“Struggles over the academic canon, the conflict over multiculturalism and the battle for either extending or containing the rights of new social groups dominate the current political and ideological landscape.”
Giroux might have been writing from
America, but the above statement couldn’t be more apt given Tony Abbot’s recent
comments on the national Australian curriculum. I must admit, when reading the
Giroux reading, and accepting that education obviously has political elements
to it, I was primarily agreeing in the abstract- of course some education
systems in some parts of the world were dictated so! It was easy to accept, and I could conclude
the reading in a thoroughly abstract frame of thought. But never for a moment
did I question how the focus of my high school education has placed on
indigenous history, art, and spirituality- on labor movements, past prime
ministers or Australia’s relationship with our eastern neighbors. Like a good
student I kept my head down and plowed through the reading just as I had once
sat through my own history textbooks: Without question on how the content and
world views applied to me.
The above article did however ignite a few
questions. No- not simply questions like: why is this man our prime minister? I
began questioning whether there was an underlying point- is the Australian
curriculum politicized? Surely it is fair to say that the structure and content
of our education system shapes our student’s identity, thus becoming a major
playing ground in Giroux’ identity politics. The short answer then, is yes.
Which only raises more questions- Are the
coalition government criticizing the political aspect of our education system,
or Identity politics in general? Abbott’s call to include a greater influence
on our western heritage rather than indigenous, as well as a broader view of
business outside of trade unions can’t be confused with a desire to
de-politicize the education system. Merely, as a way of aligning the politics
with the hegemonic views of the past- In saying greater focus needs to be on
Australia’s western history, Abbott is placing a greater political value on
that specific way of thinking about our national identity.
Which raises another pretty big question:
Should the curriculum focus on showing an equal emphasis on both indigenous and
western history, considering that outside the classroom, indeed outside the
history curriculum, students are already inundated with a plethora of images
and stories which feature solely on a western perspective and re-iterate the
idea of western heritage containing greater value than aboriginal heritage? If
we assume the curriculum does focus predominantly on the indigenous history of
Australia, then the argument becomes equality of opportunity versus the
equality of outcome. In the history curriculum, the coalition government might
argue that there is not an equal opportunity for students to learn about both
western and indigenous heritage, but that does not necessarily indicate that
there is an inequality in outcome. The effect of the curriculum on a student’s
formation of identity is only one particular influence, and indeed, the
classroom and the curriculum are the only avenue of discourse to accurately
relay the true importance of indigenous heritage as an alternate worldview to
students.
Perhaps the most interesting facet of the
article, actually has nothing to do with whether or not the curriculum should
of should not be altered. The most significant point raised is by author and
historian Kieth Windshuttle who is quoted as arguing the national curriculum in
general is a mistake, as it leaves the education system: "…open to
political operators, in both politics and academia, to think they can influence
the whole nation's way of thinking about history".
As someone currently studying to become a
history teacher, the thought is alarming at best. My decision to become a
teacher was partly due to my love of the subject, and to instill that interest
and passion into others. It was partly, however, to encourage other individuals
to engage critically with the views of the world around them. To examine
sources, to consider motivations and bias in accounts. Perhaps one day, I’ll have
encourage my students to critically examine just exactly what I’m teaching
them, and why.
No comments:
Post a Comment