School Curriculum Review

[Shark Bait (Stu)]

Reports in this mornings news have flagged a review into the Australian School Curriculum. No matter how good any education system is, improvements can always be made. My eldest is just about to start Grade 2, so education is a topic that is of high priority in our house.

Reports from various sources tell us that our standards have slipped in relation to other developed countries. When looking at our Son's Grade 2 cohort, it is surprising that a good number of students have not achieved the expected standards in reading (approx 20-25%). It appears that this is a problem across Australia. Kids learn to read and then transition into reading to learn. If they don't 'get' the basics it will only get harder as they get older.

What areas do you see in need of improvement?

Are there any primary / secondary educators on IIS? What is your take on the current curriculum?

[glend (Glen)]

The parents have to take more responsibility, you can't just drop a kid off at school and expect them to get everything they need there. There is nothing better than one on one time reading with your kids. My two were reading when they started school, now uni graduates with good careers. Teach them to love books. You will find nothing more important than your time with them.

[Shark Bait (Stu)]

I agree Glen, education starts at home with involved parents. Like you, our children have reading time with us every day and the benefits of this are obvious within the school environment.

Unfortunately there is a small group of parents in every state across Australia who treat teachers and classrooms like daycare centres.

For the percentage of my Son's Gr 2 cohort that is struggling with reading, the school has always made a big effort to get them up to speed. Some improve while others continue to struggle, but it is plain to see that the teaching staff and parent helpers will always do their best to help every student reach their full potential.

Regading the Australian School Curriculum Review:

Is there anything that another review can reveal to improve the situation?


Were the curriculum standards really better when past generations went through the schooling system?

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Totally agree with you both. Reading starts at home and our four year old amazes us with his reading. Because my wife is French we try to get him to speak that too but he doesn't do it often yet if he reads a French book he will read it in English with a perfect translation but wont read it in French.
Blows me away.

Unfortunately there is a small group of parents in every state across Australia who treat teachers and classrooms like daycare centres.

This is a big thing we are against but here in Europe it is quite normal for a kid to start school/nursery school/whatever they call it so parents feel better, at the age of 2.
The looks we have gotten when other parents find out our son then aged 3 wasn't in school was quite offensive.
It is nothing more than a day care at that age and the hours are far longer than Australian school hours. I do realise though that every situation is different and parents can only do what they can do but I never did get where the hostility comes from.

There is no kindy type classes, they just expect to throw a kid in full time from a young age.

As for curriculum, well it's been so long since I have had any experience of it but we wonder if it could be a step backwards for our boys.
Hard to say as the system over here is pretty alien to me.

I do wish though for Australian education standards and culture for our kids.

[pfitzgerald (Paul)]

Ok I'll throw in my two bobs worth. As a background I've been teaching VCE Physics in Victoria for 25+ years, in both co-ed and single sex schools.

All of the VCE study designs can be found at:
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Pages/index.aspx

Here in Victoria at Year 12 the core areas of study in Physics are:
Motion: Straight line, Projectile, Circular (including planetary bodies), Collisions, Work, Power & Energy.
Electronics & Photonics: Basic DC circuit theory plus transducers like LDRs, Thermistors and Diodes and hteir uses in circuits to perform tasks - eg transmitting information wirelessly using light, temperatur probes etc.
Electric Power: Magnetism, movement of charge, generation of AC and DC electricity, transformers, power transmission.
Light & Matter: Understanding the dual nature of light and matter wrt the Wave and Particle models.

In addition to the core topics students will also undertake one detailed study chosen from the following six topics:
Structures and Materials: Essentially Newton's laws applied to static bodies.
Einsteins Theory Of Special Relativity.
Further Electronics: Rectification circuits, capacitors etc
Sound.
Synchrotron And Its Applications.
Photonics: Builds further on what is learnt in Electronics and Photonics.

I try to let my students choose one of the detailed studies at year 11 (They usually choose Astronomy or Medical Physics) and we do Investigations in Flight as the second detailed study.

In Year 12 my students typically choose Structures or Sound and it's a majority descision as to what we do.

(In Yr11 they do two detailed studies of which Astronomy and Astrophysics are two of the choices.)

20% of the course at both year levels is to consist of experimental activities/investigations.

