The National Curriculum

• The introduction of a National Curriculum to cover all States and Territories in Australia was a central plank of the Labor Party’s policy at the last election, seen as one of a trinity of educational reforms – the National Curriculum, National Assessment and National Reporting.  The three reforms are closely interlinked.

• The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) is responsible for developing the curriculum and makes recommendations to the Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs (MCEECDYA), which in turn makes recommendations to the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). ACARA is appointed by the Minister and is intended to be broadly representative of the Commonwealth, the States and Territories and the sectors.  The members of MCEECDYA are all the federal and State and Territory ministers for education, early childhood development, sport and youth affairs. COAG consists of the Prime Minister, state Premiers and Chief Ministers of the Territories.

• In December 2008 MCEECDYA’s predecessor (MCEETYA) issued The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians.  This set out the goals, policies, principles and guidelines which ACARA’s predecessor (The National Curriculum Board) had to apply in formulating a National Curriculum.  The Melbourne Declaration set out eight Learning Areas within which the subjects of the National Curriculum were to be developed.  One of these Learning Areas is Health and Physical Education (HPE).  The National Curriculum Board in May 2009 issued The Shape of the Australian Curriculum, which is the foundation document for the work which has been done since by ACARA in developing the National Curriculum.
  
  
• MCEETYA determined that the National Curriculum would be implemented in three stages or phases.  Phase 1 consists of English, Mathematics, Sciences and History.  Phase 2 consists of Arts, Languages other than English and Geography.  Phase 3 consists of all other subjects.
   
• Draft curricula for Phase 1 subjects are now complete, public consultation on the draft curricula for K-10 is open to May 2010 and the final curricula will be published in August.  Implementation sequences for senior secondary years’ curricula will be determined in 2010.
   
• The process for Phase 2 subjects is now under way. 

• Phase 3 consists of all the subjects not in Phases 1 and 2 and has not yet even been mentioned. It is expected that ACARA will make a recommendation to MCEECDYA as to what the Phase 3 subjects should be in March 2010. 
  
  
• Until a subject has become part of the National Curriculum, State and Territory curricula will continue to apply. When the National Curriculum is fully implemented, States and Territories will be free to maintain outside the National Curriculum subjects which are not in the National Curriculum.

• The process of curriculum development in each subject involves four phases:

Curriculum shaping
Curriculum writing
Implementation
Curriculum evaluation and review

• Curriculum shaping.  This phase produces a broad outline of the K-12 curriculum in the relevant subject area.  It provides advice on curriculum design and guides the writers.  It also provides a reference for judging the quality of the final curriculum documents. For the shaping phase, the ACARA Board appoints usually one writer. The shaping phase involves three steps:
  
  
  • Identification of key issues and development of a position paper. The position paper goes to the ACARA Board for their endorsement.
    
    
  • Preparation of the initial shape paper by the lead writer(s). This is considered by a national consultation forum and there is consultation also with curriculum authorities, professional associations and curriculum experts.
    
    
  • Preparation and publication of the Shape Paper. This will guide the curriculum writing stage. A draft is endorsed by the ACARA Board for widespread consultation involving teachers and key stakeholder groups, including professional associations, curriculum experts and school authorities. The draft and the consultation report are submitted to the ACARA Board for endorsement, and federal, state and territory ministers and curriculum and school authorities are briefed. The Shape Paper is then published.
    
    
• Curriculum writing.  This phase produces a curriculum ready for use by school authorities and teachers in all states and territories. For this purpose the Board appoints a writing team, a project manager and advisory panels. The draft curriculum is prepared in two steps:
  
  
  • A scope and sequence document is developed, which sets out the scope of content and the sequence of what is to be taught by years of schooling.  There is wide consultation on the scope and sequence document with advisory panels, professional associations and curriculum experts.
    
    
  • The writing of the detail of what is to be taught to students and the articulation of achievement standards.

Widespread consultation follows, involving teachers and key stakeholder groups. The draft is “trialled” in a sample of schools.  The draft curriculum and consultation report go the ACARA Board for endorsement and then federal, state and territory ministers and curriculum and school authorities are briefed. The curriculum is then published.

• Implementation.  Implementation and implementation support is the responsibility of school authorities (i.e. State and Territory authorities), although the ACARA Board will monitor the use of the National Curriculum to determine whether the intentions of the curriculum are being achieved.

