
  • Different perspectives can be introduced by citing the words and views of others
  • Construction of multimodal and digital texts involves knowledge of visual grammar (Year 10) (visual literacy…finally!)

Developing skills in reading and writing is something that I value, that English teachers universally value.  But skills such as spelling, grammar and syntax should be taught as means of building a student’s own representational world, rather than as ends in themselves.

Without a clear pedagogical direction that guides teachers to embed language learning within quality literacy and literature teaching, as well as differentiate language learning for students reading at different levels, the Australian English Curriculum will doom countless future students to exercises in disconnected rote learning and grammar drills. Will your child be one of them?

Visit the ACARA website for information on how to submit your views. Have your say about the experience you want your children and students to have by responding during the consultation period from 1 March 2010 to the end of May 2010.

, ,

11 Comments

ICT Cross Curriculum Content

A comment by Pixeltoy on an earlier post about the Laptops for Learning Forum got me thinking: although I do believe much work will have to be done to ensure authentic integration of ICT resources into all subject, I’m not sure that syllabus change is the answer.

NSW syllabuses already have cross-curriculum content embedded into each syllabus.  One of the content areas is Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The ICT cross-curriculum content in the English 7-10 syllabus is worth quoting here at length:

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) content in English enables students to develop and apply skills, knowledge and understanding of ICT in their composing, responding and presenting, and as part of the imaginative and critical thinking they undertake in English. The ICT content has been incorporated into the content of this syllabus to ensure that all students have the opportunity to become competent, discriminating and creative users of ICT and are better able to demonstrate the syllabus outcomes of English through the effective use of ICT.

In their study of English, students are able to apply their existing knowledge of word processing, multimedia, ways of formatting and presenting texts, simulation software, graphics and electronic communication and further develop their skills, knowledge and understanding of these technologies. They learn about the ethics of information communication through technology.

At Stage 4, students use specified tools and functions of word processing for composing. They learn to import images and graphics into folders and documents. In formatting documents they learn to desktop publish using graphics in a multimedia presentation or webpage, evaluating appropriate layout and design principles for a specific audience.

At Stage 5, students use more advanced specified tools and functions of word processing for composing. They learn to create, import and manipulate graphics. They learn about advanced forms of digital communication such as video conferencing.

So, what is it that’s already letting us down?  What is it we are missing in our professional learning to be able to implement this content, which already appears in our syllabus documents?

, , ,

5 Comments

Arts and Sciences not seperate #TED

In this TED talk Mae Jemison makes some very poetic and logical arguments for teaching the Arts and the Sciences in a more integrated way, and about the importance of promoting human creativity, which she explains is found in both the Arts and Sciences:

The talk was interesting in itself, but the reason why I found this Ted talk so appealing was that it again got me thinking about the inter-related nature of the acts of reading and writing, and of what our English syllabus in NSW calls responding (reading, listening and viewing) and composing (writing, speaking, and visually representing).  You might already have spotted a problem with these divisions – although the syllabus names reading as an act of responding (because it involves thinking about and having a response to what is read), one can also write or speak a ‘response’, yet those acts are names as acts of composing.  Do you follow? 😉

The distinction being made in the syllabus however, is not really between the acts of reading and writing (for example), but between acts that involve responsive or comprehensive thought processes, and acts that involve original or creative thought processes.

Jemison is critical of the way we have been taugh to regard ‘intuitive’ and ‘analytical’ thought processes as seperate – to see ourselves and others as ‘left-brained’ or ‘right-brained’; ‘artists’ or ‘scientists’; ‘destructors’ or ‘constructors’.  While it may be handy for working out assessment task weightings to distinguish between acts such as listening and writing (although we will often test listening by getting kids to write down what they understood!), it is one way in which we reinforce the artificial binary of intuition and analysis.

One must be intuitive to be truly analytical.  One may work very methodically to acheive originality or create art.  Good English teachers understand this, and continue to promote creativity in all its forms.

, ,

2 Comments