In Victoria we have been consistently encouraged and challenged to present Physics as a subject that is relevant to everyday life and most of us teach the content contextually. For example when doing Newtons three laws of motion it is usaually taught in the context of transportaion, eg cars, collisions and car saftey. The detailed studies provided teachers and students a degree of choice over the two years in terms of having a topic that may be of particular interest to them.

From a mathematical point of view the current course only requires an understanding of algebra, trigonometry, graphical interpretation and some geometry.

I would argue that the major reason behind the deminishing numbers in Physics and what us old timers would call Pure and Applied mathematics is as follows: The number of courses requiring these subjects as a pre-requisite have been significantly reduced over the last twenty years. They are still recommended for large numbers of courses but you don't have to have done them. So wrt mathematics in particular students have started to choose the 'weaker' maths subjects in order to maximise their ATAR score - the mark used to get into a university course. If you don't believe me check the courses offered my the major universities and you will find that Physics is only a pre-requisite for about ten courses. Aeronautical Engineering is one of the few that springs to mind. Physiotherapy, medicine, Architecture and most engineering courses - no. It may be recommended, but not a pre-requisite.

I've lost count of the number of times I've had a discussion with university academics in my area of expertise, Physics, when they ask about the paucity or quality of students that they get and they just don't seem to understand the significant impact that the choices that the universities make wrt prerequisite subjects has on what students choose to study. Every year I lose one or two potentially excellent physics students to other subjects so that they can maximise their ATAR scores.

I could also be a bit synical here and add that since uni courses are now user pays, it is to the universitie's financial advantage to have students studying for longer (Year 13, bridging courses etc), or to make it easier for them to enrol in courses and boost their numbers to gain access to funding.

Sorry for the min-rant!

OK wrt the National Curriculum (final two years - physics only), it wasn't due to be implemented until 2016, and the last I heard was that the three larger states, Qld, NSW, Vic., were all playing hardball in terms of what should be covered and how it should be assessed. For example Qld do not externally assess each academic subject you study, NSW and Vic both have external exams and internally assessed work. In Vic. with the detailed studies I believe we can better tap into student interest by the choices available in the detailed studies. And guess what - no state wants to change what it does. I haven't sussed out what the other states are up to - sorry. Wrt to curriculum content and depth of study that hasn't been completely thrashed out yet either. It may sound pretty negative atm but we will get there - however it's a huge undertaking.

For those of you still awake I'm open for questions!

Paul

[Kugelblitz (Marcus)]

Originally Posted by pfitzgerald

In Year 12 my students typically choose Structures or Sound and it's a majority descision as to what we do.
Paul

As someone who completed Year 12 last year, this astounds me. Your students actually get to choose which detailed study they get to do?
Mine was decided on by a "school council" and my physics teacher with no input from us students whatsoever.

Perhaps a greater emphasis on student feedback, and action taken in accordance with it, should be an aspect considered on improving in the current curriculum.

I myself had terrible mathematical methods and physics teachers last year, but no amount of complaining or asking for extra help would change the fact that my classmates and I were stuck with them.
There was a general attitude that it was up to us students to work around the issues (which is what ended up happening).

-Marcus

[AstroJunk (Jonathan)]

As the husband of a senior teacher who works herself into the ground, I would say the following are serious issues of the Educational system:

1. Stop changing the curriculum! Teachers have to do an amazing amount of lesson planning and moving the goal posts only make things worse (and you would not believe how poor centralised teaching resources are)
2. Parents, parents, parents. The very fact that you are interested Stu, excludes you from this category. Whilst mythbusters showed us that in special circumstances, you can polish a poo, teachers can't - they simply don't have the time. Sorry, but parents need to up their game.
3. Centralised control of positions. Would you believe it - the allocation of teachers is handled by the faceless state bureaucrats! Most people don't like doing a job badly and when found in that position, look elsewhere to find something more suitable. Marcus, your physics teacher was probably just as horrified to be teaching the subject! My experienced humanities teaching wife taught freekin maths last year and has no way of leaving the stoopid place...

Grrrrrrr, I could go on for a very long time. And how many of my top three were covered by Gonski - NOT ONE.

