Search

This paper seeks to explain and develop a better understanding of the relationship between the History curriculum and the consequences of political motive. It compares the History curricula of Australia and Lebanon, and is relevant to understanding the purpose of the History curricula in the two countries as well as, more generally, other countries. In Lebanon, the teaching of that nation's experience of the 1975-90 Civil War has been withdrawn from schools. In Australia, meanwhile, it now appears that the national curriculum that took shape in 2010 under the Rudd Labor Government has been replaced by what the new Federal Coalition Government wants. Important changes have been made to the nations' History curricula with different political groups urging the inclusions of different topics. This paper considers the question of the effect of wholesale deletions from the curriculum of a nation's history, as in the case of Lebanon. Will such changes affect the development of students' higher-order historical understanding, historical consciousness and historical literacy? And will such changes influence students' appreciation of historiography? Advanced in this paper is an argument that, generally, History curricula are so politicised that there should be a historiographical component that requires students to understand that history is about many different points of view. Furthermore, students should be taught that it is the understanding of the development of evidence for the various perspectives that matters.

This paper aims to illustrate how the historical novel may be used as an engaging teacher/learning strategy for undergraduate student teachers in pre-service teacher education units, the vast majority of which simply provide for a single 10-credit point unit in order to prepare student teachers for the classroom. First, this paper will argue the historical fiction narrative is an engaging medium. It will then attempt a brief survey of the wider popularity of historical fiction in society-at-large and the way in which this is associated with the popularity of memory literature in general. It will then attempt an analysis of how historical fiction can assist in developing student teachers' appreciation of "historical literacy". But what sort of historical literature should educators encourage student teachers to engage in? Social norms and values are constantly changing, so how do readers and critics interpret historical novels written years ago? In response to this question, the paper shall examine the issue of interpreting historical fiction, and what does literary interpretation mean? But how much faith should student teachers be encouraged to place in the veracity of historical fiction? This question is examined in conclusion to this paper.

During period 2011-2014, there was an increase in public discourse in Tasmania concerning post-secondary school retention rates. Perhaps this is not surprising, because the state has lingered for years in this regard with the poorest in the Commonwealth. The Liberal Party gained government on 15 March 2014, and immediately began enacting its policy of progressively providing post-secondary classes to high schools. Directed at highlighting an historical review and analysis applied to an educational policy topic, this paper features a research technique and topic which have received little attention in the research literature. Using historical research methodology, it details the politics of contested educational policy in respect to the provision of Tasmanian postsecondary classes for all Tasmanian secondary schools, as a measure to alleviate postsecondary school retention rates. Analysis is provided through the lens of Kingdon's Agendas, in this instance, the how and why educational policy development, and brought into public discourse, preparatory to the public voting on it at a state election. Through a case study of the political imperatives of educational policy, an analysis is provided for system-level policymakers and political leaders.

With a proposed Australian national history curriculum, many Australians began to question what historical content would be taught in the nation's schools and colleges. While pressure for a national history curriculum had been building for many years, the final impetus came from a moral panic that gripped Australian society during late 2005, possibly reinforced by risk society imperatives. This paper argues that the history taught in Australian school education is highly politicised, the product of a moral panic, and of risk society thinking. This paper further argues students should be enabled to appreciate these factors underpinning national history curriculum through a more rigorous teaching of historiography in the school education.

During period 1919-39 through rather passive and uncontroversial means under the banner of cooperative federalism the Commonwealth instituted some major and long-lasting school educational policy. During this period it was generally acknowledged that the Commonwealth should eschew involvement in school education, yet, the politics of the time, with the additional imperatives of the dominant zeitgeist, drove Commonwealth involvement in school education through ministerial councils.

During period 1975 through to 1987 the Commonwealth ventured into curriculum development, hitherto an activity for states and territories. Unlike the ACARA Curriculum of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments, there was nothing mandatory about the CDC's curriculum development activities. Here, the dominant influence was coordinative federalism. This paper advances a thesis that Kingdon's Agendas is a useful lens in examining the historical circumstances bringing this educational policy into being, principally because it requires an examination of the political circumstances of the time, in this case including the politics of the administration of the CDC.