• Curriculum evaluation and review.  There will be periodic review of the data on curriculum implementation and issues raised to determine whether a curriculum or part of it requires revision.  There will be periodic consultation with teachers and key groups regarding the existing curriculum to identify issues which warrant further investigation.

• If Outdoor Education is to be in the National Curriculum, it will clearly come within the Health and Physical Education Learning Area.
  
  
• The problem for Outdoor Education is that nowhere in any of the relevant documentation is it mentioned as a separate subject.  The first task in getting Outdoor Education into the National Curriculum is to achieve acknowledgement from first the ACARA Board and then from MCEECDYA that it is a separate discipline in its own right and that as such it should be a Phase 3 subject. The issue is not at this stage the curricular content of Outdoor Education as a subject.
  
  
• In contrast the Australian Council for Health, Physical Education and Recreation in The ACHPER National Statement on the curriculum future of Health and Physical Education in Australia, May 2009, made it clear that they considered Outdoor Education to be a small sub-division of Physical Education. This view would appear to be shared by most of the Federal and State and Territory ministers and by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister on her behalf. ACHPER has undertaken a united campaign to ensure that Health and Physical Education are included in the Phase 3 subjects.
  
  
• Outdoor Education is emasculated if it is seen as simply a part of Physical Education. ACHPER sees HPE as the area of the curriculum, which provides education for children to learn how to lead healthy lifestyles now and in the future, which is directly concerned with the development of skills, values and attitudes that will counter lifestyle diseases and which engages students in learning related to contemporary, adolescent health issues. In contrast Outdoor Education is concerned with “our relationships with the environment, others and ourselves” and “the ultimate goal” is “to contribute towards a sustainable world”. The learning process in Outdoor Education could not be more different from the learning process of Physical Education. Outdoor Education requires teachers and instructors, who are trained in Outdoor Education. It is not something that HPE teachers can undertake without specific training.

• If Outdoor Education is not accepted as a Phase 3 subject in the National Curriculum, does it matter?  It matters if Outdoor Education curriculum comes within the National Curriculum as part of Physical Education and if the curriculum first is relegated to be a minor activity and second is devised and written by people who are not Outdoor Education experts.
  
  
• Does it matter if Outdoor Education is outside the National Curriculum altogether? Outdoor Education can continue as a state or individual school responsibility if it is outside the National Curriculum.

The development of the National Curriculum is the major step in the process of education at school level becoming increasingly an Australian responsibility and activity rather than a State or Territory responsibility.  The States and Territories will continue to have responsibility in theory for the implementation of the curriculum, but the decisions regarding what is to be taught and how it is to be taught will be in the hands of the Commonwealth, who will also in practice determine the implementation because of their control of financial power. Systems and schools will increasingly be guided by the National Curriculum and any subject or activity which is outside the National Curriculum will be seen as of secondary importance.  All resources and effort will go into the National Curriculum subjects at the expense of anything which is outside it.  In time, probably within ten years, subjects outside the National Curriculum will simply disappear, if not absorbed into it. The experience of other countries which have implemented national curricula supports this.  In the United Kingdom Design and Technology was included in the National Curriculum, when it was introduced in 1992.  Design and Technology has absolutely boomed in British schools with a huge investment of resources into Design and Technology centres.  Outdoor Education was excluded from the National Curriculum and increasingly in the years which followed was relegated to voluntary club activity outside the mainstream activities of schools.  There are at present great efforts to try to get it back again.

• If there is not a clear place for Outdoor Education in the National Curriculum, Outdoor Education in schools will decline. This has serious consequences for students, but also for the Outdoor Education profession. On the other hand if there is recognition of Outdoor Education as a separate discipline in its own right there will be steady growth of Outdoor Education in schools.  In particular we shall see growth of Outdoor Education in those government schools and low fee schools, which at present are not able to have programmes. If we truly believe in the overwhelming merits of Outdoor Education, its benefits to young people’s lives now and as adults and its significance in the development of this nation, we must surely aim to give these experiences in the future to all Australian young people. We must believe in the merits of the expansion of Outdoor Education and this is unlikely to occur if Outdoor Education is not in the National Curriculum. The eventual outcomes of the decisions being made now may be some way down the track, but the choice is stark – either Outdoor Education will become part of the core education of all Australian young people or it will become increasingly a fringe activity for a few.

Written by and reproduced with permission Tony Hewison