[supernova1965 (Warren)]

Culture war

[pfitzgerald (Paul)]

Hi Marcus/Johnathon

Often the detailed study will be chosen by the teacher and the decision is based upon which topic they feel they can best teach. Admittedly I would find having to teach Einstein's Theory Of Special Relativity a challenge, particularly from the point of view of understanding it. I could teach it to pass the exam so to speak, but that's not the way I operate. I always let the students know which detailed studies I've taught in the past, and which ones I would feel most comfortable teaching based on my own skill set. And that's something that has developed over time. The first five or six years of my teaching Year 12 physics I didn't have to 'worry' about detailed studies - they didn't exist, although some of them, sound structures and further electronics were part of the core. Since the introduction of the detailed studies I have made a point of looking at each of them (progressively over the years) firstly to improve my own learning and understanding of physics, then to have them as an option for teaching. I started with those in the Yr11 curriculum and then followed them up with Yr12.

Johanthon's points are also quite valid - especially his second point. The more involved we are as parents with our children's education the better. Particularly when it comes to helping them gain a sense of joy in learning and reading. Generally they will follow the example we set for them at home. Stability in what we have to teach would be good but each successive government has its own ideas about this - so the wheel will continue to turn.

Finally, in some subject areas like Physics & Mathematics there is a developing shortage. Most state schools are fortunate if they have one 'genuine' physics teacher. From memory the average age of physics teachers is about 47 or so (I'm 50+) and there are very few physics teacher graduates at the end of each year to replace those who are retiring (It's almost ten years since I last had a student teacher for physics). I haven't seen the figures for a few years but I suspect that there is a small net loss most years. From my understanding the problem isn't quite as bad wrt mathematics teachers. However, it means that these teachers can afford to be more 'choosy' in where they teach, and this inevitably leads to some state schools suffering from a shortage of these types of teachers. Meaning that some schools find it quite difficult to cover these areas of the curriculum. These could be distant country schools, or in the metropolitan area it could be schools that are preceived to be difficult to teach in.

It will be interesting to see what the final outcomes are with the National Curriculum and Gonski.

Paul

[Nikolas (Nik)]

So much to say, too frustrated to say it. (teacher of 25 years and counting)

[pfitzgerald (Paul)]

What subject area Nik?

I feel that what I've posted so far is only one proverbial drop in the bucket!

Paul

[Shark Bait (Stu)]

I'm glad that Science has been raised. I was reluctant to make any comments without being exposed to what high school students are expected to cover. My experience is limited to that of our Son, with young primary students just getting introduced to Science through their studies. It appears to be aimed at getting them to be aware of their environment, cause and effect, even some astronomy. In general it looks like it is designed to spark their curiosity.

It is concerning to read that there is a shortage of teachers in some of the Science based subjects. From memory, QLD had a shortage of English teachers around ten years ago. As far as i'm aware, this is no longer the case. Hopefully the shortage of Physics educators is addressed sooner rather than later. Thanks Paul, your detailed posts make for interesting reading.

The primary school my Son attends bases it teaching on the National Curriculum. I had assumed that with NAPLAN testing in place that all states were already teaching from standard curriculum. I am disappointed to learn that this is not the case. Then again, i'm not that surprised that QLD is one of the holdout states. QLD has a long history of doing things a little differently. Having all states within Australia on the same page would just make sense.

It will be interesting to see if this upcoming review continues with NAPLAN testing in its current form. NAPLAN is often given negative press which may, or may not be justified. My Son will undertake his first round of testing in Year 3, 2015. I will not be in a position to make a valid judgement until then. Whatever happens, I do think that some form of national assessment to determine if students are hitting required benchmarks is worth doing.


Edit: Nik, I would be interested to read what you have to say as well. Is it along the same lines as the post from Jonathan?

[Astro_Bot]

I don't hold out much hope for sense coming out of the "review":

Education: Christopher Pyne's move to review curriculum dubbed a political stunt

Christopher Pyne appoints critics of school curriculum to review system

[pfitzgerald (Paul)]

Hi Stu

Just to clarify that we have been teaching to the National Curriculum in Science from Years 7-10 for the past two years. From a science teacher's perspective there are aspects of it I like, particularly in its endeavour to make its content relevant to students. As to the quality in terms of depth of understanding thats taught, well that's another matter. It can often depend upon the teacher and their background (eg a Biology teacher teaching the conceptual aspects of Physics.), number of lessons available and if you look at it all carefully there is a hell of a lot of material to cover! So some areas will be paid less attention than others.

