PDF (Whole Thesis) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern ...

PDF (Whole Thesis) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern ... PDF (Whole Thesis) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern ...

eprints.usq.edu.au
from eprints.usq.edu.au More from this publisher
11.02.2013 Views

Instead, from the nation's Parliament, there has been a stony and stubborn and deafening silence for more than a decade. ... A view that instead we should look for any pretext to push this great wrong to one side, to leave it languishing with the historians, the academics and the cultural warriors as if the Stolen Generations is a little more that an interesting sociological phenomenon. (as cited in T. Jones, 2008, para. 3, 4, 6, emphasis added) Although this and other events were reported as a continuation of the history/culture wars (T. Jones, 2008; and Ferrari’s, 2008 link to the national curriculum); given the paucity of coverage on these debates since that time, a case can be mounted that asserts the end of the history/culture wars had arrived. An exception to this is the August 29-30 editorial in The Weekend Australian where Rudd is criticised for comments made during a speech to launch Thomas Kenneally’s book Australians: Origins to Eureka that were “...so innocuous as to be useless in a serious debate about our past” (Editorial, 2009, p. 16). However, as this Editorial did not gain any momentum, it cannot be considered as a serious resurgence of the debates. Amongst other accusations, the newspaper claimed that Rudd was avoiding any robust debate about the nation’s past, and brought up the national curriculum as a reference point for the importance of public debate. Although the newspaper could be accused of being less than objective in their reporting of the history/culture wars, the column finished with a terse: Mr Rudd is wrong when he talks of ‘arid intellectual debates’ of the past and counsels us to agree to disagree about our history. Calling for a truce in the history wars ignores the fact our knowledge about the past is constantly evolving. The historical record is based on facts but it is not fixed in stone. (Editorial, 2009, p. 16) A number of questions can be seen as remaining. Was there a winner of the history/culture wars? If there was, who was it? Does the election of a Labor government mean in and of itself that the conservative side has lost? Given the conservatism of the Australian Labor Party and the at times bipartisan support of these ideologically-driven debates, this may not be the most significant indicator of success and failure. G. Henderson called the loss by the conservatives of the history/culture wars as far back as 2006, writing “...there is only one area where the Coalition has failed to have a significant impact – namely, in what some have termed the ‘culture wars’” (2006b, p. 12). G. Henderson still maintained his praise of 480

Howard’s intentions, adding, “Mr Howard has attempted to present a more positive interpretation of the Australian achievement” (G. Henderson, 2006b, p. 12). Reinforcing the view that Howard (and therefore some might argue, the conservative right) lost the history/culture wars, G. Henderson repeated his view two years later, writing “Agree or disagree with the Howard Government, it made some tough decisions on economic, foreign and social policy. However, its impact on the so-called culture wars has been grossly exaggerated” (2008b, para. 2). A1.7 Education Contexts: History/Culture Wars and School Curriculum Since the initial SOSE syllabus implementation in Queensland schools in 2000, there have been a number of sustained campaigns critical of the new curriculum. An indication of the impact the history/culture wars has had on schooling can be seen in the print space devoted to the topic in major newspapers. Queensland-based The Courier Mail’s reprinting of the entire SOSE Syllabus is one example of this. The Weekend Australian’s decision to include five articles plus an editorial in the September 23-24, 2006 edition, on the asserted failings of curriculum is also an indication of the perceived importance and generated public interest of this topic on a nation-wide scale. The syllabuses derived from the SOSE Key Learning Area (KLA) of all states have been at the centre of much public commentary, such that it becomes apparent that it is the area of social learning broadly that attracts attention, and not narrowly state-specific characteristics of specific syllabuses. SOSE syllabuses have many commonalities across the various Australian states, and thus a national focus on this issue has been convenient and relatively easy to generate, as broad generalisations can be made based on curricula that have similar theoretical groundings. Representations of SOSE through public discourses have been varied; at times on the attack, sometimes supportive, usually surrounded by controversy and seemingly always topical. This section maps the debates at sections where the history/culture wars connect with education by highlighting key personalities who have consistently maintained an interest through public commentaries on the SOSE curriculum and present counter arguments presented by educators to dominant criticisms since 2000. A1.7.1 Public contexts: Commentaries and responses. Prominent criticisms of the SOSE curriculum fall into two clear categories. First, the nature of the curriculum in terms of its underpinning values and specific content often forms the 481

Howard’s intentions, adding, “Mr Howard has attempted to present a more positive<br />

interpretation <strong>of</strong> the Australian achievement” (G. Henderson, 2006b, p. 12). Reinforcing the<br />

view that Howard (and therefore some might argue, the conservative right) lost the<br />

history/culture wars, G. Henderson repeated his view two years later, writing “Agree or<br />

disagree with the Howard Government, it made some tough decisions on economic, foreign<br />

and social policy. However, its impact on the so-called culture wars has been grossly<br />

exaggerated” (2008b, para. 2).<br />

A1.7 Education Contexts: History/Culture Wars and School Curriculum<br />

Since the initial SOSE syllabus implementation in Queensland schools in 2000, there have<br />

been a number <strong>of</strong> sustained campaigns critical <strong>of</strong> the new curriculum. An indication <strong>of</strong> the<br />

impact the history/culture wars has had on schooling can be seen in the print space devoted to<br />

the topic in major newspapers. Queensland-based The Courier Mail’s reprinting <strong>of</strong> the entire<br />

SOSE Syllabus is one example <strong>of</strong> this. The Weekend Australian’s decision to include five<br />

articles plus an editorial in the September 23-24, 2006 edition, on the asserted failings <strong>of</strong><br />

curriculum is also an indication <strong>of</strong> the perceived importance and generated public interest <strong>of</strong><br />

this topic on a nation-wide scale. The syllabuses derived from the SOSE Key Learning Area<br />

(KLA) <strong>of</strong> all states have been at the centre <strong>of</strong> much public commentary, such that it becomes<br />

apparent that it is the area <strong>of</strong> social learning broadly that attracts attention, and not narrowly<br />

state-specific characteristics <strong>of</strong> specific syllabuses.<br />

SOSE syllabuses have many commonalities across the various Australian states, and thus a<br />

national focus on this issue has been convenient and relatively easy to generate, as broad<br />

generalisations can be made based on curricula that have similar theoretical groundings.<br />

Representations <strong>of</strong> SOSE through public discourses have been varied; at times on the attack,<br />

sometimes supportive, usually surrounded by controversy and seemingly always topical. This<br />

section maps the debates at sections where the history/culture wars connect with education by<br />

highlighting key personalities who have consistently maintained an interest through public<br />

commentaries on the SOSE curriculum and present counter arguments presented by educators<br />

to dominant criticisms since 2000.<br />

A1.7.1 Public contexts: Commentaries and responses.<br />

Prominent criticisms <strong>of</strong> the SOSE curriculum fall into two clear categories. First, the nature<br />

<strong>of</strong> the curriculum in terms <strong>of</strong> its underpinning values and specific content <strong>of</strong>ten forms the<br />

481

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!