Ideally what we try/should be trying to do is to provide students with the necessary skills (and basic knowledge) so that by the time they leave school they are independant learners who know when, where and how to seek extra help when it's required. Some do, far too many don't.

It's good to hear that science is being taught at your son's primary school. Very few primary trained teachers have a specialised science background in their methodology. Often the school will employ a specialist science teacher to teach across the school's year levels.

Having a national curriculum from P-12, is I believe, a worthy goal. Knowing where your child is nationally wrt the basics is also important. However, it is all too easily used by the media to label schools/students and teacher bash. Don't get me wrong we need to be accountable for what we do in the classroom and should be continually striving to improve our own skill set. But to be honset most of us have had a gutful with the way we are often portrayed in and by the media.

Please keep in mind though that some of my observations are anecdotal. Wrt numbers of graduates etc I'll have a look into the exact figures once I'm back at work. The year I graduated there were 28 'new' physics teachers entering the system and we were told that there were about 35 retiring.

Paul

[Astro_Bot]

Another pertinent article on the "review":

Education reviewer Kevin Donnelly makes case for more religion to be taught in public schools

In case it was missed by anyone in the previous artcles, Kevin Donnelly is one of the two reviewers chosen by Chris Pyne:

Former teacher and ex-Liberal Party staffer Kevin Donnelly ...

[Shark Bait (Stu)]

Originally Posted by AstroJunk

1. Stop changing the curriculum! Teachers have to do an amazing amount of lesson planning and moving the goal posts only make things worse (and you would not believe how poor centralised teaching resources are)

The more I hear about this Review of the National Curriculum the more i'm inclined to agree.

Originally Posted by Astro_Bot

I don't hold out much hope for sense coming out of the "review":

Education: Christopher Pyne's move to review curriculum dubbed a political stunt

Christopher Pyne appoints critics of school curriculum to review system

I will be watching the news tonight for the latest updates. Not sure if I will like what I hear. It would be nice to think that they were trying to improve the outcomes for students and teachers. The jury is out at the moment.

Originally Posted by pfitzgerald

Ideally what we try/should be trying to do is to provide students with the necessary skills (and basic knowledge) so that by the time they leave school they are independant learners who know when, where and how to seek extra help when it's required. Some do, far too many don't.

Well said! It is a pity that you are not part of the inner circle that is tasked with providing advice to the Education Minister.

[pfitzgerald (Paul)]

Thnx Stu - like many others I'm doing my bit at the pointy end. Basically I dislike politics as too often it's about individual gain rather than common good. Perhaps I'm just a little too idealistic.

[simmo]

Originally Posted by Shark Bait

It appears to be aimed at getting them to be aware of their environment, cause and effect, even some astronomy. In general it looks like it is designed to spark their curiosity.

Sorry slight sidetrack but I was surprised when last year my grade 1 son came to me with an school I-pad and showed me an astronomy program. Good to report that he was pretty interested and would have gone on for a while if the teacher didn't need to go home.

Got me thinking about the notepads. After watching a doco I also found some inspiration. Seems that in India (I think) they had learning stations at various public places for the underprivileged kids who we're by choosing what they wanted to learn becoming brighter than many kids from leading countries. So decided for Christmas to go out and buy an iPad and figure I'll load up some educational programs and let the kids go wild on it.

Kind of reminds me of my parents buying an encyclopedia set when I was young. Was a brilliant resource for learning as a kid just it's a little more condensed now.

So yeah totally agree that it's not just what we have delivered from the schools in total but we as parents also need to be involved.

[Nikolas (Nik)]

Originally Posted by pfitzgerald

What subject area Nik?

I feel that what I've posted so far is only one proverbial drop in the bucket!

Paul

Actually across a few curriculum areas.
I'm a qualified Science teacher with Biology up to VCE but haven't taught it in quite a few years, but also humanities and ICT.
I'm just sick and tired of the curriculum being dictated to at the whim of the current minister of either persuasion. JUST LET US TEACH!!!!! It's just reinventing the wheel.

[pfitzgerald (Paul)]

Yes please!